Mike Coslo wrote:

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
The current in a typical loading coil in the shortened antennas drops
across the coil roughly corresponding to the segment of the radiator
it replaces.

Quote from your page.

I would not expect anything else. If the loading coil is making the
antenna act like a physically longer antenna, other "qualities" of that
simulation are likely to be similar.

Is there a reason why the coil would *not* do this?
- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Every reason in the world. This misconception is EXACTLY what started
this whole thing years ago.

The loading coil doesn't "replace" missing electrical degrees, it
primarily corrects power factor by compensating reactance. Anything
else is generally secondary, and is related to flaws in the system
rather than something necessary.

That idea repeats one of the worse myths about loading coils.

The truth is the loading inductor almost never has the same phase shift
in current as the missing antenna area it replaces, and it almost never
has the same "current drop". "Current drop" isn't even a good English
description of what happens in any circuit.

I can have an antenna of given dimensions with a loading coil at one
fixed spot. The difference in current flowing into one end and out the
other can go all over the place, depending only on the coil's physical
design wity the antenna resonant on the same frequency. This happens
ONLY by changing the coil.

If I had a coil that was compact and not against the groundplane with
low stray capacitance compared to the antenna area above the coil,
current difference between each terminal or through the coil could be
immeasurable with reasonably good instrumentation. Phase shift in
current could also be nearly zero. None of this would be anywhere near
the area the coil replaces.

Without any change in anything except the coil, I could change all
that. If I replaced the coil with a long stub or very large single
turn, it would indeed act more like the antenna area it "replaces". The
reason for this is the coil's capacitance to ground and capacitance to
space around the antenna, NOT the electrical degrees it replaces and
certainly not the standing waves. This all can and has been proven over
and over again. The very few people offering the long drawn out
arguments against this really are violating basic electrical laws of
how systems really work, and enforcing the myth that a loading coil is
so many electrical degrees long or that displacement currents are not
at work and current magically vanishes, or magically flows two
directions at the same time at one point in a conductor.

A few people have taken the model of standing waves, not understood the
limits or boundary conditions of that model, and thought it to be an
actual literal description of what really is happening. They appear to
actually think current can flow two directions at the same time at the
same point. They somehow thing we can have charge drift velocity in two
directions at the same instant of time at one point in a conductor, or
that current can just vanish into thin air without actually being
diverted through a second path.

A few people have violated the rules of charge conservation, charge
movement, and misapplied the concept of standing waves, but the single
largest error is standing behind the myth or misconception that that
loading coil somehow acts like the "missing area of antenna".

73 Tom

wrote:
The loading coil doesn't "replace" missing electrical degrees, it
primarily corrects power factor by compensating reactance.

If correcting the power factor didn't cause a phase shift, the
power factor wouldn't change but we know it does. That phase
shift is exactly what we are talking about. The coil shifts
the phase of both the forward wave and reflected wave thus
furnishing some much needed electrical degrees in order to
resonate the antenna by bringing the phasor sum of the forward
and reflected voltages into phase with the phasor sum of the
forward and reflected currents.

Any power engineering textbook will tell you what happens to the
phase when the power factor is corrected. Hint: If the phase
stayed the same, as you assert, nothing would change. But we
know that correcting the power factor changes the phase. That's
exactly what correcting the power factor is all about.

The truth is the loading inductor almost never has the same phase shift
in current as the missing antenna area it replaces, and it almost never
has the same "current drop".

The inductor does indeed
contribute a phase shift that is not zero. In a one wavelength
system, the coil can just as easily contribute a current RISE
as a current DROP. That fact alone is reason to drop the flawed
model. Current cannot be created in a coil by sucking it out of
earth ground which is what your theory have us believe. But of
course, you have refused to discuss the subject.

I can have an antenna of given dimensions with a loading coil at one
fixed spot. The difference in current flowing into one end and out the
other can go all over the place, depending only on the coil's physical
design wity the antenna resonant on the same frequency. This happens
ONLY by changing the coil.

Of course, but that is beside the point. Every real world inductor does
contribute its own unique phase shift and its own unique current change,
rise, fall, or equal at current nodes and antinodes. You have absolutely
refused to discuss that current rise. One wonders why.

If I had a coil that was compact and not against the groundplane with
low stray capacitance compared to the antenna area above the coil,
current difference between each terminal or through the coil could be
immeasurable with reasonably good instrumentation. Phase shift in
current could also be nearly zero. None of this would be anywhere near
the area the coil replaces.

Resorting to a specially designed coil completely different from
anything used in the real world has been your specialty. If your
theory only works for only one special case and is not valid for
the general case, it's time to junk that theory.

After failing a dozen times to achieve equal current at both ends
of numerous coils, you finally declared victory using a small
toroidal coil. Uhhhh Tom, one out of twelve doesn't prove much.
I have shown you how to achieve equal current with any coil. It
just depends upon where the coil is placed in the standing wave
environment.

A few people have violated the rules of charge conservation, charge
movement, and misapplied the concept of standing waves, but the single
largest error is standing behind the myth or misconception that that
loading coil somehow acts like the "missing area of antenna".

The coil's function is to bring the forward and reflected waves
into phase so the feedpoint impedance will be purely resistive.
It cannot do that if it has no effect on phase. Your theory
is full of holes.

The coil affects the electrical length of the antenna, not the
physical length. Nobody has ever said it replaces the missing
physical length of the antenna. Your implication is that same
tired old straw man riding that same old dead horse.

Please stop trying to twist what we are saying and fix the
twist in your own misconceptions. For instance, how does your
theory handle a current rise through a coil as illustrated at:

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

in the right hand part of the graphic. Why do you refuse to
discuss this current RISE?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Any power engineering handbook will tell you what happens to the phase
when the power factor is corrected."

Most industrial loads have a lagging power factor. They represent an
inductive reactance in addition to their resistive loads. Extra energy
must be generated and transmitted just to charge this inductance which
does no work but demands current. Extra loss comes from this reactive
load. This is eliminated by tuning the inductance out with a capacitive
reactance at the load. This is often an overexcited synchronous motor.
When the motor has no mechanical load it is often called a "synchronous
capacitor".

An antenna needs zero reactance too if it is to accept maximum energy
and not make standing waves. Reactance impedes energy to the antenna.
Reactive current also increases loss in the transmission line as it does
in the case of the power utility frequency. So j0 is a goal in many
instances.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Any power engineering handbook will tell you what happens to the phase
when the power factor is corrected."

Most industrial loads have a lagging power factor. They represent an
inductive reactance in addition to their resistive loads. Extra energy
must be generated and transmitted just to charge this inductance which
does no work but demands current. Extra loss comes from this reactive
load. This is eliminated by tuning the inductance out with a capacitive
reactance at the load.

Yet W8JI would have us believe that power factor correcting capacitor
functions faster than the speed of light, making an instantaneous
phase correction. Sorry, the real world doesn't work that way.

The bottom line is that we cannot shift phase without delaying
something, either voltage or current. Contrary to the presuppositions
of the lumped-circuit model, neither voltage nor current can travel
faster than the speed of light. That means that any phase shifting
of the relative phase angle difference down to zero results in a
delay.

I have seen it explained as "apparently" traveling faster than
light. That's just one more patch on an already flawed mode.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp