Well now....a short wire that is too short to meet the stated requirement,
would not in fact be resonant. That takes care of your first point.
The second point is self defining....because if it is resonant, then it has
to have a resonant length...ergo there is a length requirement.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alfred Lorona" <w6wqc@dslextreme.com>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT SWR VS Power Loss
> Zero reactance in a wire antenna feedpoint is a necessary but not
sufficient
> condition for it to be truly resonant. Citing the Antenna Fundamentals,
chap
> 2, page 2-1 of my 16th addition of The ARRL Antenna Book, a resonant wire
is
> defined as 'The shortest length of wire that resonates at a given
frequency
> is one just long enough to permit an electrical charge to travel from one
> end to the other and back in the time of one RF cycle.'
>
>
> Clearly, a short wire with a finite pure resistive radiation impedance is
> too short physically for the required condition to exist as stated in the
> Handbook definition..
>
> On the other hand, elsewhere in the book, a zero reactance 'resonant'
> condition does not mention the required physical length of the wire. If
this
> is all that is required, ANY wire can be called resonant and there is
> nothing to distinguish such wires from a halfwave wire. Somehow this
doesn't
> sit right with me. What do you think? Do you think that this discrepency
> begs for a minor clarifying rewrite?
>
> 73, AL
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|