Cecil Moore wrote:

My comment above is primarily about standing wave current,
not about coils. Standing wave current phase cannot be used
to measure the phase shift through empty space, wires, or
anything else.

Sure it can. You just haven't yet figured out how to do it.

Here is a hint.
Standing wave current and voltage is not all the same phase.
Go far enough down the line, and there is a change.
How far is far enough?

John Popelish wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Standing wave current phase cannot be used
to measure the phase shift through empty space, wires, or
anything else.

Sure it can. You just haven't yet figured out how to do it.

Here is a hint.
Standing wave current and voltage is not all the same phase.
Go far enough down the line, and there is a change.
How far is far enough?

My comment above is about 1/2WL dipoles and 1/4WL monopoles.
In those antennas, the standing wave current phase is fixed
around zero degrees. It cannot be used to measure delay
through anything.

The 180 degree phase shift in longer antennas doesn't add
any additional information. Since the amplitude is zero
at that point, we already have all the phase information
that we are going to get. We know at the zero point that
the forward current and reflected current are 180 degrees
out of phase.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote in message
oups.com...

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
We are having problem with people admitting there could be difference in
the
current across loading coils, and here the "problems" is what is the
error?
So lets stick to the big problem and fuggettabout detours and nitpicking.
Yuri, K3BU

Yuri,
Rather than playing like Cecil and making words for others, please post
the dates and statements made by people who say current cannot be
uneven at each end of a coil.


Now it's "cannot be uneven?"

Your own words:
To which W8JI replied:

"The idea current is high in only the start of a coil is not correct.
Model an antenna with EZnec, and look at the load. Model a coil in any
software, and look at current. Read any textbook, even beginner's textbooks,
and see what they say. Measure a real antenna yourself!
.......

You are like to call names, insult people, and argue rather than take the
time to learn basic electronics. This is in any book, including the ARRL
Handbook. If you look at HOW an inductor works, the current flowing in one
terminal ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal.

and.....

Measuring the current into and out of the loading coil with a small
thermocouple RF meter, I detect no difference This is in close agreement
with the model. " "


Show us where that is said with an exact in context quote, don't pull a
Cecil and invent something that you expect us to blindly accept as the
truth.
It would help if we knew what you were talking about.
73 Tom


You still don't know what are we talking about?
Cecil is playing? Can you answer questions that he posted and I posted?

73 Yuri

Roy Lewallen wrote:
And in any case, the statement about EZNEC is incorrect. As I explained
in a posting a short while ago, EZNEC has no awareness of nor does it
make any use of traveling wave currents or voltages. It calculates only
the total current from fundamental rules which don't involve traveling
waves.

For anyone who thinks EZNEC doesn't report traveling wave currents
differently from standing wave currents, please download the following
files.

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

This is a *traveling wave file*. EZNEC reports the nearly linear phase
of the current from 0 degrees at the source to 90 degrees at the load.
The file comes with a zero load in the center of that 90 degree run.
EZNEC reports the current's phase at 45 degrees at that zero load.

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

Removing the resistive load from testx.EZ turns it into a *standing
wave configuration*. EZNEC reports the phase of the current close
to zero degrees all up and down the wire. The file comes with a
zero load in the center of the same wire as above. EZNEC reports
the current's phase very near zero degrees. The phase is near zero
degrees all up and down wire 2.

Contrary to what you have been told, EZNEC clearly reports the
difference between the traveling wave configuration and the
standing wave configuration. The traveling wave current phase
can be used to measure the phase shift through the wire (or
through a coil). The standing wave current phase cannot.

To summarize: For the traveling wave configuration, the current
magnitude is essentially constant all up and down the line while
the phase shifts smoothly from zero degrees at the source to
90 degrees at the resistive load.

For the standing wave configuration, the current magnitude
follows the familiar cosine envelope from source at zero
degrees to the end of the antenna at 90 degrees. The phase
of the standing wave current is unchanging near zero degrees
all up and down the wire.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
In an Internet discussion, everybody has the right to attempt to switch
the discussion away from the point.

Everybody seems to understand how a coil works. Very few
people understand how standing waves work. There's no point
in discussing what people already understand. There's every
point in discussing what people don't understand.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote:
... the current flowing in one
terminal ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal.

That's true.

That's essentially true for forward current and reflected
current. Demonstrably not true for standing wave current.
Even your own measurements showed that the current at one
end of the coil is RARELY equal to the current at the
other end of the coil.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Richard Clark wrote:
Any association between resonance, velocity of propagation, height,
width, etc. and something like our 118.60° tall antenna needs a heap
more explaining than resonance, velocity of propagation, height, width,
etc.
______________

Now responding specifically to your request for a heap of explaining, you
will find it in the George Brown paper I referenced earlier in this
sub-thread. As that IRE paper from 1945 may be difficult to access now, you
could refer to section 4-2 on the subject of cylindrical antennas in the
"Antenna Engineering Handbook," 2nd edition (pub. 1984), by Johnson and
Jasik -- from which this quote:

"In practive the antenna is always fed by a transmission
line. ... The effective terminal impedance of the line
(often referred to as the antenna impedance) then depends
not only on the length and diameter but also on the terminal
condition."

The text continues that for a MW monopole, the terminal condition consists
of the characteristics of the ground plane. This section includes the plots
of resistance and reactance for monopole radiators of various height to
width ratios from George Brown's 1945 IRE paper.

RF

Cecil Moore wrote:

The testx.EZ file has been renamed to:

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

The testy.EZ file has been renamed to:

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

The current reported by EZNEC for TravWave.EZ contains the term
cos(kz+wt) It's a traveling wave current, clearly not the same
as a standing wave current.

The current reported by EZNEC for StndWave.EZ contains the terms
cos(kz)*cos(wt) It's a standing wave current, clearly not the
same as a traveling wave current.

Current reported by EZNEC every 10% of wire #2 is presented in
the following table. The currents are obviously very different.
The phase of the traveling wave progresses from 0 to 90 deg
in 90 deg of wire. The phase of the standing wave doesn't
progress beyond 0.11 of of degree.

% along current in current in
wire #2 TravWave.EZ StndWave.EZ

0% 0.9998 at -0.99 deg 0.9996 at 0 deg
10% 0.9983 at -9.39 deg 0.9843 at -0.03 deg
20% 0.9983 at -18.23 deg 0.9454 at -0.05 deg
30% 0.9957 at -27.59 deg 0.8843 at -0.06 deg
40% 0.9949 at -35.96 deg 0.8023 at -0.08 deg
50% 0.9945 at -44.84 deg 0.7014 at -0.09 deg
60% 0.9945 at -54.2 deg 0.584 at -0.09 deg
70% 0.9949 at -62.58 deg 0.4528 at -0.1 deg
80% 0.9956 at -71.43 deg 0.311 at -0.11 deg
90% 0.9965 at -80.27 deg 0.1616 at -0.11 deg
100% 0.9976 at -89.14 deg 0.006073 at -0.11 deg

Some say "current is current". EZNEC disagrees. When
reflected waves are eliminated, EZNEC indeed does accurately
report traveling wave current. EZNEC reports the current
that is there, whether it is traveling wave current or
standing wave current.

I'm trying to learn how to graph the above current magnitude
and phase in Mathcad but not having much luck.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
% along current in current in
wire #2 TravWave.EZ StndWave.EZ

0% 0.9998 at -0.99 deg 0.9996 at 0 deg
10% 0.9983 at -9.39 deg 0.9843 at -0.03 deg
20% 0.9983 at -18.23 deg 0.9454 at -0.05 deg
^^^^^^
Sorry, a typo. Should be 0.9969

30% 0.9957 at -27.59 deg 0.8843 at -0.06 deg
40% 0.9949 at -35.96 deg 0.8023 at -0.08 deg
50% 0.9945 at -44.84 deg 0.7014 at -0.09 deg
60% 0.9945 at -54.2 deg 0.584 at -0.09 deg
70% 0.9949 at -62.58 deg 0.4528 at -0.1 deg
80% 0.9956 at -71.43 deg 0.311 at -0.11 deg
90% 0.9965 at -80.27 deg 0.1616 at -0.11 deg
100% 0.9976 at -89.14 deg 0.006073 at -0.11 deg

--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote in message
oups.com...

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
Your own words:
To which W8JI replied:

"The idea current is high in only the start of a coil is not correct.
Model an antenna with EZnec, and look at the load. Model a coil in any
software, and look at current. Read any textbook, even beginner's
textbooks,
and see what they say. Measure a real antenna yourself!

Where is the entire context of that comment Yuri? You (and Cecil) have
the habit of extracting things from context of a larger statement and
exaggerating or putting a creative spin on what others say.

If you were saying the current is high only in the first few turns of a
coil that is not in a high order self-resonance, that is incorrect.


Now you are putting words in my mouth. The question and argument WAS and IS
about the current being (almost) equal (you claimed), or DIFFERENT (my et
other's claim) at the ENDS of the loading coil. You stated "ALWAYS EQUAL"
(Kirchoff, bla, bla...).
As illustration and description of the effect I observed on the Hustler
resonator was, that the heat developed from the bottom few turns. Like I am
so stupid to claim that there is high current only in your few turns?
Common' give me a break and fes up!! This is getting comical and pathetic.
..
Anyone can look up the original posting about the development of the "story"
at
http://www.k3bu.us/loadingcoils.htm
The whole dispute is summarized in Fig. 3 there, where it properly shows the
shaded area representing reality - current and area at the whip after the
loading coil vs. solid line representing misconception. (See degrees used
there?) Anyone, even Richard can see that graphic representation of white
area between the shaded area and triangular curve at the right, to see the
the difference in efficiency ignored by the "same current" crowd - the white
triangle is what you are missing!
If you don't get it by now, then you have serious problem.

Why don't you "gurus" repeat measurements, model it PROPERLY as solenoid or
loading stub (or look at Cecil's examples) within the quarter wave resonant
loaded antenna and tell me where and what IS WRONG on my web page. Step by
step and arguments please.
I am getting tired of this mental masturbation why it CAN'T BE when it IS.
I tought that by now "same currentniks" would get it, but looks like too
much resistance to admit being wrong. Well, looks like really need for
comprehensive article to explain it, describe the experiments that anyone
can replicate and set the record straight. If you choose not to believe it,
that is your choice and you can live with it, who cares, really. Except that
some people parade as experts, gurus, engineers, when they are not. They
have odacity to attack others about misinformation, when they have same on
their web pages.
The even more sad thing is that apparently you influenced ON4UN to take the
right information out of his latest edition of Low Band DXing book and
replaced with your misinformation. It is all there in black and white, can't
deny it, besides claiming being or having "JI Engineering" company, which
you have no right to use that name or description, you ain't no engineer
with degree.
One last question Tom: How many electrical degrees has 60 ft tall tower (10"
face) with circular (or hex, or whatever you choose) top hat of 20 ft
diameter at 1.8 MHz?
Can you answer Cecil's questions?
Obviously NOT without admitting that you were and are wrong. No more
"proofs" needed like potshots at Cecil's ex wife.
I get better response from a brick wall when I hit it with hammer.
I really have no more to say, the rest will be in the comprehensive article
published for anyone to get the picture and decide for themseleves if this
is important or valuable for them, or not. (I promise, I am peeved now :-)

73 Yuri Blanarovich, www.K3BU.us

Rest is crap, twist and dance around the argument
With couple more comments that I could not resist. :-)

If you were saying the current is high in only the first few turns your
statement was incorrect.

Any dummy would know that it would be DISTRIBUTED along the coil, not in few
turns that you picked or shorted out! Argument was ACROSS the coil, or at
IT's ends. SAME (you) vs. DIFFERENT (me)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Capish?

If you were saying it had something to do with a cosign shape, your
statement was not correct.

Saying the current is NOT high in only the first few turns in a loading
coil in a working system is NOT the same as saying the current does not
vary or cannot vary.

You are like to call names, insult people, and argue rather than take the
time to learn basic electronics. This is in any book, including the ARRL
Handbook. If you look at HOW an inductor works, the current flowing in
one
terminal ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal.

That's true. The only thing that causes any differential is when the
inductor has significant stray C to the outside world compared to the
"through" impedance. Current can't just vanish.


ITS THE STANDING WAVE CURRENT measurable with RF ammeters or current probes.
How come it "vanishes" at the tip of quarter wave vertical, HUH???? Or you
deny that too????

I think that was explained at the same time. As I recall the
conversation, you were claiming current followed the same taper as the
antenna area it replaced and claiming only the first few turns had high
current. You claimed coil Q didn't matter because most of the current
was high only in a few turns.

CRAP! Make up some stories.

I was trying to point out that idea, that the Q does not matter and the
current is high only in the first few turns, is not correct by giving
examples where we cannot measure the change with thermal couple meters.

and.....

Measuring the current into and out of the loading coil with a small
thermocouple RF meter, I detect no difference This is in close agreement
with the model. " "

Measurements are at:

http://www.w8ji.com/mobile_antenna_c...ts_at_w8ji.htm

You still don't know what are we talking about?
Cecil is playing? Can you answer questions that he posted and I posted?

I've tried to answer every question Yuri, as have others. Does this
help clear up what I was trying to say?

WHERE?

As I recall you were claiming Q did not matter because current was high
only in the first few turns of a loading coil.

Yea, riiiiight, I am so stuuuupid!

I pointed out Q does not matter as people expect for a different
reason. The real reason Q does not have the large effect on FS is
ground losses in the system swamp out the effects of coil ESR.

You said current difference was directly related to antenna area the
loading coil replaced, that the loading coil had to have the same
current slope as the area of antenna it replaced. If it replaced 80
degrees of antenna, it had to have the same current differential as
that 80 degrees of antenna. Is that correct, or did I misunderstand
you?

I was giving counter-points to that claim.

For example I posted this:

http://www.w8ji.com/agreeing_measurements.htm

Do you disagee with anything I say or Roy said when it is in context of
the overall discussion??


YOU and Roy disagree with REALITY!!!!!!!!!!!!

73 Tom