Eznec looks at FreeCell vs. Master Chief in 2006.

[Marconi]

I've just had the pleasure of cutting apart a Jo-Gunn Son of a Gunn antenna.

Let me tell you, this antenna is HEAVY at the base! It should come at no surprise when you see that they use THREE layers of tubing in the base of this antenna!

Its also amazing, their use of woodscrews to hold this bad boy together! I used a hack saw to get the base apart, which is when I found the screws. They actually break off the heads and then slip the pieces together, covering the screws.

Now you may ask, why cut this antenna up?! Well, the previous owner cut the top tubing of the base assembly for some unknow reason. I wanted to fix this piece of aluminum and sell it, but I couldn't get it apart! The more I dug into it, it became clear that the base would have to be destroyed to get it apart, which would allow me to replace the previously broken section.

I got the antenna for free so what the heck! Out came the saw! (I'm cutting up a Maco V58 also. I'm doing a write up on how to convert your V58 to a V5000 with almost over the counter parts!).

What is interesting about this antenna is its height! 26'. I know of only one other antenna close to that length; the Sigma IV. This antenna uses 4 ground radial sloping down at a 45 degree angle and a gamma match, much similar to the Sigma IV. BUT, whereas the Sigma IV is only a half wave antenna, THIS antenna may truly be a 3/4 wave! (That should stir up the flies in here...right Bob!) But but, there is a weird sleeve inside the base section that may make this a different antenna altogether.

Also, this antenna does not use a coax connector. Not a bad idea as the coax connector is usually the weak link in an antenna system.

I may rebuild it. The base assembly is VERY easy to build with standard aluminum square tubing and a hole saw! I wouldn't have used wood screws, but maybe Jo-Gunn was trying to keep the base assembly a secret. I don't know.

I don't have the manual for this antenna so I'm not sure what the original tubing lengths were. I'm going to try to get one from the factory.

This was just another of Master Chief’s worthless promises…in a thread he started. If you read the whole thread: http://www.worldwidedx.com/cb-antennas/24663-jo-gunn-son-gunn.html, you’ll see, as usual, he never followed up.

Below are two image of a JG’ 1st radial arm in its two piece radial setup that shows the radial angle that Master Chef says is 45* degrees. The close up is with a protractor in the view, and a chop stick pointing to an approximate 30* degree angle. I also checked the angle from the image on JG Website, and it too showed about 30* degrees on the protractor. However, that image might have been an artist rendering.

You’ll also read where he tries to convince us that he found some mystery construction in the base, that he suggested was a JG secret. He also claims the antenna was cut up, but it was 26’ feet long. He could just as easily gotten that information on their Website: http://www.jogunn.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=3&Itemid=26 You’ll see this data by clicking on the details.

Radial images go here:




The following are several other posts that I cut and pasted to add clarity to my presentation for an Eznec modeling argument that I could not make back in 2006 to support what FreeCell posted and maybe answer some questions I asked as well. I know you guys don’t cottom to my Eznec models, but it is all I have…other than words.

Well MC I don't question that the I-10K works better and I did not suggest anything to the contrary. The simple fact that the I-10K has an effective GP attached tells us that it probably is the better design.

In other discussions you have claimed that the method of feeding also gives the I-10K a definite advantage. I have never read a definitive opinion on the subject of feed point losses while comparing one feeding method opposed to another. I mean one that really says one way or another. In fact, other than in the most general of terms, I have never heard you state why you believe the feeder on the I-10K performs better than other methods. You just throw out the claim. If you have such a report, then provide me the source. I can't prove my sense of the issue, but I do have an opinion on the subject. Maybe we could have a discussion specifically about that some time.

Sure the I-10K will allow for higher wattage input. This has only to do with the nature of resistance of conductors and conductor cross-sectional area. It’s just my guess, but I would imagine if one built an A99 feeder on the same effective scale as the I-10K then both would probably perform about the same under high power.

MC, my argument here has only to do with your ridiculous claim of the I-10K being “the killer” as you note. It has nothing to do with my preference or understanding of which is better and why. You made the claims, I just would like to know how you come about those claims. You may be right, and then I would have to rethink my experiences over all these years.

Happy Thanksgiving to all you guys!

The bold print items above are my issues in arguing with MC.

and BTW, while graphite has much better thermal conductivity than c o p p e r due to the method by which its wave lattice structure transfers heat at the atomic level it is not better than c o p p e r in the electrical conductivity department, even though when heated or doped with other metals (like c o p p e r) its electrical conductivity can be improved. graphite is only a fair conductor in its unaltered form. it's closest atomic relative is the diamond and it is labelled as an insulator even though both elements contain carbon atoms containing six protons, six neutrons and six electrons each with the only difference between the two being that the graphite molecules are flat groupings of carbon atoms while the same carbon atoms in the diamond molecules are grouped tetrahedrally.

and while i'm at it: "well documented that a signal wavelength above 5/8 is (for lack of a better word) distorted."

the problem with a "conventional" 3/4 wave (or longer) radiator is that it develops major secondary lobes at higher angles thus reducing the amount of energy in the lower angled lobes, the ones providing the most benefit for long distance direct, ground wave and skywave communications. it has nothing to do with any type of "distortion". that's why there is a reduction in gain.

My Eznec models go here so be sure and check the patter distortion FC talks about above.
View attachment FreeCell's ideas.pdf

Conclusions by Freecell where I think my models support his ideas.

the radial modification has little to no effect on the resonant length of the main radiator. electrically speaking, there's no such thing as a 5/8 wave antenna. i'll get into this more later on but i'll leave you with this to think about for a while. the first antenna design that was ever officially dubbed as a 5/8 wave antenna was a 1/2 wave center fed dipole with the bottom most end of the dipole elevated 1/8 of a wavelength above ground.

what the engineer meant is that he was well aware that in a conventional 3/4 wave ground plane gain at the lower angles suffers due to the creation of secondary high angle lobes that are not conducive to long distance direct, ground wave and sky wave communications circuits. the upswept radials eliminates the wasted high angle radiation and compresses the pattern and attendant energy back down into the lower angle lobes where it does the most good, creating a 3/4 wave vertical that defies the conventional thought paradigm.

antenna gain is increased by directing radiation in a single direction, while necessarily reducing it in all other directions since power cannot be created by the antenna. thus the higher the gain, the larger the aperture and the narrower the beamwidth. in this particular example the elimination of the secondary high angle lobes and compression of the pattern energy into the lower angle lobe of the elevation plane resulted in the narrower beamwidth, hence the increased gain.

 

[Moleculo]

You do realize that you're resurrecting a discussion between two individuals that were kicked off of the site many years ago?

What's the point of that?

It's cool to start a thread about modeling an antenna to learn something about it, but why bring up the history of banned members from 6 years ago?

 

[Marconi]

You do realize that you're resurrecting a discussion between two individuals that were kicked off of the site many years ago?

What's the point of that?

It's cool to start a thread about modeling an antenna to learn something about it, but why bring up the history of banned members from 6 years ago?

Moleculo, I presented my views based on my modeling ideas. The thread is still posted, so I figured anything said there is still fair game to discuss, plus I think there is a level of BS involved in the thrust of ideas presented. Is it against the rules to comment on old threads, or question folk's post that are still on the forum? Who else better to question, than folks that have been kicked off the forum. If that is not the case, then why leave anything posted for folks that are expelled. I sense that you make exceptions where that happens.

My idea only came up because of a discussion in another more recent thread, and I explained how it happened.

I tried to argue at the time just using simple words. So, I thought Eznec modeling examples might shed some new light on the topic, about how a 3/4 wave ground plane acts, it wasn't meant to be personal even though I might have taken some liberties. I couldn't leave out the usual suspects.

You have the ability to scratch my post at any time.

 

[BOOTY MONSTER]

i,m not particularly interested in this particular thread ATM ...... but that may change . however , i do think that OGP using the old thread gives a good example of the miss understanding , points of view and general ying and yang of the topic he wants to put on the table for discussion . no doubt freecell was a wealth of information , and no doubt he screwed his own goose with his bull headedness getting in the way of business dealings here , and really left the forum no choice but to ban him ...... IMO . but at the same time other forum members were involved in that thread and some are still contributing to the forum on a regular basis .

just the opinion of a part time ass-hole and a full time fat dude

 

[jon666]

really

who cares

 

[mackmobile43]

You do realize that you're resurrecting a discussion between two individuals that were kicked off of the site many years ago?

What's the point of that?

It's cool to start a thread about modeling an antenna to learn something about it, but why bring up the history of banned members from 6 years ago?

He must be a little crotchety not having them to argue with. ^can not stand it^

 

[GLR]

You do realize that you're resurrecting a discussion between two individuals that were kicked off of the site many years ago?

What's the point of that?

Time to unban everyone.

 

[BOOTY MONSTER]

if justin can come back , why not freecell ?

http://www.worldwidedx.com/members/justindepolis.html

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Time to unban everyone.

Or ban some more.

 

[mackmobile43]

Or ban some more.

Bring back Ed White, he was a hoot when he made those guys look like preschoolers.

 

[hookedon6]

well, most of the Eznec stuff posted on here is really a case of measuring with a micrometer,................. and then cutting with an axe:blink:

 

[bob85]

hoot,
kenwhite was proven wrong on everything he tried bsing us with from output vswr to biasing he was clueless,

98% of what freecell posted was correct, the cluelsss that argued with him never posted any proof of what they claim because they can't.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

hoot,
kenwhite was proven wrong on everything he tried bsing us with from output vswr to biasing he was clueless,

98% of what freecell posted was correct, the cluelsss that argued with him never posted any proof of what they claim because they can't.

Freecell may have presented correct info (about 80% of it was something he copy and pasted from someone else's work) but he had the demeanor of a rabid junk yard pit bull.

 

[bob85]

i agree jack could have been more diplomatic, oddly he was never a dickhead with me, on the other hand he did not suffer fools gladly,

if he presented copy/pasted material as his own that's dishonest,
on the other hand i think anybody making technical posts should post links to respected reference material.

 

[Marconi]

Freecell may have presented correct info (about 80% of it was something he copy and pasted from someone else's work) but he had the demeanor of a rabid junk yard pit bull.

I use to talk to FreeCell on the phone, and he was always nice to me. I never thought of him as unnecessarily punitive, but he sounded like my old grampa sometimes, and at other times he sounded like my old antenna mentor...who could be really gruff due to his background as a retired Master Sargent in the US Army in communications.

I don't know about the total accuracy #'s of his statements, but whatever he said about antennas always seemed reasonable to me, and when I disagreed we talked sensibly, until he started talking about his homeopathic medication ideas.

Once he told me that he had hung a Starduster upside down in his barn and that it changed the RF angle below the horizon. I argued he was full of it. Now I have some proof that I was probably right. In the models below is a pattern overlay for both models.

View attachment FreeCell's upside down SD'r idea.pdf