![]() |
Noise level between two ant types
Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: Try looking in any basic physics text. I believe you will find discussion of electrostatic forces, equipotential surfaces, fields, and Gauss' law. It is doubtful that you will find any technical description of charge equalization. On the contrary, my DC circuits book has an example of the charges on two identical capacitors equalizing when they are paralleled. If I cause 10 coulombs of charge to be on a 10 meter long wire, do I not have a uniform charge distribution of 1 coulomb per meter on the wire, under dc steady state conditions? Isn't this required for any equipotential surface? |
Noise level between two ant types
Richard Clark wrote: Quite true. Its as if a needle has penetrated the equipotential shells over that 300V span. Streamlines would probably reveal a dead short to what are in the distance 300V/90aA = 3,333,333 GOhm resistive paths. .....and when we picture this stuff correctly everything works. For an example the cubical quad antenna. Quads almost always have long insulated spreaders with long leakage paths that allow directors and the reflector to "float". So, unlike the typical Yagi, the elements can charge to whatever potential is around them. Everything around the floating element is around the same potential as the element. There is no corona. The driven element has a path to ground, as most antennas do, so it is at a different potential than stuff around the element. Unlike a Yagi, the quad has the advantage of not having very sharp multiple extended protrusions into the space around its only "grounded" element. Not only does the only quad element with a connection that keeps it at earth potential lack extended protrusions, it also does not have the highest impedance point of the element at the point where corona or leakage current is likely to form. This means the quad, unlike the Yagi, does not have a very high impedance point of the antenna protruding into space around the antenna where any very tiny leakage discharges with very low current and very high voltage are better matched to the antenna. When we don't get all hung up on the very obvious nonsense that a closed loop is somhow magically quieter than an open element by virtue of "dc short", or fixated on an odd idea that the particles hitting the conductor are the actual instant of noise generation, everything fits. In conditions where there is corona or the potential for corona, quads are less susceptable to noise. As a matter of fact the very reason quads were used in their initial applications was in the moist high altitude environment of HCJB, and the quad element was used to prevent errosion of the dipole elements by corona into the moist air! When we look at this, it is almost laughable the very people claiming corona can't be the root cause of what is commonly called p-static noise are often arguing quad or quad like antenna short the noise of particles striking the antenna to ground, and thus can't have corona. Or worse yet they argue moisture prevents corona, when the entire reason the quad was "invented" was to prevent coronal errosion of dipole elements in the moist air at HCJB. 73 Tom |
Noise level between two ant types
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Try looking in any basic physics text. I believe you will find discussion of electrostatic forces, equipotential surfaces, fields, and Gauss' law. It is doubtful that you will find any technical description of charge equalization. On the contrary, my DC circuits book has an example of the charges on two identical capacitors equalizing when they are paralleled. Cecil, My bad. I forgot that rain drops and antenna wires are identical. The behavior of two identical capacitors certainly covers all charge transfer phenomena. 8-) 73, Gene W4SZ |
Noise level between two ant types
Dave wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Try looking in any basic physics text. I believe you will find discussion of electrostatic forces, equipotential surfaces, fields, and Gauss' law. It is doubtful that you will find any technical description of charge equalization. On the contrary, my DC circuits book has an example of the charges on two identical capacitors equalizing when they are paralleled. If I cause 10 coulombs of charge to be on a 10 meter long wire, do I not have a uniform charge distribution of 1 coulomb per meter on the wire, under dc steady state conditions? Isn't this required for any equipotential surface? Dave, No. A good conductor in DC conditions will have an equipotential surface. Charge distribution depends on the shape of the object and the external environment. The wire you describe will have higher charge density near its ends. Electrostatic analysis would be a lot easier if what you suggested was true. 73, Gene W4SZ |
Noise level between two ant types
My previous comments about the charge on each particle of given
diameter which impinges on a grounded antenna wire appears to have put you on the right track. But you are now over-complicating matters. KISS. A succession of random dis-charges constitutes a noise current induced in an antenna wire. Now carry on from there. You'll eventually sort it out. ---- Reg. |
Noise level between two ant types
Dave wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Try looking in any basic physics text. I believe you will find discussion of electrostatic forces, equipotential surfaces, fields, and Gauss' law. It is doubtful that you will find any technical description of charge equalization. On the contrary, my DC circuits book has an example of the charges on two identical capacitors equalizing when they are paralleled. If I cause 10 coulombs of charge to be on a 10 meter long wire, do I not have a uniform charge distribution of 1 coulomb per meter on the wire, under dc steady state conditions? Isn't this required for any equipotential surface? Nope. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
Noise level between two ant types
Gene Fuller wrote:
I forgot that rain drops and antenna wires are identical. The behavior of two identical capacitors certainly covers all charge transfer phenomena. You apparently misunderstood what I was saying. I didn't say the charge on the charged particle and the wire equalized. I said, after the charge is transferred to a point on the wire by the particle, the charge on the wire equalizes up and down the wire. But I am always ready to learn something new. Given two identical conductive spheres with unequal charges, please explain the physics that prohibits those spheres from equalizing their charges when they are brought into physical contact. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
Tom Donaly wrote:
If I cause 10 coulombs of charge to be on a 10 meter long wire, do I not have a uniform charge distribution of 1 coulomb per meter on the wire, under dc steady state conditions? Isn't this required for any equipotential surface? Nope. But that wasn't the correct question. Given two identical dipole elements connected by a link coupling, does the charge on each element equalize with the other? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: I forgot that rain drops and antenna wires are identical. The behavior of two identical capacitors certainly covers all charge transfer phenomena. You apparently misunderstood what I was saying. I didn't say the charge on the charged particle and the wire equalized. I said, after the charge is transferred to a point on the wire by the particle, the charge on the wire equalizes up and down the wire. I'm sorry, not up and down the single elementary wire, but between the two identical elements of a link-coupled dipole. But I am always ready to learn something new. Given two identical conductive spheres with unequal charges, please explain the physics that prohibits those spheres from equalizing their charges when they are brought into physical contact. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com