RadioBanter - Antenna optimization

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Antenna (https://www.radiobanter.com/antenna/)

- - Antenna optimization (https://www.radiobanter.com/antenna/98526-antenna-optimization.html)

Antenna optimization

Dear Roy and the group:

As you know, my other job is that of a patent attorney. It is time to
comment.

We are not concerned with patents. It is common to overlap patent
protection of something useful with copyright protection of an expression.
This is more common when software is involved because a patent might involve
software and Congress has made it clear that software is amiable of
copyright protection.

As you have observed, a copyright notice is no longer required.
However, I always tell clients to provide such a notice. Judges, most
reasonably, may wonder why a notice was not provided when to do so costs (in
most cases) nothing and the absence of a notice can cause mischief. The
requirement not to require notices was due to pressure from European
interests.

If one thinks one will need to defend one's copyright, it is beneficial
to register the copyright with the Copyright Office (part of the Library of
Congress) - a simple process.

Let us turn to what copyright is: it is the right to prevent the making
of copies of a work by others. One who holds a copyright to a work has the
right to control copies of that work. Congress and the courts have carved
out some exceptions. We have seen one used here where one copies small
sections of a copyrighted book or paper. Researchers and universities are
given some narrow rights to copy the works of others. In a law suit, an
important aspect is the degree that someone's unauthorized copying has
actually injured the copyright owner.

Absent a specific contract to the contrary, one who legally purchases a
copyrighted work may sell it, destroy it, read it if it can be read, and run
it on a computer if it is software. Such a lawful copy may be used to
facilitate the crafting of another work (such as using WordPerfect to write
a letter) or may be used to facilitate the fabrication of useful articles
(such as the use of EZNEC to design an antenna that is improved in some
way).

Let us keep patent protection and copyright protection in their separate
cages.

To the issue of the French radio amateur who started this long string
(and with a nod to the opinion of the experienced radio amateur in the UK):
optimization of more than simple antennas still requires the intersession of
a thoughtful and experienced human. My experience has been that the human's
main contribution relates to crafting an adaptive notion of what optimum is,
for the subject antenna. In other words: knowing when further playing is
not appropriate.

73, Mac N8TT
--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
Tom Ring wrote:

That's all there is in either version of YO that contains the
"copyright" in any form, case insensitive. I am ignoring the companion
programs. Interestingly, the .EXE files do not include a copyright
notice internal to the program, at least in plain text. The only thing
that shows when running the program (v6.x) is "Copyright 1995 by Brian
Beezley, K6STI All Rights Reserved" at the top line on the files menu.
I am writing the last from memory since it's a DOS program, so I might
not have it perfect.

Under current U.S. law, a copyright notice isn't required in order to
secure a copyright; the copyright automatically exists as soon as the
work is created. Adding a copyright notice does bring some advantages
if a lawsuit is filed, however.

Disclaimer: I'm not an attorney.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Antenna optimization

Tom Ring wrote:
hihi, CW for laughter.

hii hii, the beginning of the Texas Aggie war hymn.

"Hullabaloo, Caneck! Caneck! Hullabaloo, Caneck! Caneck!"
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Antenna optimization

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 23:12:20 -0400, "J. Mc Laughlin"
wrote:

Absent a specific contract to the contrary, one who legally purchases a
copyrighted work may sell it, destroy it, read it if it can be read, and run
it on a computer if it is software. Such a lawful copy may be used to
facilitate the crafting of another work (such as using WordPerfect to write
a letter) or may be used to facilitate the fabrication of useful articles
(such as the use of EZNEC to design an antenna that is improved in some
way).

Mac, I am not sure of you meaning of a "specific contract".

It is often the case that we acquire software (being a copyright work)
under a licence that is an agreement between the licensor and the
licensee.

The agreement may be in the form of a general license, for instance an
end user licence that the user is deemed to have accepted in using the
software, or it could be in the form of a specific formal agreement
executed by the parties.

That agreement may limit the licensee's rights, including the purpose
for which software is used.

I give an example, the BestOne mainframe performance evaluation suite
licence limited it use to execution a specific computer and explicitly
only for analysis of performance data collected from that computer.

Isn't the license agreement like any contract in that the parties can
agree to anything lawful.

It seems to me that one has to read the relevant licence agreement to
form a view on what is or isn't permitted by the licence in addition
to any rights under copyright statutes.

Owen
--

Antenna optimization

Tom Ring wrote:

And YO could beat K1FO by only hudredths of a dB. If he'd had more CPU
power to do more runs per day...

YO7 includes a model of K1FO's 40 element 70 cm Yagi. In YO7, it
measures:

Gain 20.93
F/R 24.01
Z 21.8 + j5.4
SWR 1.0
Gain FOM -0.4 (versus theoretical limit for a given boom length)

In 10k iterations (minutes on a 250 MHz Pentium II), YO7 produced:

21.24
19.54
20.9 + j46.1
1.0
0.0 (I stopped it when it reached this)

You can tweak for Gain, F/R, etc depending on how you weight
performance tradeoffs. Looking at the current distribution, it appears
fewer elements might result in a better design. YO7 does not optimize
for number of elements but it doesn't take much effort to remove
elements and see what happens on the same boom length.

Regarding K1FO's design using Basic on a PDP11, here's Brian's
description:

************************************************** *********************************
YO includes an automatic optimizer that can maximize
forward gain and input resistance, and minimize backlobes,
sidelobes, and SWR. The optimizer iteratively adjusts element
lengths and spacings to optimize performance objectives you
specify using parameter tradeoffs you decide. It can perform
both local and global optimization.

YO is calibrated to NEC, the reference-accuracy
Numerical Electromagnetics Code from the Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory. YO and NEC results normally differ by less
than 0.05 dB in forward gain, a dB or two in F/B, and a couple
ohms in input impedance. You can invoke NEC from within YO to
verify results.

YO's analysis and graphics engines use assembly language
with pipelined floating-point code optimized for Pentium processors.
************************************************** **********************************

The entire yo.exe program is only 82k (and DSP Blaster is only 16k).
The major change from YO6 to YO7 was the addition of global
optimization, so it will not get stalled on local maxima.

The other thing I must give Brian credit for is his excellent command
of English. I have *never* seen a spelling or grammatical error in any
of his documentation, which is very unusual these days.

73, Bill W4ZV

Antenna optimization

Richard Clark wrote:

SNIPPED

Franklin was right about these matters.

As for automated optimization, NASA spent huge bucks on this stuff to
design twisted paper clips to replace Walt's work of 30 years ago. I
can well bet that license runs pages. If the testimonials to Beezley
are any indicator, the utility of the software is in inverse
proportion to the length of its license.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

If I remember the anecdote: A patent guarantees you the right to sue.

Antenna optimization

If I remember the anecdote: A patent guarantees you the right to
sue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

Is that why lawyers are all in favor of patents?

Antenna optimization

Dear Reg:

Patents are one of the things that makes a creative people great. In
the Republic's Constitution patents and copyright are listed. Citizens have
thereby a means to increase their wealth and provide employment while having
available the power of the courts to protect their rights.

Not all lawyers are in favor of patents. A few, before they are
cashiered, are against anything that inconveniences their clients, including
laws.

At the other extreme, a few lawyers serving as judges have expressed
disgust at the patent system, supposedly because it rewards the creative.

Please look for some Midwestern wine. It may assist you in recovering
the common sense seen in your early work.

Warm regards, Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
"Reg Edwards" wrote

-

Is that why lawyers are all in favor of patents?

Antenna optimization