wrote in message
oups.com...

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


Nice twist again! (That was sarcasm and take on your comment about ALL
coils)

I didn't produce any MY theory. I simply realized that there is something
weird (effect) when I burned heatshrink tubing on the bottom of my Hustler
80m coil, W9UCW measured and did experimenting with that and brought to our
attention that there is significant difference in the current distribution
across the loading coil. W5DXP put some explanations on as far as mechanism
of the effect. I give credit where its due, I didn't produce any theory, I
simply tried to bring attention to the effect, tried to find explanation and
set the record straight for the benefit of hams, who were misled for decades
(including myself), provide (with others) correction pointers so we can
correctly model antennas and get better, more accurate results. If W7EL can
capture the effect and provide tool to model the loading coil (lumped
inductance) as what the hairpin of the same inductance does, we have a major
improvement in modeling and designing loaded antennas and arrays.

Sooo, we have the effect, we have some measurements to quantify it and we
have explanations going back to Dr. Nikola Tesla and we are trying to set
the record straight and correct the years of false information in the ham
literature, going back to J. Belrose first article in ancient QST.

What you have? Misinformation on your web site and refusing to admit that
you could be wrong (again). Not answering technical questions, nitpicking on
things to confuse and cloud the issue "proving" that you are right.

Funny how you object to "personal" attacks, when it is the first thing you
do when someone posts something that doesn't jive with your understanding of
the subject. Been there, you have done it to me few times. Tom, it's not
personal attack on YOU, it is correction ("attack") on what you (wrong) say
and parade on your web site.

The bottom line is, that you claim that loading antenna coil behaves
according to "DC circuit laws" and has the same (or almost) current at both
ends. When in reality there is quite a difference (talking about case of say
quarter wave loaded radiator). The significance is, that the efficiency of
the antenna is proportional to the area under the current distribution
curve. If that distribution is portrayed wrongly (not showing, calculating
drop of current across the coil) then we get false results, which will be
magnified in multielement loaded array.
So you can keep up the mumbo-jumbo and cloud the issue all you want, reality
is there and won't go away.

One more experiment that "scientwists" can do: Stick some neon bulbs at the
bottom and top of the coil with equal "tail", or just move the neon bulb
along the coil whil holding in your hand. I bet you would see that there is
noticeable difference in brightness from top to bottom, top being brighter,
meaning higher voltage. We know (not mine theory) that if voltage is higher
then the current has to be lower, meaning that current at the bottom of the
coil is higher than on the top. Meaning that it is not EQUAL as W8JI is
insisting on. Nice science project for a 7th grader kid of a ham. (To avoid
mumbo-jumbo detours - we are talking say 80m mobile Hustler or similar
quarter wave antenna at resonant frequency). No need for phasors,
distributed this or that, inside or outside of the coil wire and other
"clouds".

Can you answer questions that are posted, instead of sidestepping them and
nitpicking on unrelated stuff? That's just MY theory, I may be wrong, and I
would admit it, if I am shown the right.

So can you ANSWER Cecil's question?
Where did you get the engineering degree and usage of "JI Engineering"?

Yuri, www.K3BU.us

Yuri, why not try program LOADCOIL.

Its just what you've been waiting for.

Download from website below.
----
.................................................. ..........
Regards from Reg, G4FGQ
For Free Radio Design Software go to
http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp
.................................................. ..........

wrote:
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.

Anyone with EZNEC can answer the question for himself.
For the following EZ files, the currents at the bottom and
top of the coil are viewed by clicking on the "Load Dat"
button. Load 1 is at the bottom of the coil and Load 2
is at the top of the coil. The loads are both zero so
they have no effect on the antenna system and are used
only to report the current at that point.

I previously modeled a bottom-loaded 5.89 MHz mobile
antenna. That EZNEC file is available at:

http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/test316.EZ

Taking that antenna and *changing nothing* except adding
1/4WL of wire to the top of the whip, yields the EZNEC
file at:

http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/test316c.EZ

The antenna has been changed from a base-loaded 1/4WL
antenna to a base-loaded 1/2WL antenna using the same
coil in the same relative position to the source and
ground. The changes in the currents through the coil
are obvious.

The frequency was not changed so the coil occupies the
same percentage wavelength of the antenna in both examples.
In the first example, we have 1.01 amps at the bottom of
the coil and 0.6984 amps at the top of the coil. That's
fairly typical for mobile antennas at the 5.89 MHz
frequency and agrees with the measurements presented
so far.

Now, changing nothing except the whip length by adding
40 feet (1/4WL) of whip, in the second example we have
1.239 amps at the bottom of the coil and 2.068 amps at
the top of the coil. How does the lumped-circuit model
explain that one? More current "flowing" into the coil
than is "flowing" out of the coil just by adding 40'
of wire to the top of the antenna?

The coil occupies the same electrical length in both
examples because they are at the same frequency. The
current through the coil depends upon where it is
physically installed relative to the standing waves
existing at the point of installation.

Using what EZNEC tells us about the self-resonant
frequency near 9 MHz, we can calculate the delay
through the coil as ~59 degrees. Thus the coil
occupies ~0.16 wavelength. (The wire used to wind
the coil is ~0.24 wavelength if stretched out
straight.) Nobody said it was a 1:1 replacement
but someone said it was *NOT* a replacement at all.

I would encourage the experimenters to add 1/4WL
of whip to their previously measured mobile antenna
systems and make additional measurement. That is, of
course, after matching the source to the new
impedance. Please report the results here.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cec, who the heck is Dr Corum?

Is he yet another Bible writer?

Nobody's ever heard of him.

What makes you think he is right?

Is it just because you think he agrees with YOU?

And you may have taken him out of context and misquoted him anyway.
----
Reg.

Everybody quotes from Bibles.

Which reduces the authors to the same standard of conversation as
transpires on this newsgroup.

Has nobody any confidence in what he is saying and feels in need of
support from the angeles.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Reg Edwards wrote:

Cec, who the heck is Dr Corum? Nobody's ever heard of him.

Reg, in Mexico, it's known as a "Tequila Sunrise".
In your case, it must be a "Chardoney Sunrise". :-)

If you've never heard of him, it's your own fault.

http://www.ttr.com/corum/index.htm

http://www.ttr.com/TELSIKS2001-MASTER-1.pdf

- URLs posted here a number of times. Do a web search
to understand his far-reaching influence in matters
of a technical nature.

What makes you think he is right?

He makes sense and his equations agree with my rough
measurements within 14%. I suspect my measurements
are off by at lease 10%.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Reg Edwards wrote:
Has nobody any confidence in what he is saying and feels in need of
support from the angeles.

"angeles"? Resorting to Spanish is no help. The present
question is, "can EZNEC be trusted"? We already know
your opinion. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"Cecil Moore" wrote
Reg Edwards wrote:
Has nobody any confidence in what he is saying and feels in need
of
support from the angeles.

"angeles"? Resorting to Spanish is no help. The present
question is, "can EZNEC be trusted"? We already know
your opinion. :-)
========================================

Dear Cec,

- - - and what is my opinon which everybody is supposed to know?
C'mon then. Be truthful. Out with it!
----
Reg.

Reg Edwards wrote:
- - - and what is my opinon which everybody is supposed to know?
C'mon then. Be truthful. Out with it!

Your opinion of EZNEC is recorded for posterity on Google.
Who am I to embellish it?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:

wrote:
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.

Anyone with EZNEC can answer the question for himself.

In accordance with my policy of correcting my mistakes
using the scientific method and updating my presentations
to have the most impact, I have revised the bottom of the
web page at http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/current.htm

Can there be any question about the lumped-circuit model
failing in a standing wave environment after viewing that
information?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp