![]() |
Current through coils
Cecil Moore wrote: K7ITM wrote: In fact, if there were no such current -- if there were no capacitance from the coil to the world outside the coil -- then the time delay through the coil, calculated from tau = sqrt(L*C), would be zero. It is exactly this current that allows there to be a transmission-line behaviour and a corresponding time delay. Tom, have you read what Dr. Corum had to say about that on page 8 of http://www.ttr.com/corum/index.htm? Here's a partial quote: "The problem has been that many experimenters working self-resonant helices have pursued the concept of coil self- capacitance without really understanding where the notion comes from or why it was ever invoked by engineers." Cecil, You keep trying to drag something from a self-resonant helice into a loading coil discussion. The two are nearly at opposite extremes in behavior, but even at that the self-resonant helice can be analyzed with standar L/C analysis. It's just another way to analyze things, and it's just one way of doing it. 73 Tom |
Current through coils
Yuri Blanarovich wrote: Tom. You tell that to the RF ammeters installed on the vertical, W9UCW's pictures on my page! 1.) I can build an antenna that has greatly uneven currents at the ends of the loading coil, but the antenna rea above the inductor is wasted and the system will be less efficient than a properly designed system. 2.) The meters are large and have a good deal of self-capacitance compared to the capacitance at the point where they are connected, and are directly connected to the antenna. Bad idea to base a whole concept of how an antenna works on something like that. You can mumbo-jumbo all the theory, you can dream of, but reality shows that in the say, quarter wave vertical, with loading coil the current at both ends of the coil is different. It can be different, but in a well designed system it is essentially the same. The only difference is caused by displacement currents, and that is a result of stray capacitance. Wind a good coil that has low self-C to the outside world compared to the antenna hanging above the coil, and the problem of large uneven current goes away. Cecil explained the various situation depending where the coil is placed within the radiator and at overall antenna curve. I doubt that. If he explained it in those terms he was missing some important points. Try this test, no meters necessary (perhaps the aquarium strip thermometer): Take your 80m Hustler antenna with Hustler loading coil and whip. At the resonant frequency put about 600 Watts to it for a while. Stop transmitting and go feel (or read the temperature on the strips) the coil, bottom end and the top end. Same temperature? Temperature is proportional to the current flow (same diameter wire) - warmer end - more current. Are you saying thermal effects have no bearing? It's getting pretty dangerous to write a theory based only on a Hustler mobile coil with almost no stinger above the coil. One of the reasons the Hustler works so poorly is the distributed capacitance in the coil is large compared to the tiny stinger above the coil. The Hustler has narrow bandwidth and poor efficiency because of the coil design. Then test two: Keep the RF flowing until heat shrink tubing on the coil starts melting. Where does it melt first? Bottom of the coil or nicely uniformly as you claim it should? I never claimed uniformly in ALL coils. I set boundaries as to the conditions. I can replace that Hustler coil with another coil and ruin your theory about standing waves and missing antenna degrees. 73 Tom |
Current through coils
wrote in message oups.com... Yuri Blanarovich wrote: Tom. You tell that to the RF ammeters installed on the vertical, W9UCW's pictures on my page! 1.) I can build an antenna that has greatly uneven currents at the ends of the loading coil, but the antenna rea above the inductor is wasted and the system will be less efficient than a properly designed system. 2.) The meters are large and have a good deal of self-capacitance compared to the capacitance at the point where they are connected, and are directly connected to the antenna. Bad idea to base a whole concept of how an antenna works on something like that. You can mumbo-jumbo all the theory, you can dream of, but reality shows that in the say, quarter wave vertical, with loading coil the current at both ends of the coil is different. It can be different, but in a well designed system it is essentially the same. The only difference is caused by displacement currents, and that is a result of stray capacitance. Wind a good coil that has low self-C to the outside world compared to the antenna hanging above the coil, and the problem of large uneven current goes away. Cecil explained the various situation depending where the coil is placed within the radiator and at overall antenna curve. I doubt that. If he explained it in those terms he was missing some important points. Try this test, no meters necessary (perhaps the aquarium strip thermometer): Take your 80m Hustler antenna with Hustler loading coil and whip. At the resonant frequency put about 600 Watts to it for a while. Stop transmitting and go feel (or read the temperature on the strips) the coil, bottom end and the top end. Same temperature? Temperature is proportional to the current flow (same diameter wire) - warmer end - more current. Are you saying thermal effects have no bearing? It's getting pretty dangerous to write a theory based only on a Hustler mobile coil with almost no stinger above the coil. One of the reasons the Hustler works so poorly is the distributed capacitance in the coil is large compared to the tiny stinger above the coil. The Hustler has narrow bandwidth and poor efficiency because of the coil design. Then test two: Keep the RF flowing until heat shrink tubing on the coil starts melting. Where does it melt first? Bottom of the coil or nicely uniformly as you claim it should? I never claimed uniformly in ALL coils. I set boundaries as to the conditions. I can replace that Hustler coil with another coil and ruin your theory about standing waves and missing antenna degrees. 73 Tom Yea Tom, it all started with ALL coils, it is MY theory and you can ruin MY theory. Riiiight! It's getting pathetic. Yea, meters are too big, Hustler is crapy, Cecil is wrong, and you never claimed uniformly in all coils, just those that you have. Reality is wrong, your "theory" is right! Rrrrright!!! But what a coincidence that what W9UCW measured, jives with what Cecil calculated. Hmmm! ANSWER Cecil's question about his modeled example. I guess when someone is stuck on something and dunt gitit, its tough! I am just waiting how you will come around, dancing around in mumbo-jumbo circles and then will become guru on how current IS different in the loading coils. Happened in the past, will happen again. You are WRONG, reality proves it, regardless of your detours. BTW, what engineering degree, from what university do you have or PE that gives you right to put labels like "JI Engineering" on your products? bada BUm |
Current through coils
Correction:
Roy Lewallen wrote: K7ITM wrote: . . . It is also exactly this displacement current from a large coil that allows the current at one end of the coil to be substantially different from the current at the other end. [I wrote:] Yes again, with one slight modification. You'll note from the EZNEC models that the current actually increases some as you go up from the bottom of the inductor. This is the effect noted by King which is due to imperfect coupling between turns. It results in currents at both ends being less than at the center. Tom's statement doesn't need modification, it's correct as written. Imperfect coupling between turns causes current which is different at the ends than in the middle. Tom said, correctly, that displacement current is the cause of the currents at the ends being different from each other. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Current through coils
Tom, W8JI wrote:
"What you are missing is the flux inside the coil links all the turns at light speed. When it does that, current appears at nearly the same instant of time (light speed over the spatial distance of the inductor) in all areas that are linked by flux." Are any famous authors protagonists of that theory? One author, Bill Orr, W6SAI writes in the 22nd edition of "Radio Handbook" on page 5.11: "Spaced closely around the beam (in a TWT) is a circuit, in this case a helix of tightly wound wire, capable of propagating a slow wave. The r-f energy travels along the wire at the velocity of light but, because of the helical path, the energy progresses along the length of the tube at a considerably lower velocity that is determined by the pitch of the helix. Maybe Varian has a paper on this (just my speculation). Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
Current through coils
Yuri Blanarovich wrote: Yea Tom, it all started with ALL coils, it is MY theory and you can ruin MY theory. What is your theory Yuri? You didn't explain it. 73 Tom |
Current through coils
Roy Lewallen wrote:
When the ground was removed and replaced by a wire, the transmission line properties of the coil changed dramatically, while the C across the coil didn't change significantly. Moral: The self-resonant frequency of a loading-coil needs to be measured in the mobile antenna system, no on the bench. Yes again, with one slight modification. You'll note from the EZNEC models that the current actually increases some as you go up from the bottom of the inductor. This is the effect noted by King which is due to imperfect coupling between turns. It results in currents at both ends being less than at the center. It results in a deviation away from the perfect cosine envelope exhibited by a 1/2WL thin-wire dipole. In any case, the delay through a 75m bugcatcher coil is tens of degrees, not 3 nS. If the reasons for this aren't obvious, many texts cover it quite well. No special "traveling wave" analysis is required. The self-resonant frequency of that modeled coil is around 9 MHz. Since the coil is 90 degrees at 9 MHz, it would be ~59 degrees at 5.9 MHz. Dr. Corum suggests a 15 degree limit at which the lumped-circuit model needs to be abandoned in favor of the distributed-network model or Maxwell's equations. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Current through coils
wrote:
Yuri Blanarovich wrote: Cecil explained the various situation depending where the coil is placed within the radiator and at overall antenna curve. I doubt that. If he explained it in those terms he was missing some important points. I never claimed uniformly in ALL coils. I set boundaries as to the conditions. I can replace that Hustler coil with another coil and ruin your theory about standing waves and missing antenna degrees. Take your 1/4WL electrical antenna and put another 1/4WL bottom section beneath it. The current "flowing" into the bottom of the coil will be higher than the current "flowing" out of the top of the coil. Please explain that. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Current through coils
Richard Harrison wrote:
Are any famous authors protagonists of that theory? In "Fields and Waves in Modern Radio", Ramo and Whinnery, 2nd edition, there is a section titled: "9-16 The Idealized Helix and Other Slow-Wave Structures". Quoting: "A rough picture would convince one that the wave should follow the *wire* with about the velocity of light, ..." From the IEEE Dictionary: "slow-wave circuit - A circuit whose phase velocity is much slower than the velocity of light. For example, for suitably chosen helixes the wave can be considered to travel on the *wire* at the velocity of light but the phase velocity is less than the velocity of light by the factor that the pitch is less than the circumference." a 75m bugcatcher loading coil is a slow wave structure with a velocity factor around 0.017 (calculated and measured). -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:41 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com