![]() |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Roy Lewallen wrote:
So for starters, why don't you explain how your theory fits with the existing model results? Why is the current drop the same with an antenna and for a lumped circuit? Why does removing ground make the current drop go away? Why is there no significant phase shift in current from bottom to top? Conventional theory can explain this. Can yours? As for your promise to write the article, I have to point out that you've made this promise before without delivering. So I'm not exactly holding my breath waiting for it. I'm sure it'll make interesting reading, though, and it's a revolutionary enough theory that the IEEE, or at the very least QEX, should be happy to publish it when it's finally complete. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Sorry, I forgot to mention that they also don't appear to understand math, or the fact that "complex numbers" are quite simple if you went to engineering school and own an HP15 calculator. Mine still works fine. If you had trouble with the previous statement, Cecil and Yuri, I meant that your "phasor" math is trivial. At best 2nd year engineering. And yes, we do understand it. A lot more than you do apparently. tom K0TAR |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Gene Fuller wrote:
My question is why you feel there is anything of significance or anything for the "gurus" to ponder. Hopefully, I answered that question in my other posting. If one wants to measure phase shift using a traveling wave current, one measures the phase shift between two points. If one wants to measure the phase shift using a standing wave current, one measures the amplitudes at two points and subtracts the arc-cosines of the normalized amplitude values. You said essentially the same thing in your earlier posting - that there is no phase information in the standing wave current phase and all the phase information is in the amplitude values. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Tom Ring wrote:
They are not interested in reality. They are not interested in engineering. They do not want to understand physics, or they are not capable. It matters not. You are, of course, talking about QEX. Tom, maybe you can explain how to use standing wave current phase to measure the phase shift through a wire? If you can, I would really appreciate it. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Tom Ring wrote:
If you had trouble with the previous statement, Cecil and Yuri, I meant that your "phasor" math is trivial. At best 2nd year engineering. And yes, we do understand it. A lot more than you do apparently. Well then, please prove W8JI's assertion that "current is current", i.e. that cos(kx+wt) = cos(kx)*cos(wt) at every point up and down the wire. That should be "trivial" for you. If you cannot prove that, please explain to us how and why standing wave current is different from traveling wave current. (That's what I have been doing.) During your explanation of the difference, you will realize why W7EL's standing wave phase measurements are meaningless - that there is no phase information in standing wave current phase. As Gene said, all the phase information is in the standing wave current *amplitude*, not in the phase. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
"David G. Nagel" wrote I have completely lost track of what the object of the exercise is. ======================================= I gave up trying just after the thread began. What put me off was "current across the coil" when everybody knows it should be "current through the coil". It is VOLTS which appear ACROSS coils. ---- Reg. |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Tom Ring wrote:
Roy, I will make you a bet. Lunch, if you might be at Central States this year. Are you kidding? With odds about the same as winning the lottery? Not Gonna Happen. They are not interested in reality. They are not interested in engineering. They do not want to understand physics, or they are not capable. It matters not. I have been watching, and reading, and would like to see you, and the others, stop beating a very dead horse. Cecil and Yuri will never get it. Oh, I know all that. I'm not posting in an attempt to educate Cecil and Yuri or to change their minds -- it became evident years ago that's a waste of time. The only reason I bother is in the hopes that it'll play some part in preventing some of the lurkers from getting sucked in by the flurry of informed-sounding but demonstrably wrong arguments which continue to come from those folks. It's hard to say if it's having any effect, but I think it's important to present a point of view supported by established theory, modeling, and measurement results which are all in agreement rather than letting the pseudo-science stand alone as apparent fact. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Reg Edwards wrote:
"David G. Nagel" wrote I have completely lost track of what the object of the exercise is. ======================================= I gave up trying just after the thread began. What put me off was "current across the coil" when everybody knows it should be "current through the coil". It is VOLTS which appear ACROSS coils. ---- Reg. evidently Cecil doesn't. Dave |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Cecil,
I thought you denounced and denied this "concept" earlier today. 73, Gene W4SZ Cecil Moore wrote: If we had a coil installed in that 30 degrees of the antenna instead of a wire, the same concepts would apply. |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Roy Lewallen wrote:
The only reason I bother is in the hopes that it'll play some part in preventing some of the lurkers from getting sucked in by the flurry of informed-sounding but demonstrably wrong arguments which continue to come from those folks. Roy, it is demonstrably wrong to try to use standing wave current phase to measure the delay through a coil. Anyone, including you, who says it is a valid procedure is either ignorant or trying to hoodwink the lurkers. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Current across the antenna loading coil - from scratch
Gene Fuller wrote:
I thought you denounced and denied this "concept" earlier today. Guess you misunderstood. A coil can replace 30 degrees of an antenna but it won't use the same amount of wire as 30 degrees of wire. What I said is that an inductor is more efficient than linear loading. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com