Paul Christensen wrote:
>> It looks as if the NEC is here concerned not with electrical
>> characteristics, but with mechanical ones. Cortland
>> KA5S
>>
>
> It may be related to both mechanical and electrical safety concerns since
> the NEC (Sec. 810) dictates wire size irrespective of RF power level -- and
> that the specified gauges are adequate for maximum authorized FCC power in
> the amateur service. Perhaps the concern is with the feeding of a thin wire
> radiator/transmission line with high power, and a portion begins to burn,
> fall, then comes in contact with persons or flammable materials.
>
All of my antennas but one meet their criteria and that is a 75 meter
dipole being fed the legal limit less coax loss. It's #16 copper clad
steel and even with no more loss than 75' of LMR600 and 30' of LMR-400
at 1500 watts of carrier it doesn't even get warm. My local inspectors
don't care and if they don't neither do I. OTOH there is nothing for it
to fall on should it break, or burn. Actually in 47 years I've never
had even a thin wire dipole break. I had a wood mast resonate in the
wind and disintegrate, but the Inverted V on it came though fine (IIRC)
73 Roger (K8RI)
> Paul, W9AC
>
> .
>
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>
>
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|