Current through coils
 

Jerry Martes wrote:
I have a HP8405A Vector Voltmeter I'll give you and even pay the shipping
if that is of any help with the measurements.

Wow, thanks for the offer. That would certainly be more
accurate than eyeballing an o'scope. Do you think the
use of such would prove me right or wrong? Does the
VV compare two signals and report the phase difference?
Are the probes differential or coaxial? I've never used
a VV.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Current through coils
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. com...
Jerry Martes wrote:
I have a HP8405A Vector Voltmeter I'll give you and even pay the shipping
if that is of any help with the measurements.

Wow, thanks for the offer. That would certainly be more
accurate than eyeballing an o'scope. Do you think the
use of such would prove me right or wrong? Does the
VV compare two signals and report the phase difference?
Are the probes differential or coaxial? I've never used
a VV.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Hi Cecil

I dont know how to use a VV either. I got a couple of them from Pacific
Missile Range surplus. One has a probe sheared off. I figured I could
build a "pair of probes" to make that one work for myself. You are welcome
to have the other. That one looks complete.
It sure would be worth the effort to ship it to you if you'd like to have
it.
I cant guarentee that the 8405A works but I do know they are repairable.
If you are willing to check it out, its yours.
I downloaded a manual for the unit. E-mail me your address. Maybe you
can tell me something about the unit after you figure it out.

I have such a high respect for Roy and Wes that it is not possible for me
to think they'd both be wrong while in agreement. And, I like to read your
discussions on this group so much that I'd offer anything I can to assist
your 'getting some measurements made'. I am absolutely sure all you guys
will agree on this stuff after you make some measurements. You are all too
bright to have such severe differences in understanding on this subject.

Jerry

Current through coils
 

Jerry Martes wrote:
It sure would be worth the effort to ship it to you if you'd like to have
it.

I hate to accept it for free. Maybe I could just borrow it
for awhile?

I have such a high respect for Roy and Wes that it is not possible for me
to think they'd both be wrong while in agreement.

So why are you offering a free VV to someone they both hate? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Current through coils
 

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 04:23:03 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

Jerry Martes wrote:
I have a HP8405A Vector Voltmeter I'll give you and even pay the shipping
if that is of any help with the measurements.

Wow, thanks for the offer. That would certainly be more
accurate than eyeballing an o'scope. Do you think the
use of such would prove me right or wrong? Does the
VV compare two signals and report the phase difference?
Are the probes differential or coaxial? I've never used

The VVM probes are comprised of a quad diode sampling bridge followed
by an FET amplifier. They are nominally coaxial, although without the
BNC adapters, they have an exposed pin (very delicate) and at lower
frequencies they can be used much as a high impedance scope probe is
used.

The instrument uses a phase-locked oscillator to drive the samplers
with the "A" probe being the reference. One meter can be switched to
display the amplitude of either channel and the second meter reads the
phase difference between them.

Current through coils
 

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 05:10:24 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

Jerry Martes wrote:
It sure would be worth the effort to ship it to you if you'd like to have
it.

I hate to accept it for free. Maybe I could just borrow it
for awhile?

I have such a high respect for Roy and Wes that it is not possible for me
to think they'd both be wrong while in agreement.

So why are you offering a free VV to someone they both hate? :-)

I don't hate you. While I shook your hand at Flagstaff once, I don't
know you well enough personally to get all worked about you one way or
another.

This is Usenet, not the real world. No sense taking it too seriously.

Current through coils
 

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:14:18 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

Wes Stewart wrote:
Why do you persist at doing this?

My post was in response to someone else and you feel it necessary to
jump in with the same old bafflegab.

This is a public forum. Why do you not respond to my posting on
a technical level instead of resorting to an ad hominem attack?
I have tons of technical references to support my position.

Clearly, you were too busy trying to frame an argument to actually
read what I wrote.

I only respond to portions I disagree with, Wes. Why can't
you and I have a simple, point by point, technical discussion?

Which points? You are the master at selective editing. For example
you stated:

"Your graphs show standing wave current which doesn't flow...blah
blah"

When I show otherwise, snip, gone without reply.


"We" need to plot no such thing. You may have such a need; I do not.

You, nor your cohorts, are likely to understand what's really
happening until you take a look at the individual underlying
currents that superpose to form the standing wave current which
doesn't flow at all since its phase angle is fixed at zero degrees.

I have no "cohorts" here. This isn't the "Let's get Cecil" gang.


Isn't a bunch of IEEE PhD's saying that "the lumped-circuit model
fails in a standing-wave environment", enough evidence for you to
consider that they know what they are talking about?

I've worked with lots of PhD's. Hell I even had one working for me
and his was in Nuclear Physics from Trinity College at Oxford. He was
a lovely old guy, the quintessential Einstein type, who couldn't find
his way to the men's room without directions. Another, younger one
was so impressed with himself, it was impossible to have a
conversation with him without him saying, "When I was working on my
thesis..."

Pass him in the hall and say, "Nice day today."

He would reply, "Yes, it is but I remember a day back when I was
working on my thesis..."

Sorry, "A bunch of IEEE PhD's" impresses me less than a handful of the
guys posting here.

Current through coils
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
om...
Jerry Martes wrote:
It sure would be worth the effort to ship it to you if you'd like to have
it.

I hate to accept it for free. Maybe I could just borrow it
for awhile?

I have such a high respect for Roy and Wes that it is not possible for me
to think they'd both be wrong while in agreement.

So why are you offering a free VV to someone they both hate? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Hi Cecil

There is no reason to ever return any of the stuff I send out. I
actually enjoy knowing that someone appreciates this stuff. I dont pay $$
for it. It gets surplused by the government. My buddy buys it in bulk.
I am able to refurbish alot of the surplus he buys, like 100 KW gen-sets, so
he can re-sell the units back to them. Since I enjoy learning how to fix
the broken stuff, I dont charge for my time. So, he lets me sort thru his
"scrap piles". Everyone wins. But, I dont get to watch much TV because
I keep too busy learning how to fix the stuff.

Send me your shipping address. The HP 8405A will be in the mail within a
day after I get the address.

Do you have any use for a HP 8660 signal generator main frame, *no*
plug-ins? That would sure be a nice generator to go with a Vector
Voltmeter. I have 5 main frames but I havent been able to win an eBay bid
for the plug-ins.

Jerry

Current through coils
 

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:14:18 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

Wes Stewart wrote:
Why do you persist at doing this?

My post was in response to someone else and you feel it necessary to
jump in with the same old bafflegab.

This is a public forum. Why do you not respond to my posting on
a technical level instead of resorting to an ad hominem attack?
I have tons of technical references to support my position.

Clearly, you were too busy trying to frame an argument to actually
read what I wrote.

I only respond to portions I disagree with, Wes. Why can't
you and I have a simple, point by point, technical discussion?

Which points? You are the master at selective editing. For example
you stated:

"Your graphs show standing wave current which doesn't flow...blah
blah"

When I show otherwise, snip, gone without reply.


"We" need to plot no such thing. You may have such a need; I do not.

You, nor your cohorts, are likely to understand what's really
happening until you take a look at the individual underlying
currents that superpose to form the standing wave current which
doesn't flow at all since its phase angle is fixed at zero degrees.

I have no "cohorts" here. This isn't the "Let's get Cecil" gang.


Isn't a bunch of IEEE PhD's saying that "the lumped-circuit model
fails in a standing-wave environment", enough evidence for you to
consider that they know what they are talking about?

I've worked with lots of PhD's. Hell I even had one working for me
and his was in Nuclear Physics from Trinity College at Oxford. He was
a lovely old guy, the quintessential Einstein type, who couldn't find
his way to the men's room without directions. Another, younger one
was so impressed with himself, it was impossible to have a
conversation with him without him saying, "When I was working on my
thesis..."

Pass him in the hall and say, "Nice day today."

He would reply, "Yes, it is but I remember a day back when I was
working on my thesis..."

Sorry, "A bunch of IEEE PhD's" impresses me less than a handful of the
guys posting here.


Hi Wes

The more I read your posts the more I like the way you think.

Jerry

Current through coils
 

Cecil Moore wrote:

Please explain how a net current with a fixed constant
non-rotating phase can possibly flow. Please explain
how a wire with 1 amp flowing in one direction and 1 amp
flowing in the other direction supports a net charge flow.

Once again this indicates you are not familiar or comfortable with
basics, and have gotten ahead of yourself by going off somehwre in a
land of reflected waves. Now you are confused, and can't make sense of
basics.

The generator sees a reactive load. When the generator sees a reactive
load, current and voltage are no longer in step. This is true all
through the system from source to load.

3.) You also claim significant current phase shift exists between the
terminals of a compact inductor operated well below self-resonance.

Please define "compact" in terms of the number of degrees
of phase shift measured using a traveling wave.

Phase shift in what Cecil? This is how people get in trouble, make
misstatements, and wind up blaming others for what they say. Here we
are again, trying to work traveling and standing waves into a system
too small to have anything stand when another significantly better
analysis method would easily explain it all.

You keep trying to define the "inductor" in terms of degrees related to
standing waves like standing waves change the properties of the
component. I can't remember the last time I called to order an inductor
and they vendor asked me "what phase shift in degrees of standing wave
100uH inductor do you want?".

It's very simple to measure current and voltage and the phase
relationships in a two terminal device and prove you are wrong.

I've got many technical references that disagree. If you can do
that, why haven't you done that?

I have done it and told you how, you ignore it. Roy has done it and
told you how, you ignore it. I'm sure many thousands of people here and
everywhere else understand in a reactive system voltage and current are
not in phase. I'm equally sure many thousands of people, including
lurkers here, understand a small inductor operated well below
self-resonance has equal phase current entering one lead and leaving
the other.

The only way to get confused on that is if someone doesn't understand
behavior of the basic component, gets in over his head and confuses
himself trying to use a tool that doesn't work, and then lashes out at
others and refuses to listen.

The current flowing into one end and out of the other end of a small
lumped inductor operated far below self-resonance is essentially equal
in both phase and amplitude.

Please define "small" as the number of degrees of phase shift
measured using a traveling wave.

There you go again! Back to traveling and standing waves.

You say it isn't, I say it is, and I can
prove it beyond any doubt to any open minded person.

Here, you are just out and out lying since I never said that.
Want to bet $1000 that you can prove I ever said that? I didn't
think so. What is with this compulsion you have to lie about
what I have said? Can't you win a technical argument without
lying?

There you go again, back to the lowest form of debate. If you can't
understand something or get trapped, just call the other guy a liar.

You very clearly said current in each terminal of the inductor has a
different phase shift several times in your posts.

I say I can easily build a loading coil that acts the same way. I can
replace 40 or 60 degrees of electrical height with an inductor that has
virtually no phase shift in current between the two terminals, and
virtually the same current level. I can prove that also.

I seriously doubt that. Please measure the phase shift using a
traveling wave through any coil that accomplishes that function.
I suspect you are being fooled by the current loop located inside
the coil and the fact that you have been ignorantly been measuring
the net standing wave current which is essentially irrelevant.

I can't understand what you are saying or what your point is, other
than you think I am being fooled by standing waves, I am ignorant, and
anything I measure is irrelevant.

Maybe someone else can help me with your last statement.

I'm just not sure I can prove anything to someone who thinks a current
transformer measures current that doesn't flow!

I explained it to you, Tom, in another posting. If you don't
understand it, you need technical help. At a fixed point on a wire
(where no net current or net charge is flowing) that is experiencing
a constant exchange of H-field energy with E-field energy every
cycle, a toroidal pickup coil will certainly report the results of
that orthogonal energy exchange between the fields even though there
is no lateral flow of net current or net charge. That's why a
standing-wave dipole radiates broadside and a traveling-wave
dipole is an end-fire.

Maybe someone else on this group can explain or understand what you are
trying to say.

Anyone help me here? What is Cecil saying in that last paragraph? What
does the pattern of a radiating structure in the far-field have to do
with current in a circuit with a reactor?

73 Tom

Current through coils
 

Wes Stewart wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
So why are you offering a free VV to someone they both hate? :-)

I don't hate you. While I shook your hand at Flagstaff once, I don't
know you well enough personally to get all worked about you one way or
another. This is Usenet, not the real world. No sense taking it too
seriously.

I wasn't serious, Wes. That's why the smiley face.
I apologize if my humor irritates anyone.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp