Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+linear\s+loading\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+linear\s+loading\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com (w8ji.tom); Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:20:50 -0500; Hi Pete, that this. That's a tough question Pete. It is pretty easy to get an unfair comparison. **Of course this might not apply to systems that are not properly optimized, anything can happen when; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00528.html (10,053 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV); Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 17:36:11 GMT; On Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:20:50 -0500, "w8ji.tom" <w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com> wrote: How would you comment on the spread-out variant of LL used by Force 12. That would seem to minimize capacitance, particular; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00549.html (9,565 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV); Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 22:29:01 GMT; On Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:20:50 -0500, "w8ji.tom" <w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com> wrote: How would you comment on the spread-out variant of LL used by Force 12. That would seem to minimize capacitance, particular; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00553.html (9,679 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com (w8ji.tom); Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 01:59:04 +0000; Hi Guy, I'm not sure what W4AN's policy is on postings, so this is only to you and Pete. If you want to re-post it...feel free. I personally thought the reflector was pretty good, but maybe it is not; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00555.html (11,255 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: cebik@utkux.utcc.utk.edu (L. B. Cebik); Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 22:06:07 -0500 (EST); I can add a bit to the the difficulties of modeling linear loads in the currently available software (NEC and MININEC). NEC (both -2 and -4) have a weakness in modeling two different situations, both; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00557.html (11,888 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: bogus@does.not.exist.com (); Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:33:50 EST; << What is the "best" effective location for the loading, other than at the ends? What is the effective location for the loading on the F12 design? >> You can't "load" the end of an antenna, however; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00567.html (9,173 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV); Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:52:29 GMT; This is the one point I'm having problems with. A loading coil does not radiate significantly, and it's properties will not vary with distance from the ground (say 65 feet vs. 100 feet on 40m). I sus; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00574.html (9,748 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com (w8ji.tom); Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:05:57 -0500; Hi Cebik, I was hoping you'd say something, since I know you modeled this type of thing a lot. I appreciate your work, some of it is really detailed. situations, It is also my understanding NEC also; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00581.html (13,838 bytes)
9. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com (w8ji.tom); Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 21:05:57 -0500; Exactly what is a "critically coupled" element? Where does one find that definition, or what makes it "critically coupled"? variation a antennas 73 Tom -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towert; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00584.html (8,577 bytes)
10. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com (w8ji.tom); Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 22:34:11 -0500; Hi Guy, This is about all I can add. I think the confusion stems from thinking it is proximity of the coil to ground that causes the detuning. That is not true at all, of all the parts of the antenna; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00585.html (14,002 bytes)
11. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: cebik@utkux.utcc.utk.edu (L. B. Cebik); Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 07:32:48 -0500 (EST); Since "critical coupling" is a term properly applied to inductive coupling, it is likely better simply to classify the Force 12 multi-band antennas (but not all of them) as using open sleeve couplin; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00590.html (11,053 bytes)
12. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: CQK8DO@aol.com (CQK8DO@aol.com); Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 10:15:37 EST; And, as I remember, Tom commented that it took some 900 computer runs using manual iteration to develop the Force 12 basic design... Denny -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html S; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00595.html (8,122 bytes)
13. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: force12@interserv.com (force12@interserv.com); Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 15:21:17 -0800 (PST); Good afternoon. A comment was passed along on this reflector about my using 900 computer runs for the basic Force 12 line. This is not quite right. The original open sleeve antenna design that began; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00607.html (9,409 bytes)
14. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com (w8ji.tom); Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 11:46:34 -0500; Thanks Ben and LB, I understood the standard meaning of "critical coupling", and now I think I know what was meant in this case. I don't understand why it is starting to appear in antennas. I agree w; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-11/msg00610.html (8,155 bytes)
15. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: corneliuspaul@gmx.net; Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:01:05 +0100; I fully understand why TOP LOADING (where there is very little current) accounts for much less ohmic losses But ON4UN also recommends linear loading AT THE BASE of a vertical to be BETTER (less ohmic; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-11/msg00128.html (8,149 bytes)
16. [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: "Frank Mayer" <domino@worldlynx.net>; Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:18:26 -0500; Please explain how linear loading increases the loss? Frank, WY3D _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Statio; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-11/msg00132.html (6,712 bytes)
17. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:28:24 -0800 (PST); That is a false comparison. The linear loading is effectively center loading, which has an advantage over bottom loading. What I referred to was center loading with a coil vs center loading with lin; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-11/msg00133.html (8,420 bytes)
18. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: K3BU@aol.com; Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:02:39 EST; to be BETTER (less ohmic loss) than a loading coil at the base...? 73 Con DF4SA<< I wonder if it is more due to the difference in size of wire used in them (ohmic loses), or sort of linear loading th; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-11/msg00137.html (7,387 bytes)
19. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:44:58 -0800 (PST); With linear loading, if you use thick wire (or tubing) you reduce the inductance. This forces you to stick with thin wire. In a lumped inductor, you can easily use thick wire or tubing to reduce los; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-11/msg00147.html (8,084 bytes)
20. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: linear loading (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, K4IK" <k4ik@subich.com>; Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:56:50 -0500; In addition, since the linear loading is often folded along and relatively close to the element, there is substantial coupling between the element and the loading. This results in cancellation in th; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-11/msg00149.html (7,980 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1]