Gene Fuller wrote:
I just ran a cut-down version in the EZNEC 4 demo, and I found no
geometry errors.

You only get the geometry warning after the creation of the
helix, not after you store and reload the file. Create the
helix and you will get those geometry warnings.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Gene Fuller wrote:
The original files are still good at my end. I will resend if that will
help.

Gene, you won't understand what the problem is until you create
the coil in EZNEC 4.0. Right after creation of the coil, EZNEC
will display the geometry errors. After that, the geometrical
errors appear to be down the list from the segment errors and
unavailable for viewing.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Gene Fuller wrote:
The original files are still good at my end. I will resend if that will
help.

I've been wondering why you could create close spaced coils
and I couldn't without objections from EZNEC.

I've been sitting here creating coils to see where the geometry
check fails. On 4 MHz, with a 25 turn coil and a 0.5 ft. diameter,
the turn spacing passes the geometry test at 0.175 ft. and higher
but fails at 0.174 ft. and lower.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:

The original files are still good at my end. I will resend if that
will help.

I've been wondering why you could create close spaced coils
and I couldn't without objections from EZNEC.

I've been sitting here creating coils to see where the geometry
check fails. On 4 MHz, with a 25 turn coil and a 0.5 ft. diameter,
the turn spacing passes the geometry test at 0.175 ft. and higher
but fails at 0.174 ft. and lower.

It just occurred to me that this geometry check failure that I have
been seeing might be a bug in EZNEC. I just downloaded and installed
the latest update and the problem seems to have been resolved.

I apologize for any confusion.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
It just occurred to me that this geometry check failure that I have
been seeing might be a bug in EZNEC. I just downloaded and installed
the latest update and the problem seems to have been resolved.

It just took from post number 808 to post number 840, about 30 posts,
to resolve an error occuring in one person's computer. For a real
treat, go back to post 808 and start reading the tone of the entire
exchange, and make a written list of the errors.

Imagine how long it would take to resolve something complicated in this
thread!

Now you see why I won't get into this. I go to Waffle house when I want
to look at someone turning out waffles at a high rate of speed.

73 Tom

wrote:
It just took from post number 808 to post number 840, about 30 posts,
to resolve an error occuring in one person's computer.

I apologize for not being omniscient, Tom. It just didn't occur
to me that the problem could be a bug in EZNEC+V4.0.0.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote:
Now you see why I won't get into this.

It's not hard to see why you are afraid to comment on the
graphic at: http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/1WLDIP.GIF

My statements there are either right or wrong.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:

Now you see why I won't get into this.


It's not hard to see why you are afraid to comment on the
graphic at: http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/1WLDIP.GIF

My statements there are either right or wrong.

They're just disembodied statements, Cecil. Come back
when you can supplement them with some theory and
experimental proof.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

"Tom Donaly" wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
It's not hard to see why you are afraid to comment on the
graphic at: http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/1WLDIP.GIF

My statements there are either right or wrong.

They're just disembodied statements, Cecil. Come back
when you can supplement them with some theory and
experimental proof.

It is trivial to use EZNEC to stick a coil at those points.
I have offered EZNEC proof on my web site. Nobody
wants to discuss it. Wonder why?
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

"Gene Fuller" wrote:
What's that old saying? Something like, "It's a poor workman who blames
his tools."

When I was at Intel we didn't blame our customers for Intel's
programming bugs and software problems.

I am happy to find out that my years-long struggles to create a
decent coil in EZNEC was a program bug. Thanks to you, EZNEC
is twice as useful to me today as it was yesterday.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP