"John - KD5YI" wrote in message
news:uP70g.270$_s5.47@trnddc04...
Dave wrote:
How would you guys who are stuck in an endless thread of loading coils
like to take on 'linear loading'?? are the currents the same at each end
of the loading line?? do they cancel completely along the length of the
loading line? does the loading line replace so many degrees of the
length of the elements or cause some kind of delay???

the antenna i am working on is an m-squared 40m4lldd where, for example,
the reflector is 50' tip to tip, about 10' out from the boom there is an
insulator, a rod about 9' long connects with a metal bracket on each side
of the insulator and folds back toward the boom where they are connected
with an aluminum shorting bar that then uses a piece of phillystrand that
goes to an element truss support bracket. then of course beyond the
insulator is another 15' or so of element, the tips are adjusted to tune
the elements.



What's "linear loading"? What's a "loading line"?

i probably didn't do a very good job of describing it, but basically you
take a shorter than 1/4 wave element and cut it in the middle somewhere and
put in an insulator. instead of putting in a loading coil as you would
normally expect you use a shorted piece of parallel wire line to tune it.
in the case of the 40m4lldd the parallel wire line is made of aluminum rod
and is folded back to use it as a truss for the element.

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"John - KD5YI" wrote in message
news:uP70g.270$_s5.47@trnddc04...
Dave wrote:
How would you guys who are stuck in an endless thread of loading coils
like to take on 'linear loading'?? are the currents the same at each
end of the loading line?? do they cancel completely along the length of
the loading line? does the loading line replace so many degrees of the
length of the elements or cause some kind of delay???

As far as acting as loading element, it is another form of (real life)
loading inductance, so it is similar to loading coil, but worse performer in
the loaded Yagi situation. Have look at the end of my article
http://www.k3bu.us/loadingcoils.htm
where EZNEC plot shows current distribution along the loaded Yagi element,
using loading stubs.

the antenna i am working on is an m-squared 40m4lldd where, for example,
the reflector is 50' tip to tip, about 10' out from the boom there is an
insulator, a rod about 9' long connects with a metal bracket on each
side of the insulator and folds back toward the boom where they are
connected with an aluminum shorting bar that then uses a piece of
phillystrand that goes to an element truss support bracket. then of
course beyond the insulator is another 15' or so of element, the tips
are adjusted to tune the elements.



What's "linear loading"? What's a "loading line"?

i probably didn't do a very good job of describing it, but basically you
take a shorter than 1/4 wave element and cut it in the middle somewhere
and put in an insulator. instead of putting in a loading coil as you
would normally expect you use a shorted piece of parallel wire line to
tune it. in the case of the 40m4lldd the parallel wire line is made of
aluminum rod and is folded back to use it as a truss for the element.


It has been found and published in articles in CQ magazine, where loading
stubs were replaced by the loading coils and the performance of the antenna
like KLM 80m 3 el. loaded Yagi was improved significantly. Better gain and
better and cleaner F/B and pattern. Real modeling and measurements confirmed
that, regardless what the "flat earth - same current" believers claim and
try to "prove".
Folding the loading stubs along the elements seems to distort the current
distribution along the element and deteriorate its' performance. So you are
better off replacing loading stubs with loading coils, and that's what the
whole debate about the current distribution, reality and understanding it is
about.

73 and GL Yuri, K3BU.us

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 12:06:45 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

it is similar to loading coil, but worse performer in
the loaded Yagi situation. Have look at the end of my article
http://www.k3bu.us/loadingcoils.htm

Hi Yuri,

As usual, your statement has nothing to do with your link. What is
worse, this EZNEC model is from a third party who is not available to
comment as to the accuracy of your statements about performance.

Even more is the compounding of error at the link:
"G5RV antenna using inductors in the form of loading stubs"
Clearly, then, it is NOT a G5RV.

When we continue with the commentary we find:
"When simple inductance in Eznec is inserted in place of the
stubs, the current erroneously is shown as the same at the both
ends of the inductor."
Clearly, then, the model designer who expected something other does
not know how to design the model. It would seem after several years
of corrections to this error you continue to publish, that you would
have updated your page by now.

It is easy to offer broken solutions. This group sees many of them
that are then used to discredit either the tool or the theory. What
these broken models reveals are the bankrupt designer.

Perhaps you should vet the material from your contributors more
closely.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hi Richard,
I thank you for posting such revealing evaluation of my deficient,
misleading knowledge.
Yes, my web site is full of old no good stuff. Even my C6AYB picture is too
many pounds old.
Anyone with spec of antenna knowledge can see that "G5RV" is operated as
dipole, judging by the standing wave current distribution, and it is not
cardinal sin to call it G5RV dipole or vice versa.
If I can get away from deflecting mumbo-jumbo and over holidays, I will
start working on the project. Looks like audience here is looking for
sticking needles rather than providing answers and suggestions to questions.
The main thrust of question posted here was, should he stay with loading
stubs or do something better. I described what was done, and stubs suck,
coils are MUCH better and that current distribution is what it is and
illustrated in that "butchered" drawing by W5DXP.
I humbly bow in view of your much better, educational posting. I am sure the
questioner is fully satisfied with your answers and solutions.

Happy Easter from bankrupt designer

73 Yuri, K3BU

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 12:06:45 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

it is similar to loading coil, but worse performer in
the loaded Yagi situation. Have look at the end of my article
http://www.k3bu.us/loadingcoils.htm

Hi Yuri,

As usual, your statement has nothing to do with your link. What is
worse, this EZNEC model is from a third party who is not available to
comment as to the accuracy of your statements about performance.

Even more is the compounding of error at the link:
"G5RV antenna using inductors in the form of loading stubs"
Clearly, then, it is NOT a G5RV.

When we continue with the commentary we find:
"When simple inductance in Eznec is inserted in place of the
stubs, the current erroneously is shown as the same at the both
ends of the inductor."
Clearly, then, the model designer who expected something other does
not know how to design the model. It would seem after several years
of corrections to this error you continue to publish, that you would
have updated your page by now.

It is easy to offer broken solutions. This group sees many of them
that are then used to discredit either the tool or the theory. What
these broken models reveals are the bankrupt designer.

Perhaps you should vet the material from your contributors more
closely.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 21:44:55 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

Hi Richard,
I thank you for posting such revealing evaluation of my deficient,
misleading knowledge.

Hi Yuri,

Your appreciation is well placed.

Anyone with spec of antenna knowledge can see that "G5RV" is operated as
dipole, judging by the standing wave current distribution, and it is not
cardinal sin to call it G5RV dipole or vice versa.

Anyone? No, this is embracing a crowd to insulate you from
sloppiness. You rail about accuracy, bewail efficiency, demand
perfection, and this is your defense? It works better in a teenager's
diary - not here.

If I can get away from deflecting mumbo-jumbo and over holidays, I will
start working on the project. Looks like audience here is looking for
sticking needles rather than providing answers and suggestions to questions.

More sobbing. Yuri, if "doing" this had anything to offer you, you
would have done it by now. Others, including myself, have already
posted results, answers and suggestions. We merely wait for you to
either catch up, or pass us.

In light of the many promises of more horsepower, faster acceleration,
and better gas mileage, that has been a long wait.

The main thrust of question posted here was, should he stay with loading
stubs or do something better. I described what was done, and stubs suck,

Suck goes right up there with BS that is sold for a dime a truck full.
coils are MUCH better

How much better? This sounds like a fractal sales pitch.

and that current distribution is what it is

Zen and BS depress the price to a nickel a truck load.

and illustrated in that "butchered" drawing by W5DXP.

This confirms my comment that you should vet your references closer.

I humbly bow in view of your much better, educational posting. I am sure the
questioner is fully satisfied with your answers and solutions.

Not something I would take for granted. You have to careful about
being humble, I whip peasants for fun too.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
protecting the world against fractal salesmen for 10 years.

"Richard Clark" wrote

How much better? This sounds like a fractal sales pitch.


Your HOW MUCH is getting a bit TOO MUCH!
Comparing this to fractal sales pitch??? That is TOO MUCH!
Go read the article in CQ magazine if you like to find out details. Geeez!
Guy asked question, I gave some answer, better than nothing that you gave or
anyone else. If you expect me to write a book, than wait!
Looks like you got TOO MUCH time and enjoy sticking needles.
Sorry I don't write exactly as you would wish.
Get a life!

73 Yuri

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 12:06:45 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

As far as acting as loading element, it is another form of (real life)
loading inductance, so it is similar to loading coil, but worse performer in
the loaded Yagi situation. Have look at the end of my article
http://www.k3bu.us/loadingcoils.htm

Hi Yuri,

Now, when we actually "look" at the design at your link, we find we
don't know much about:
1. How tall the antenna is (never said);
2. How long the radials are (never said);
3. How many turns in the coil (have to squint and count and hope);
4. How long the coil is (you gotta guess);
5. What frequency this resonates at (well, actually it doesn't say it
resonates anywhere);
6. What the drive point Z is (as if that mattered)

But we do know that some one can find
7. The current into the coil and;
8. The current out of the coil;
9. which according to breathless reports makes all the difference in
the world,

until
10. I threw away that trash coil, replaced it with a distributed load
(aka shorted transmission line) and boosted the performance.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 12:06:45 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

As far as acting as loading element, it is another form of (real life)
loading inductance, so it is similar to loading coil, but worse performer
in
the loaded Yagi situation. Have look at the end of my article
http://www.k3bu.us/loadingcoils.htm

Hi Yuri,

Now, when we actually "look" at the design at your link, we find we
don't know much about:

Here is the information from my web site as described by Barry, W9UCW:

"Here are some actual measurements of current below and above loading coils.
92" mast, using a HI-Q coil (openwound airdux, 2 1/2"d) with small
thermocouple type meters mounted on the insulated coil support. First for
40m, moving the coil in the mast from base to center to top (with hat) and
reresonating.
Base --100ma below & 66ma above
Center --100ma below & 45ma above
Top --100ma below & 37ma above

Then, same test but for 30m
Base --100ma below & 75ma above
Center --100ma below & 60ma above
Top --100ma below & 52ma above

On a long, skinny 160 resonator with 25pf of top hat and whip, mounted on an
8' mast, I read 100ma below and 65ma above the coil.

Because of the constant claim that this must be due to the fact that the
coil is so big compared to a wavelength, I measured the in and out current
on a TOROIDAL loading coil used on a 20m mobile antenna. It was a 78" base
mast (including spring and mount) with a 38" top whip (including 12" of
alum. tubing for adjustment).
Below --100ma & Above --79ma
When I moved the coil to the top of the mast and made a horizontal "X" top
hat to resonate it back on the same freq, I got
Below --100ma & Above --47ma

So, It happens even in a totally shielded loading coil with miniscule power
going thru it! Kirchoff has no laws about current being the same on both
ends of inductors. His current law is about one POINT in a circuit and his
voltage law is about a closed loop."
.... and some significant difference W9UCW in field strength measured between
the base and center loading coil:

"The actual difference in signal strength between top and base loading of a
9' antenna is about 16 db (measured) on 75m, but Tom calculates 8db on 160.
That's because he assumes the same current in the coil. Actually it's worse
on 160 than 75."



1. How tall the antenna is (never said);

He said - 92" simulating mobile whip.

2. How long the radials are (never said);

Radials laid on the ground are non resonant, doesn't matter much, but there
were enough of them (I remember him mentioning at least 32)

3. How many turns in the coil (have to squint and count and hope);

Coild is of good quality (aka Texas Bugcatcher), what is important that it
was adjusted to bring antenna to 90 electr. degrees - RESONANCE.

4. How long the coil is (you gotta guess);

Same as 3, in each test, enough to resonante on band of test (40, 30, 80)

5. What frequency this resonates at (well, actually it doesn't say it
resonates anywhere);

Ham bands 40, 30, 80 and 160 is where they measured the currents.

6. What the drive point Z is (as if that mattered)

Not important as long as antenna is resonant on frequency in question. The
power was adjusted to show 100 ma full scale on the bottom of the coil and
read on the same type of meter on the top.

But we do know that some one can find
7. The current into the coil and;
8. The current out of the coil;
9. which according to breathless reports makes all the difference in
the world,


Picture of REALITY vs. phasors, distributed baloney, pink electrons, bla,
bla ... why it "could not be".
More appropriate assesment would be "significant", which you can judge by
his comment about 16 dB vs. 8 dB "calculated" by W8JI
Anyone can duplicate the test and verify the results and claims, instead of
displaying their ignorance of reality.

until
10. I threw away that trash coil, replaced it with a distributed load
(aka shorted transmission line) and boosted the performance.


And you did that, and measured it, right?
It has been proven in real life and measurements that "trash" coil performs
better in the loaded Yagi design that loading stub (distributed load). It
has been done, described and measured by at least three happy owners of
modified KLM 2 or 3 el. loaded Yagis on 80. Improved gain and pattern, F/B.

Interesting that the "problems" with loading coils and same current
affcionados "know it" based on their (faulty) theories. W8JI attributes his
mental state to others to "prove" his "right" which will end up being big
egg in his face.

Interesting, that question about loading stubs has "matured" to this also,
instead of providing some answers for David.
This is my last contribution to this thread.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

73 Yuri, K3BU

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 23:03:56 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

Now, when we actually "look" at the design at your link, we find we
don't know much about:

Here is the information from my web site as described by Barry, W9UCW:

This is still insufficient even for a partial description.

"Here are some actual measurements of current below and above loading coils.
92" mast, using a HI-Q coil (openwound airdux, 2 1/2"d) with small

92" does not agree with other numbers offered.

snip

On a long, skinny 160 resonator

The coil shown is no such thing.

with 25pf of top hat and whip

I frankly don't accept the description of "25pf of top hat and whip"
because there is absolutely no supporting discussion, measurements, or
modeling. This is "blue sky" reporting.

, mounted on an
8' mast, I read 100ma below and 65ma above the coil.

An 8' mast equates to 92" mast which leaves no room for a whip, that,
or the whip is unspecified.

snip
a 20m mobile antenna. It was a 78" base
mast (including spring and mount) with a 38" top whip (including 12" of
alum. tubing for adjustment).

Which has absolutely nothing to do with your published page. It is
bad enough to fight for details with one obscure design, to then
australian tag match for two obscure antennas.

snip

1. How tall the antenna is (never said);
He said - 92" simulating mobile whip.

This is incorrect from the your statements offered above. The ANTENNA
is larger, that much is obvious.

2. How long the radials are (never said);
Radials laid on the ground are non resonant, doesn't matter much, but there
were enough of them (I remember him mentioning at least 32)

This does not answer the question.

3. How many turns in the coil (have to squint and count and hope);
Coild is of good quality (aka Texas Bugcatcher),

This does not answer the question.

what is important that it
was adjusted to bring antenna to 90 electr. degrees - RESONANCE.

The coil is stock, there was no adjustment made, that is quite
obvious. Further, nothing was resonated. This page's material came
from a jury-rigged set-up for a kangaroo court proof. The antenna was
not resonated the tuning was performed in the shack. Twist enough
knobs to jimmy a current was the name of the game here.

4. How long the coil is (you gotta guess);

Same as 3, in each test,

This does not answer the question.

enough to resonante on band of test (40, 30, 80)

Yuri, you are ****ing on our legs and telling us it is raining. One
coil, one mast, one whip, does not resonate on three bands. You guys
were twisting knobs, not resonating a radiator with a load.

5. What frequency this resonates at (well, actually it doesn't say it
resonates anywhere);

Ham bands 40, 30, 80 and 160 is where they measured the currents.

Impossible, the coil is much to small for such a small radiator to
resonate in 160M band, the rest of these claims are equally invalid by
the simple observation of the content at your page and the poor
responses to technical questions above.

6. What the drive point Z is (as if that mattered)

Not important as long as antenna is resonant on frequency in question.

This is simply your way of saying you don't know and you couldn't find
out. Further, nothing was resonant - it would take far more details
that you don't have to make it happen. Again, you just don't know.

until
10. I threw away that trash coil, replaced it with a distributed load
(aka shorted transmission line) and boosted the performance.


And you did that, and measured it, right?

Yes.

It has been proven in real life and measurements that "trash" coil performs
better in the loaded Yagi design that loading stub (distributed load). It
has been done, described and measured by at least three happy owners of
modified KLM 2 or 3 el. loaded Yagis on 80. Improved gain and pattern, F/B.

And they aren't here are they? Tell us the found the missing WMD and
that would make them real heroes.

This is my last contribution to this thread.

You over-rate it considerably. No doubt we will hear more on this,
but that won't be contribution either.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

OK one more time.
We had argument about current in antenna loading coils, one bunch says it is
different, another bunch says it is, has to be the same, no way can it be
different.

Instead of trying to verify the reality on real antennas, with real, typical
hardware and measure it or show that there is something wrong with what we
so far presented, we see "theoretical reasons" why it can't be and
nitpicking on tangents leading to la-la land, instead of hitting the "meat"
of the argument.
Suit yourself. No one said that W9UCW did all the different band experiments
with the same setup in the picture. He showed one picture, proof that
current CAN be different at two ends of a loading coil, which W8JI and his
worshippers claim it CAN NOT BE.
Show us your setup, description and details showing that in all cases
current IS ALWAYS (or almost) the SAME!

There is really no point of arguing any more here. I will do the tests and
with help of "our campers" we will present comprehensive article on the
subject.
I would like to thank you all, including "current nonbelievers" for their
opposition, because they highlighted how much misinformation (50 years) and
false "science" is out there and helped us to understand the depth and
reasons for the current in the loading coil behavior, and especially for the
need to set the record straight and help to improve the modeling of loaded
antennas.

The rest will be reported on my web site, which I will consolidate and bring
up to date in the next few days at www.K3BU.us Then you can nitpick or
provide critique. There is no point in arguing, when Cecil asks why is there
higher current at the top of the coil and "unbelievers" are mum or keep
rattling off their but, but, but...
IT IS STANDING WAVE CURRENT and VOLTAGE along the resonator, get it?
What's next? Denying that there is a daylight, when the sun is out?

73 +
Yuri, K3BU