Tho the Yagi has been good to communication over
the years it has in fact retarded the advance of antennas.
The biggest reason is the misinterpretation of the term "curl"
where it is termed as a two dimensional vector instead
of a three dimensional vector. The two dimensional term
came about by adding vectors to a static charge where
the vector values are zero i.e time was removed from
equations by reducing the vector to a point for the sake
of mathematical expedience but with a known direction.
This aproach has fastened into the minds of academics that
radiating elements should always be in parallel form and
which the Yagi has perpetuated. The error in this aproach
is that when a time varying field is applied to a static charge
is that the addition of vectors move from a two dimensional
form into a cartesian three dimensional form. With this
concept in mind which is an extension of a Gaussian
antenna aproach, it should be seen that parallism tho good
in terms of manufacture is not the ideal array arrangement
and in fact verticals may well be better off place at an angle
somewhat less than 90 degrees. Ofcourse as always
antennas are compromises and the biggest drawback here is
the lack of symetry for only a small advance in efficiency.
Food for thougtht gentlemen if you have an open mind
Art

art wrote:

Tho the Yagi has been good to communication over
the years it has in fact retarded the advance of antennas.
The biggest reason is the misinterpretation of the term "curl"
where it is termed as a two dimensional vector instead
of a three dimensional vector. The two dimensional term
came about by adding vectors to a static charge where
the vector values are zero i.e time was removed from
equations by reducing the vector to a point for the sake
of mathematical expedience but with a known direction.
This aproach has fastened into the minds of academics that
radiating elements should always be in parallel form and
which the Yagi has perpetuated. The error in this aproach
is that when a time varying field is applied to a static charge
is that the addition of vectors move from a two dimensional
form into a cartesian three dimensional form. With this
concept in mind which is an extension of a Gaussian
antenna aproach, it should be seen that parallism tho good
in terms of manufacture is not the ideal array arrangement
and in fact verticals may well be better off place at an angle
somewhat less than 90 degrees. Ofcourse as always
antennas are compromises and the biggest drawback here is
the lack of symetry for only a small advance in efficiency.
Food for thougtht gentlemen if you have an open mind
Art


How about some real math and equations. You should present some technical
basis for your conclusions other than some verbal handwaving.

You also seem to make some assumptions which are irrelevant ( parallelism
being good for manufacturing being one) that may not be valid.

You are looking for open minds, but present nothing of substance.

craigm

Before the mathematical equations comes about you must understand the
concept,
it is that which requires an open mind . We are not back in college
where we take every
thing in so we can pass an examination. Ask your self why dx/dt is nor
included
when a conservative field is described by the experts and then we have
the
beginnings of a debate where you can explain your points. Don't shoot
the messenger!
Art
\

craigm wrote:
how about some real math and equations. You should present some
technical
basis for your conclusions other than some verbal handwaving.

You also seem to make some assumptions which are irrelevant ( parallelism
being good for manufacturing being one) that may not be valid.


As an engineer I can say that elements in a varying three dimensional
form
to each other is more difficult and more costly than parallism on a
single plane,
No amount of mathematical juggling will allow you to escape that
analysis,
but I am willing to debate around that point
Art




You are looking for open minds, but present nothing of substance.

If you are not willing to try and understand the concept then your
mind must be closed. Yes we can debate that to
Art


craigm

Well, there is the Moxon Rectangle, Discone, Sloper, Delta Loop, Big
Wheel, Circular Loop, Orthogonal loops with periodic feed, Vee,
Rhombic, Helix, Parabolic Dish, Cone with spiral lip, G String, Surface
fed half sphere, BirdCage, Lazy Vee, Moon Bounce, and a bunch of others
that escape me at the moment...

It would seem that many antenna designers, some of whom would not
recognize a real time vector if it poked them in the eye and then
scrawled a table of Naperian Logarithms on the wall paper, have already
gone ahead without waiting on directions from open minds...

denny / k8do

"Denny" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, there is the Moxon Rectangle, Discone, Sloper, Delta Loop, Big
Wheel, Circular Loop, Orthogonal loops with periodic feed, Vee,
Rhombic, Helix, Parabolic Dish, Cone with spiral lip, G String, Surface
fed half sphere, BirdCage, Lazy Vee, Moon Bounce, and a bunch of others
that escape me at the moment...



You left out the King of them all:
http://members.aol.com/ve3bmv/Razors.htm
Da VE3BMV Razor Beam, which may have escaped the Art da Antenna Wiz.
Let's not forget this 3D champion that decimated Yagis and other inferior
contraptions by the antenna gurus and professoirs and scientwists. :-)))

73 Yuri da BUm da father of Razors

Yuri, I didn't remember that.. Thanks for the memory jog...
And the blurb on the cover about local rtty loops brings back lots of
good memories.. Every time I get a fresh whiff of WD-40 I hear a model
19 rattling in my head for a split second... Autostart thunder from
the basement at 2AM the xyl hated that after the guys got home from
work at the auto plant and started trading the latest rtty pictures....
Remember the topless girl in the indian head dress / the american flag
done with a red and black ribbon / lots others?

denny

Denny you make my point by pointing out that radiation can occur when
parasitics are not in parallel but for all of this the yagi is a firm
favorite
as well as the boomless quad wire directive antenna which is just a
variation
of stacked dipoles bent at the ends.. Why don't you model a vertical
dipole
with a succession of one degree change in the vertical direction and
note what changes occur, I'm sure you will be surprised at the results
even tho parassitic elements are not involved.
As far as designers not being up to speed in time they will change
trust me
Art





Denny wrote:
Well, there is the Moxon Rectangle, Discone, Sloper, Delta Loop, Big
Wheel, Circular Loop, Orthogonal loops with periodic feed, Vee,
Rhombic, Helix, Parabolic Dish, Cone with spiral lip, G String, Surface
fed half sphere, BirdCage, Lazy Vee, Moon Bounce, and a bunch of others
that escape me at the moment...

It would seem that many antenna designers, some of whom would not
recognize a real time vector if it poked them in the eye and then
scrawled a table of Naperian Logarithms on the wall paper, have already
gone ahead without waiting on directions from open minds...

denny / k8do

yuri I put my money where my mouth is, it cost me a lot to apply
for another patent. Ask yourself the question why do you
experiment and why are you at at odds so many times with the experts?
I'll tell you why because you are pursueing the truth that may well
oppose the books so why hit me when I do the same?
art

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Denny" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, there is the Moxon Rectangle, Discone, Sloper, Delta Loop, Big
Wheel, Circular Loop, Orthogonal loops with periodic feed, Vee,
Rhombic, Helix, Parabolic Dish, Cone with spiral lip, G String, Surface
fed half sphere, BirdCage, Lazy Vee, Moon Bounce, and a bunch of others
that escape me at the moment...



You left out the King of them all:
http://members.aol.com/ve3bmv/Razors.htm
Da VE3BMV Razor Beam, which may have escaped the Art da Antenna Wiz.
Let's not forget this 3D champion that decimated Yagis and other inferior
contraptions by the antenna gurus and professoirs and scientwists. :-)))

73 Yuri da BUm da father of Razors

yuri I put my money where my mouth is, it cost me a lot to apply
for another patent. Ask yourself the question why do you
experiment and why are you at at odds so many times with the experts?
I'll tell you why because you are pursueing the truth that may well
oppose the books so why hit me when I do the same?
art

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Denny" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, there is the Moxon Rectangle, Discone, Sloper, Delta Loop, Big
Wheel, Circular Loop, Orthogonal loops with periodic feed, Vee,
Rhombic, Helix, Parabolic Dish, Cone with spiral lip, G String, Surface
fed half sphere, BirdCage, Lazy Vee, Moon Bounce, and a bunch of others
that escape me at the moment...



You left out the King of them all:
http://members.aol.com/ve3bmv/Razors.htm
Da VE3BMV Razor Beam, which may have escaped the Art da Antenna Wiz.
Let's not forget this 3D champion that decimated Yagis and other inferior
contraptions by the antenna gurus and professoirs and scientwists. :-)))

73 Yuri da BUm da father of Razors

art wrote:

...
of a three dimensional vector. The two dimensional term

Art:

I take the thrust of your previous text to say, "We have lost focus of
the antenna as a technical device. Some now think of it as a "magical
device" and some as a "work of art." I can see some truth in all of
that. Plus, I will go further, if anyone thinks we have discovered ALL
there is to know about antennas, they are simply wrong ...

Basically, I only have use for three types of antennas. Two of these
are for terrestrial use only and one is for non-earth use ("talking" to
satellites, NOT aliens.)

Of the two for terrestrial use, one is omni directional the other VERY
directional. Now omni is quite easy, most dipoles or monopoles can be
placed to work with varying success.

So that leaves the "beam" or directional antenna. Now, the best
directional antenna I have EVER found is the parabolic dish--there just
ain't any better! However, for HF (indeed vhf/uhf are VERY difficult to
construct) these are out of the question for most of us. So, the
question becomes, "How can we mimic the performance of the dish with
practical materials.

Now, that is what we are all looking for, isn't it?

Warmest regards,
JS