Capacitance Hat's Don't add Audio

[mrcoily]

HAHAHAHAHAH SOME OF THE FUNNIEST STUFF I HAVE READ IN YEARS..LOLLLLLLLLLLLL..yOU GUYS ARE THE BEST!!!Killing me gut busting for sure!

 

[mrcoily]

Hello shockwave..i have to applogize about the last post way buddies and i have had way to many beers and find everyone picking on my antennas all kinds of fun,we actually take turn posting...lol..its my turn on the key board!But to get a bit more serious..i tried several differant design before settling with this one the 1/4 inch gap between the cap hats loops gave the best feild strength tests..suprisingly beating out a t top design and also a closed loop system and a rabit ear type like the golden rod that also works very well,,seems to be some reacting going on with the 1/4 gap in between the hats loops as feild stregths dropped on other designs..anyhow i find the total thread fairly interesting as there is 21 inches of meterial in the hat dropping antenna height way down..there very well tested and very well liked..But you guys have fun ripping on my design....I have yet to find anyone who has actually had one stuck in a tree...lol... there so smooth they just slide off i have trees i drag thru daily..any how you guys know yourselve out!Se you around.

 

[Shockwave]

Hello Mr. Coily. How did you confirm this 1/4 inch gap between the tops of the capacitance hat loops created more field strength? The idea behind this shape of capacitance hat is to have the two or more loops perfectly symmetrical so the there is no difference in the potential between the loops crossing and connecting at the top. Having the loops at different heights with a gap in between invites the corona arc to form across this gap due to the difference in RF voltage allowed without them connected together.

Forget about what a nearby field strength meter reports and check the differences on your receiver to a stable signal in the distance. If you find the same results, turn the antenna (not the vehicle) and you will find the asymmetrical design of your capacitance hat has introduced slight directional effects into your pattern. Two directions will show more signal at the expense of the opposite two. It's not about picking on your work, it's about progressing knowledge.

 

[MrSuburban]

Hello shockwave..i have to applogize about the last post way buddies and i have had way to many beers and find everyone picking on my antennas all kinds of fun,we actually take turn posting...lol..its my turn on the key board!But to get a bit more serious..i tried several differant design before settling with this one the 1/4 inch gap between the cap hats loops gave the best feild strength tests..suprisingly beating out a t top design and also a closed loop system and a rabit ear type like the golden rod that also works very well,,seems to be some reacting going on with the 1/4 gap in between the hats loops as feild stregths dropped on other designs..anyhow i find the total thread fairly interesting as there is 21 inches of meterial in the hat dropping antenna height way down..there very well tested and very well liked..But you guys have fun ripping on my design....I have yet to find anyone who has actually had one stuck in a tree...lol... there so smooth they just slide off i have trees i drag thru daily..any how you guys know yourselve out!Se you around.

No reply to the audio increase claims ...LOL go drink another beer it might help you understand the arrl book. It doesnt matter if there is 21" there or not it is the actual physical size that makes a difference a 6" disc on top would have more area then your 21" of wire in a ball.

 

[mrcoily]

Who said it was on a vehicle.I have a test range.

 

[mrcoily]

also there is a point of no return on the cap hat i have tested only a bazzilion differant configurations "YES THE GAP MATTERS"..the possible arc between loops is very low if at all and you would need to be pushing well over 30kw as there in use at that level,so not an issue...feild strength is the only true way to test a product.you can punch figures into a machine all day set i up and the performance is way down..you have to get your elbows dirty to actually see how the perform real world.ask the guys in seattle they all got spanked.see you dont have time for hanging out but i can pop in from time to time, Off to the shop.Me or somebody will get back..Crack the beer sit back and smile at the world!!! see yeah.

 

[Shockwave]

So we test a mobile antenna on the "test range" without the mobile? I can only imagine the variables in your test with whatever replacement ground plane you used. Either way it makes no difference in your ability to turn the antenna in it's mount to identify where this gain comes from in your cap hat. If changing the hat to make it asymmetrical increased the gain, you can be sure the pattern it produces is also slightly asymmetrical.

With respect to getting your elbows dirty to come up with real results, they can be just as inaccurate if you don't account for every variable in your test. For example you feel the only way to test antennas is by field strength. If you're talking about a simple RF detector across a meter movement a few hundred feet away, I disagree. There are plenty of antennas that will produce similar field strength readings on this device and have drastic differences out in the distance where the fringe zone is.

These differences will be smaller when comparing similar 1/4 wave antennas however, the nearby field strength meter can still miss modifications that would increase your coverage area. I do agree that your cap hat will handle extreme power before it bursts into a corona arc, but I bet it will happen right where I mentioned and that there is no advantage to spacing the loops one over the other with a gap.

 

[MrSuburban]

Who said it was on a vehicle.I have a test range.

A test range LOL Ok tell us what your test range is? parking lot? If you dont know how to conduct the test the right way your data is useless. I would have to say from what i have seen and heard your data is useless

 

[loosecannon]

MrCoily,

why are you not applying for a patent?

surely a patent would help you greatly once the rest of the world catches on to your discoveries.

if you feel you can fully explain how your approach is novel and has not been previously established, then you stand an excellent chance of securing the rights.
LC

 

[W5LZ]

Why would anything arc across that gap? Both 'sides' of that capacitive hat are at the same polarity and potential. There's no mystery or magic with the thing, wouldn't make a hill of beans difference if there are two loops there or a figure eight, it would furnish the same relationship to the rest of the antenna. there definitely would be a difference if that capacitive hat were a foot or so above the coil, the whole thing would be more efficient.
It's a shortened and loaded antenna. It won't perform any better than any other loaded antenna of the same height.
- 'Doc

 

[mrcoily]

Smooch...smooch..Why put a patent on something when all you need to do is change the design..all antennas are basicly the same so whats the point...you could call mine a copy of a tornado..big woop..you could call Jays a copy of a devant special same thing same trombone tuner??????....So as i have to prove not a thing whats the point to playing with all you forum monkeys...the Cap hat does increase the performace it does help the antenna radiate and it is proven,,as your all so smart how could i build so many dang antennas without all your help,,see yeah...I do appreciate you guys who PM me i would have to agree there entertaining for sure..73sss

 

[mrcoily]

Well if i must..I have a plotted square mile i take reading on a circle radius working at the antenna takes a while..the mfj unit works best lots of little stands and a note book...the one with the antenna on it for you guys who cant figure it out without a picture...you guys bust me up.

 

[loosecannon]

MrCoily, apparently you do not see the opportunities that having a patent would provide you with.

you have the ONLY capacitance hat in the known universe that increases performance!!!

James Maxwell would be flipping out if he were still alive!

why would anyone with this kind of original knowledge be wallowing in the lowly CB antenna market???

could it be that you are a true philanthropist and just want to give back to the CB community?

could it be that you cant fully explain all the technical aspects of your performance enhancing capacity hat, and therefore are having trouble finding a patent lawyer?

or could it be that the CB antenna market is fraught with unsuspecting potential customers who dont understand how these things work, but are willing to spend a buck on a potential advantage?

all it takes is someone to make some lofty claims and then back it up with so-called "real world tests". i mean, if there are 10,000 people that are going to buy an antenna this year, and only 10% of them actually believe this hype; well you've still sold 1000 antennas.
its just a numbers game i guess...

then all you have to do is spend some time doing "damage control" on the internet forums by adopting a "tolerant genius" sort of attitude whereby you seem so smart that you dont ever have to actually explain anything, you just laugh at the puny mortals that dare question your laws.

seems like you already know all of this which means that you know that there will always be people gullible enough to try the latest gizmo, and that you are poised perfectly to make a buck off of them.

good job sir, you are a true asset to the CB community. :thumbdown:
LC

 

[Shockwave]

Why would anything arc across that gap? Both 'sides' of that capacitive hat are at the same polarity and potential. There's no mystery or magic with the thing, wouldn't make a hill of beans difference if there are two loops there or a figure eight, it would furnish the same relationship to the rest of the antenna. there definitely would be a difference if that capacitive hat were a foot or so above the coil, the whole thing would be more efficient.
It's a shortened and loaded antenna. It won't perform any better than any other loaded antenna of the same height.
- 'Doc

Unless both loops are driven at the same exact point on the whip, they cannot be at the same potential or behave perfectly symmetrical. Indeed the difference with this 1/4 inch should be less then can be easily measured. The point is Mr. Coily is claiming the impossible by saying this increases performance.

 

[Moleculo]

So as i have to prove not a thing whats the point to playing with all you forum monkeys...

Actually you do have to prove quite a bit. You're the one making claims that are completely opposite of published and respected material like Maxwell and the ARRL. Further, you haven't proven one point or answered one technical question. Rather, your counterpoint to the debate is just contradiction: