To: | topband@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Topband: Ground conductivity discussions |
From: | Jeff Blaine <KeepWalking188@ac0c.com> |
Date: | Sun, 4 Dec 2022 12:40:45 -0600 |
List-post: | <mailto:topband@contesting.com> |
Grant, that higher Rr is the path I took as well.My 160m antenna is a bit longer than 1/4wl - trimmed in length so that the resistivity component of Z was 50 ohms. It's got Xl of course, so I use a series C bread slicer at the tower base to to cancel the Xl. My thought back then was that whatever the ground loss was, it would be about 1/3 less if the native feedpoint R was 50 ohms instead of something more close to a true 1/4 WL of around 35 ohms. 73/jeff/ac0c alpha-charlie-zero-charlie www.ac0c.com On 12/4/2022 11:19 AM, Grant Saviers wrote: Sounds like a great project.Isn't the reality that conductors (radials) in or near lossy mediums (earth, even salt water) have loss? And that the near field extends beyond the 1/4wl of the radials? The coupling among elements might be the reason 4:1 matching was used.So while more & longer radials reduce the loss, there is a limit. Note that my prior post for my antenna shows the feedpoint Z equals the Rr value of about 14 ohms only when the radials are elevated 100ft. Often called a ground plane antenna.I played a bit in Eznec with my antenna and a lot (128) more radials a few inches above your ground and saw essentially no change in Rg. Your higher conductivity ground will improve the pattern - more gain at lower angles.So I suspect adding 26 more radials to the existing 32 1/4wl will not make much improvement in Rg. I think Severns and Christman show this in their papers.Other solutions to lower ground loss is higher Rr of the antenna to improve the ratio Rr/Rg. eg 1/4wl tall verticals. The center fed 720ft BCB antennas eg KDKA are another solution. ie vertical dipoles.Grant KZ1W On 12/3/2022 08:54, Dennis Ashworth wrote:Very interesting and timely discussions on radials and ground conductivity. I’m currently rebuilding an 80M broadside array (with shortened, top loadedelements) in SW Utah that I’ve modeled at 12 ohms impedance. The currentantenna was tested and the impedance measured was 25 ohms. Each element inthe array (4 total) also measured 25 ohms. What accounts for additional system loss?Upon consulting the original builders, I learned they had also predicted animpedance of approximately 12 ohms. I’m not clear what methods or models they used for their prediction. There are 4:1 baluns at the base of each vertical which begs the question whether the array impedances were everchecked post-install. I suspect not … and I doubt anything has changed overthe years that would equally affect the impedance *on all 4 verticals.* Where I don’t blindly trust models (antennas or otherwise), I do believe the 12 ohm figure is reasonable given the short, top loaded elements. Ireviewed the FCC conductivity tables for the locale and they indicate 15-30millimos/meter. That’s pretty good! I would think the loss from a ground system of 32, 1/4 wave plus radials would NOT account for the 12 ohms ofloss ground losses. But what if my ground conductivity is less than the FCCtables report? I’m going to the site again next week to install 26 additional 1/4 wave radials on one of the verticals and see if (and how much) the measured impedance drops. I’ll share my results here.This loss has to be a ground system issue. If so, adding radials and seeinga corresponding drop in impedance should confirm my suspicions.At some point, I’ll measure the ground conductivity, but it needs to waitfor warmer temps (current temp at site is 19F!). Insight from the masses always appreciated. Dennis, K7FL Las Vegas, NV _________________Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector_________________Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Topband: Ground conductivity discussions, Grant Saviers |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Topband: My new 9 Circle works great!, Jim Miller |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Topband: Ground conductivity discussions, Grant Saviers |
Next by Thread: | Topband: Terrible Noise Level, Roger Kennedy |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |