G3SEK wrote:


But first we all need to agree that for an ideal lumped loading coil,
the current at the top and bottom terminals will be the same. If the
current is not the same at both ends, then the coil cannot be behaving
as an ideal lumped inductor.


We are back to this line of "reasoning":
......and if we rip all four legs off the frog and say "Frog jump", frog doesn't
jump. The "conclusion" is - Froggie is deaf :-)

Is it a big science secret that coils can cause delay, phase shift?
Can anyone also measure the fricken thing and THEN argue????

We have the effect, W9UCW measured it, ON4UN and W5DXP provided explanations,
what's missing? Being wrong, recognizing it and admitting? (Sorry)
Just because software (for now?) cannot digest it, it can't be?
This is becoming amusing to see how serious this misconception was out there
and who is on the bandwagon.
Let's see "better" explanation. The difference is THERE doesn't matter how
anyone denies it!!!
Knowing about it will help to design and optimize the crippled antennas,
including fricken fracktals (with coils).

I am gathering material for test setup allowing to measure RF current in every
foot of the loaded antenna, I have two 8 amp meters, so I will have to use some
power for full deflection, but it will be just another level of the same thing.
You are all invited to witness! I will document it, take pictures and video.

If there are no answers, pointing wrong to the points I have raised in my other
posting, then I am done, can't do anything more, just will do the measurements
and present the results.

Yuri, K3BU.us

On 05 Nov 2003 14:39:57 GMT, oSaddam (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:


We are back to this line of "reasoning":
.....and if we rip all four legs off the frog and say "Frog jump", frog doesn't
jump. The "conclusion" is - Froggie is deaf :-)

....

I am gathering material for test setup allowing to measure RF current in every
foot of the loaded antenna, I have two 8 amp meters, so I will have to use some
power for full deflection, but it will be just another level of the same thing.
You are all invited to witness! I will document it, take pictures and video.


Hi Yuri,

Good engineering starts with a plan. You start with the instruments
you have available. This is the line of "reasoning" where, if you
have only a hammer, all problems are nails.

It took no more than 1 minute to summon up my EZNEC file of your test
set-up (which you have still failed to confirm, deny, amend, or
specify) to observe that your comment:
so I will have to use some power for full deflection
which is rather low on specifics to observe for myself this must mean
100W as the base current for the model comes quite close to the 8
Ampere full scale deflection for 100W drive.

However, we get into issues of your having done work at the 100mA
levels and we thus turn to my earlier comments about accuracy.

100mA on an 8 Ampere full scale 3.5 inch meter is slightly more than
1% deflection (less than the width of the needle). The 100W
excitation current levels near and through the model's solenoid
exhibit values in the 1 Ampere region or at 12% deflection for an
instrument that is arguably as accurate as 10%. This does not bode
well for a compelling exhibition of any conclusive results.

NOW, if I were wrong to presume that 100W is going to be the
excitation - is that MY fault? If we jack up the power applied
(easily within the means of an amateur so empowered, so to speak) then
that region can certainly be forced into readings of vastly improved
accuracy relative to the available metering. HOWEVER, this now
inhibits doing the full length survey because the lower section would
clearly overload the metering. You can't win for losing.

Well, you can win if you are accomplished at the bench (a rare talent
in this ivory tower where merit is weighed by angel population counts)
by modifying your metering through shunts. I will warn you, however,
it is incumbent upon you to reveal how that was accomplished, how it
was confirmed and the data to support that too. You will also have to
measure the surface temperatures and conspire to replicate them to
your metering (something that you have not really responded to) to
observe the systematic error introduced by these ever growing power
applications. This, in a sense, is a turn of "you can't win for
losing, but you can get close, but you still might lose anyway."

I might add that you stand every chance of being slow cooked while
taking readings. Both for safety's sake and accuracy (so as to not
disturb the fields and those readings) use a telescope. We don't want
your video to appear on FOX. I will add for the sake of anticipating
the gowned one's suggestions, remote readings through extended leads
will invalidate everything.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

However, we get into issues of your having done work at the 100mA
levels and we thus turn to my earlier comments about accuracy.

100mA on an 8 Ampere full scale 3.5 inch meter is slightly more than
1% deflection (less than the width of the needle).

Richard,
you got the "wires crossed" - mixing two cases.
W9UCW measured data I have been quoting in my article at K3BU.us, he SET the
power for the bottom meter to read full scale on his 100 mA meter. Then he read
the top meter which showed readings in the 40 to 60 % down.
I have not done my measurements besides "hand test" and frying the Hustler
coils. Just brief test to see how much deflection I get with 100W on 8A meter.

I know a thing or two about measurements, done my years at IBM Test Engineering
Dept. I will document my tribulations and if get it, use infrared camera too.
If W9UCW lied, deceived us I will be the first one to choke him :-) So far he
put figures on what I knew and they jive.
Why don't you guys that know pitfalls of measurement do it and report ?????
Hello????

Yuri. K3BU.us

I am not as dumb as Reg portrays me. Got highest IBM Award - Outstanding
Contribution Award signed by then chairman Frank Cary for Design and
Development Excellence. BTW this was doing something that "experts" at IBM
Endicott lab said it couldn't be done. This coil stuff is trivial in
comparison.

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
I am not as dumb as Reg portrays me.

What Reg needs is some Bella Sera Merlot. Dang, that's good stuff.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On 05 Nov 2003 21:28:06 GMT, oSaddam (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:

Why don't you guys that know pitfalls of measurement do it and report ?????
Hello????

Hi Yuri,

As this is your party, the burden of proof is upon you. I supplied
you with a litany of trip-points and you in fact responded to none.
If we await and find breathlessly announced results achieved by
obviously problematic means followed by universal HO-HUMs, is it MY
fault?

This coil stuff is trivial in
comparison.

You may not be dumb, you may have been awarded up the gumpstump, you
may have done testing, but nothing is trivial or everything is
trivial. In other words, why all the sturm und drang if there's
nothing to it? Announcing things like this being trivial, in the
spin-meistering of the political hacks, is lowering the bar and
reducing expectations so that mediocre work glows in comparison.

Obtaining precision and accuracy is not daunting, it is not beyond the
reach of ordinary means, it simply takes planning. Too many here
backfill that lack with cut-and-paste philosophy.

Yuri, you came here to buff up your position to counter Tom's
criticism. You asked for input, and instead you seem to be fishing
for praise. What's the program? Respond to the technical points or
insert [applause here] in your posts.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

KB7QHC wirtes:
As this is your party, the burden of proof is upon you. I supplied
you with a litany of trip-points and you in fact responded to none.

I appreciate your points, some are valid, I know about them, some were off
target, some are in the area of nitpicking, when we are overlooking bigger
picture.

I explained that your previous posting was based on wrong assumptions (not
reading carefully the threads?) - the 100mA on 8A meter, measurement
techniques, etc.

I will do my tests and measurements, first I will do that on my Radiomobile, to
test the real life typical mobile situation. Next it would be to replicate
W9UCW setup with radials.

I keep getting "arguments" that are nitpicking in the .01 area of significance
vs. 50% and the facts.

I presented 7 points of proof and asked if anyone can debunk them, prove wrong,
so far not a single "overthrow".

Let me try to summarize again briefly:

The temperature test, feeling or thermal strips prove that there is not .1
difference in current accross the loading coil but around 50%.

W9UCW measured it and showed 40 - 60% differences.

W5DXO explained mechanics of the effect.

Are the FACTS in the way of coil "must" have the same current theory?

This is not enough proof that current is significantly different at both ends
of the coil rather than miniscule, hardly measureable? That IS the argument.

As has been demonstrated, there is a camp that believes the current is the
same. We know it is not and are bringing it to their attention in hope that it
will set the record and knowledge straight. If they choose not to believe it,
then let them be happy with their calculated world.

Anyone measured it yet?

Yuri, K3BU.us