Cecil Moore wrote:
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.

Crucially, you don't. The main property of a "coil" is inductance, and
at the most fundamental level you do not understand what inductance
does.

Very few
people understand how standing waves work.

Once again: crucially, you don't. You demand that ordinary electrical
phenomena (like inductance and even current) change their properties or
definitions in the presence of standing waves.

You are doggedly trying to make those two misconceptions cancel each
other out. Won't work.


There's no point
in discussing what people already understand. There's every
point in discussing what people don't understand.

I certainly agree with that... but we may differ about who we mean by
"people" :-)


--
73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
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...).

OK, I agree the current CAN be different.

Of course that has nothing to do with the amount of antenna the coil
replaces, it is a function of the physical construction of the loading
coil and how much capacitance the coil has from the coil to the outside
world compared to the capacitance terminating the loading coil.

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.

Well, I thought that was what you said. If you didn't say it, I have to
take your word for it.

Awww, MAN,Cecil. I am sorry. I had no idea that you were putting up
with a newsreader that can't follow threads, and in addition you have
such a severe short term memory loss that you can't follow what's been
posted within the past couple hours.

Bummer, man. Real bummer. I feel for you. It's a really bad
combination.

We should be able to help you out with the newsreader problem if you
want. I'm not so sure about the memory loss thing, though. It might
help if you didn't try to keep so many balls in the air all at once,
but I don't know that for certain.

I've patched together below (from the newsreader I use, which does keep
track of all the branches of threads) what I wrote and what I was
replying to in this particular sub-thread, so you can see it all in one
place. If you'd like, I could do the same with the postings from other
sub-threads here and from that other thread-that-wouldn't-die and email
it to you, but that would be on a time-permitting basis.

Cheers,
Tom

-------------------
-------------------
The above is in reply to:
-------------------

Path:
g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news3.google.c om!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com !newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newsmst01b .news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prod igy.com!newssvr25.news.prodigy.net.POSTED!00eff025 !not-for-mail
From: Cecil Moore
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2)
Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
References:
. com

.com








t





.com
In-Reply-To: .com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 29
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.149.30.33
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: newssvr25.news.prodigy.net 1144183841 ST000 64.149.30.33 (Tue,
04 Apr 2006 16:50:41 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 16:50:41 EDT
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
X-UserInfo1:
[[PA@SZG@@WCC^H]]RKB_UDAZZ\DPCPDLXUNNHDK@YUDUWYAKVUOPCW[ML\JXUCKVFDYZKBMSFX^OMSAFNTINTDDMVW[X\THOPXZRVOCJTUTPC\_JSBVX\KAOTBAJBVMZTYAKMNLDI_MFD SSOLXINH__FS^\WQGHGI^C@E[A_CF\AQLDQ\BTMPLDFNVUQ_VM
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:50:41 GMT

K7ITM wrote:

You really think so, Cecil?? I saw through it the first time you
posted it. As an EZNEC and NEC2 user, I know that not only the current
magnitude, but also its phase, is reported. I knew that what you
posted about it was incorrect. I don't see Roy's comment as agreeing
with you at all, but completely disagreeing. You said that it only
gave amplitude information, when in fact it gives phase and amplitude.

Again, no quote from me. I have no idea to what you are responding
or even if you are responding to something I said today or last year.

I didn't say EZNEC doesn't give phase information. I said there is
no phase information in the phase information that EXNEC gives.
What is it about Gene's posting that you don't understand?

Regarding the cos(kz)*cos(wt) term in a standing wave:

Gene Fuller, W4SZ wrote:
In a standing wave antenna problem, such as the one you describe, there is no
remaining phase information. Any specific phase characteristics of the traveling
waves died out when the startup transients died out.

Phase is gone. Kaput. Vanished. Cannot be recovered. Never to be seen again.

The only "phase" remaining is the cos (kz) term, which is really an amplitude
description, not a phase.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

-------------------------------
-------------------------------
which was in reply to my message:
-------------------------------

Path:
g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!e56g2000cwe .googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "K7ITM"
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Date: 4 Apr 2006 13:26:07 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 7
Message-ID: .com
References:
. com

.com








t





NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.25.142.225
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1144182372 31795 127.0.0.1 (4 Apr 2006
20:26:12 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 20:26:12 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To:
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=192.25.142.225;
posting-account=phdUIAwAAABBVjeZzACGtATOLRtXatU-

You really think so, Cecil?? I saw through it the first time you
posted it. As an EZNEC and NEC2 user, I know that not only the current
magnitude, but also its phase, is reported. I knew that what you
posted about it was incorrect. I don't see Roy's comment as agreeing
with you at all, but completely disagreeing. You said that it only
gave amplitude information, when in fact it gives phase and amplitude.

-------------------------------
-------------------------------
which was in reply to Cecil's message:
-------------------------------
Path:
g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news4.google.c om!news.glorb.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodi gy.net!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!pos tmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr25.news.prodigy.ne t.POSTED!00eff025!not-for-mail
From: Cecil Moore
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2)
Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
References:
. com

.com








t




In-Reply-To:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 15
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.149.30.33
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: newssvr25.news.prodigy.net 1144179596 ST000 64.149.30.33 (Tue,
04 Apr 2006 15:39:56 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 15:39:56 EDT
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
X-UserInfo1:
OP\YG\GFEB^UCWDYIBHZOWP@YZOZ@GXOXJXNMRQIMASJETAANV W[AKWZE\]^XQWIGNE_[EBL@^_\^JOCQ^RSNVLGTFTKHTXHHP[NB\_C@\SD@EP_[KCXX__AGDDEKGFNB\ZOKLRNCY_CGG[RHT_UN@C_BSY\G__IJIX_PLSA[CCFAULEY\FL\VLGANTQQ]FN
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 19:39:56 GMT

Roy Lewallen wrote:

I see that Cecil's latest fetish is that EZNEC reports RMS values of
voltage and current. Because we know that the voltages and currents are
purely sinusoidal, the RMS value and phase angle (also reported by
EZNEC) are adequate to define the time waveform. That is, when we know
the RMS amplitude and the phase angle, we know the value of the waveform
at every instant in time. No additional information is necessary.

Since you agree with me, what's with the fetish remark?
You seem to feel obliged to take an ad hominem pot shot
every time you mention my name. I assure you, it is
hurting your reputation more than it is hurting mine.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

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


By implication, this is also with respect to what Cecil wrote at the
end of another subthread. The in-reply-to-s can be used to trace
things back...:
-------------------------------
Path:
g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news3.google.c om!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com !newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newsmst01b .news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prod igy.com!newssvr25.news.prodigy.net.POSTED!00eff025 !not-for-mail
From: Cecil Moore
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2)
Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
References:
. com

.com






.com


om
t
. com

.com
In-Reply-To: .com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 30
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.149.30.33
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: newssvr25.news.prodigy.net 1144181906 ST000 64.149.30.33 (Tue,
04 Apr 2006 16:18:26 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 16:18:26 EDT
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
X-UserInfo1:
OP\YG\GFEB^UCWDYIBHZOWP@YZOZ@GXOXJXNMRQIMASJETAANV W[AKWZE\]^XQWIGNE_[EBL@^_\^JOCQ^RSNVLGTFTKHTXHHP[NB\_C@\SD@EP_[KCXX__AGDDEKGFNB\ZOKLRNCY_CGG[RHT_UN@C_BSY\G__IJIX_PLSA[CCFAULEY\FL\VLGANTQQ]FN
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:18:26 GMT

K7ITM wrote:

I beg your pardon? Excuse me? I "trimmed out all the technical
content and didn't quote anything you said"???

Yes, and you are doing it again. I'm quoting your entire posting
and there is not one quote from me.

As a matter of fact, I
took exactly the numbers you gave us, ALL of them, and used them and
ONLY them in my accounting. If THAT's "disembodied from reality," then
I'd point out that it's YOUR numbers that are disembodied from reality.
In fact, I didn't argue with YOUR numbers at all. I just took them at
face value. You were the one that discarded what I carefully developed
from them without out so much as an ounce of reasoning or explanation.
After that I went on to FURTHER EXPLAIN why I had done what I did in
the first place, and you dismissed that again without any technical
explanation.

It's all there for everyone to see, Cecil.

If there's a quote from me in this posting, Tom, I am unable
to find it.

Go ahead, dig yourself deeper into it.

Since you didn't quote anything I said, I have no idea what
you are talking about.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

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

Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Everybody seems to understand how a coil works.

Crucially, you don't. The main property of a "coil" is inductance, and
at the most fundamental level you do not understand what inductance does.

Please stop the mind fornication, Ian. I understand how a coil works
and I agree with you how a coil works in a lumped circuit or a traveling
wave environment. It's obvious that our basic disagreement is NOT about
coils but is, instead, about standing waves. If one doesn't understand
standing waves, one cannot understand standing waves in empty space, in
a wire, or in a coil.

Take away the coil leaving nothing but wire. You and I still disagree
regarding traveling waves Vs standing waves. Take away the wire and leave
nothing but empty space containing standing waves of light. You and I
still disagree regarding traveling waves Vs standing waves. Let's discuss
our point of disagreement, not something that we agree upon.

Very few people understand how standing waves work.

Once again: crucially, you don't. You demand that ordinary electrical
phenomena (like inductance and even current) change their properties or
definitions in the presence of standing waves.

I just posted some tabular current data from EZNEC. EZNEC says that
current changes its properties in the presence of standing waves.
It's there in black and white for all to see. Please explain how
those two columns of data are identical.

The traveling wave current magnitude is constant over the entire
90 degrees of wire. The standing wave current magnitude is a cosine
function over that same 90 degrees of wire.

The traveling wave current phase changes linearly over the entire
90 degrees of wire. The standing wave current phase is unchanging
over that same 90 degrees if wire.

That doesn't look the same to me. In fact, one could make an argument
that traveling wave current and standing wave current are opposites
of each other.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote:
OK, I agree the current CAN be different.

Therefore, you are admitting that you were wrong when you said:

If you look at HOW an inductor works, the current flowing in one
terminal ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal.

At this point I'm not sure what you are saying.

He's saying your original statement above was wrong. And now
you admit it was wrong. Congratulations on that admission.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

K7ITM wrote:
Awww, MAN,Cecil. I am sorry. I had no idea that you were putting up
with a newsreader that can't follow threads, and in addition you have
such a severe short term memory loss that you can't follow what's been
posted within the past couple hours.

My newsreader is indeed unthreaded. I remember what was posted
but sometimes not by who.

We should be able to help you out with the newsreader problem if you
want.

I prefer my newsreader unthreaded. I read postings in the order
in which they are received by my newsserver. Nothing else is ever
downloaded. If the context of a posting is not quoted, I never see it.

I've patched together below (from the newsreader I use, which does keep
track of all the branches of threads) what I wrote and what I was
replying to in this particular sub-thread, so you can see it all in one
place.

I still don't see any technical content in those postings. I do
apologize if I have offended you but I still don't understand how.
But that is water under the bridge by now.

Sorry, the discussion has progressed beyond coils. Take a look at my
other posting about what EZNEC says about traveling wave current Vs
standing wave current and you will be up to date. Then you can use
your lumped-circuit theory to explain the major differences in those
two kinds of currents reported by EZNEC.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

K7ITM wrote:

From where I am, Cecil, it sounds a lot more like everyone is bored to
tears with standing waves, since they are nothing more than the result
of adding together a couple travelling waves, and everyone here
understood them LONG ago.

Everyone *thought* they understood them. The assertion that "current
is current" proves that they didn't really understand them.

cos(kz + wt) is simply not the same thing as cos(kz)*cos(wt)
There is no trig idenity that will make them the same.

Even W7EL's assertion about EZNEC not worrying about traveling
wave current is wrong. When reflected current is eliminated in
the traveling wave antenna design, EZNEC faithfully reports the
traveling wave current proportional to cos(kx+wt).

Please comment on the tabular data that I posted from EZNEC.

And again, I apologize for offending you.

As I've posted before, and as far as I know nobody's taken me up on it,
it's quite enlightening to see an animation of the standing
wave+travelling wave pattern that develops on a transmission line for
various values of the ratio between the two travelling wave amplitudes.
But once you've seen it, and likely even before, you know what you
need, and (most of us) can move on

I've posted this java graphic before. The standing wave current is
obviously not the same as the traveling current.

http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/e...stwaverefl.htm
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:27:13 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

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!

Hi Yuri,

I can also see that any metrics are entirely missing as to ACTUAL
efficiency. You already admit you don't know and don't really care to
go there when you dismiss this discussion:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:47:05 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich" wrote:
So lets stick to the big problem and fuggettabout detours and nitpicking.

This "big problem and nitpicking" is girly talk when they are giggling
about Desperate Housewives. It is most obvious you enjoy the cat
fight with Tom and don't give a hoot about a technical presentation.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

I'm sorry, Cecil, but that Java applet is a poor cousin of what I had
in mind. It only tells part of the story. Please re-read my message
carefully.

Cheers,
Tom

Cecil Moore wrote, in Message-ID:
:
K7ITM wrote:

From where I am, Cecil, it sounds a lot more like everyone is bored to
tears with standing waves, since they are nothing more than the result
of adding together a couple travelling waves, and everyone here
understood them LONG ago.

Everyone *thought* they understood them. The assertion that "current
is current" proves that they didn't really understand them.

cos(kz + wt) is simply not the same thing as cos(kz)*cos(wt)
There is no trig idenity that will make them the same.

Even W7EL's assertion about EZNEC not worrying about traveling
wave current is wrong. When reflected current is eliminated in
the traveling wave antenna design, EZNEC faithfully reports the
traveling wave current proportional to cos(kx+wt).

Please comment on the tabular data that I posted from EZNEC.

And again, I apologize for offending you.

As I've posted before, and as far as I know nobody's taken me up on it,
it's quite enlightening to see an animation of the standing
wave+travelling wave pattern that develops on a transmission line for
various values of the ratio between the two travelling wave amplitudes.
But once you've seen it, and likely even before, you know what you
need, and (most of us) can move on

I've posted this java graphic before. The standing wave current is
obviously not the same as the traveling current.

http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/e...stwaverefl.htm
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 07:33:10 -0500, "Richard Fry"
wrote:

The text continues that for a MW monopole, the terminal condition consists

Problems here.

1. This was not a heap of explaining, only a pile;
2. this was not explaining at all, merely description;
3. this does not explain how a 118.60° tall antenna comes to be
resonant through
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:11:20 -0500, "Richard Fry" wrote:
The effective electrical length of a MW monople radiator determines its
resonant frequencies, and that must include the velocity of propagation
along the structure -- which is a function of the height AND width of the
radiator (mainly), and the operating frequency.

Using your reference
"Antenna Engineering Handbook," 2nd edition (pub. 1984),
by Johnson and Jasik
and having me carry your water of explaining, we find in figure 4-4
the correlation between resonance (the absence of reactance), length,
and diameter gives us a necessarily wide antenna of
13.9 meters

I cannot recall ever seeing any tower with a 45 foot diameter in a
commercial setting. However, that is not to say it doesn't exist,
merely that the odds for it are ridiculously astronomical.

If we browse the FCC database for other antennas to see how well your
reference "explains" how your quote above provides a resonance for
them, then we come across rather more astronomical odds being
fulfilled.

WFLF 75.00° tall 540 kHz
requires a tower diameter of 364 feet =whew!=

KNOE 63.00° tall 540 kHz
Let's just say that is so far off the charts it ceases to be
astronomic and becomes galactic in improbability. Basically this
reveals the breakdown in hyperbole's capacity to describe the metaphor
of improbability - especially in the face of these examples that
follow:

WGOP (POCOMOKE CITY) 63.00° tall 540 kHz

WWCS 63.50° tall 540 kHz

WYNN 65.50° tall 540 kHz

KDFT 59.30° tall 540 kHz

WXNH 56.30° tall 540 kHz

WLIE 62.30° tall 540 kHz

There's no point going further as this hardly exhausts one frequency
assignment, much less the AM band.

The long and the short of it stands with my original statement:
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. - but such explaining is a specialty occupation here in this
group.

Expanding slightly, it is absurd to attach a 90° tall claim to an
antenna simply because it has been resonated through adaptive
measures. Unfortunatley, being absurd is also a specialty occupation
here in this group.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC