Kurt Andress <andresskurt@gmail.com> wrote: "papers from
~20 years ago as he explained his 'crosswind principle'."
Sigh, I wish he had used a different terminology. It's purely semantics
but I think the phrase "crosswind principle" is misleading.
It's a fictitious force that does not exist in reality. If you have a 50
mph
wind out of the north, there is no magic crosswind that appears out of
the east or west that pushes on an antenna element.
It's similar to the centrifugal force that wants to push you
out of your car when you go around a turn. It's just inertia
and your body's frame of reference that creates an apparent
force. Same thing with an aluminum tube facing the wind at
an angle, the reaction force is perpendicular to the tube
at an angle to the wind. For mathematical convenience you can
resolve the reaction force into two components, one parallel to
the wind and the other at right angles to the wind, but that's
only a paper construct, there is no crosswind blowing.
Personally I prefer the phrase "wind reaction principle" to
describe what occurs. I recall the first time I read K5IU's
paper my reaction was "Crosswind? What crosswind?"
73 Jim K6OK
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|