Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] radial lengths ...

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] radial lengths ...
From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:39:09 -0700
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
I have read a number of places that radials that exceed the height of the antenna are not worth it. From what I understand more of whatever length you have for on ground or buried radial is better. If you have an L with a vertical section of 50ft, I would assume that you would not need radials longer than 50 ft? I don't know if this can be modeled of if anyone has actually tested or tried it.

Also for insulated wire the length will be less because of the velocity factor or 1 to 2 percent. Most of us do not have the luxury of clear space that allows room for full sized radials around the entire antenna. Do what you can, divert them around objects if it makes sense.

Having a screen down close in can help if you are limited as the closer in field seems to have a great effect on the efficiency? I am no expert but have been reading a bit.

Good luck!

W0MU


On 11/30/2016 11:23 AM, StellarCAT wrote:
For the ‘experts’ out there ...

So question.... in ON4UN’s book it is stated in abundance that one should use 
typically 0.25 wl radials... the length of course varies with the properties of the 
earth and the desired end results but somewhere around 32 1/4 wave radials seems to be 
within about 1 db of 100+ of the same length ...

but he also states, kind of “on the side” in one sections only (it seems) due 
to the velocity factor attributed to the earth that 1/4 wave is actually physically only 0.14 
waves in length!

So which is it – when it is stated 32 1/4 wave is that physically 1/4 wave or 
is it physically say 1/7th wave (and still electrically 1/4 wave)?!

so for example on a 160 meter vertical are we looking at 32 ~130’ radials or more like 
75’ radials (with the end of each of those not having enough current in them to 
contribute appreciatively to the current distribution)... ?

I know most will respond with 1/4 wave.... but I’d bet most would be going by the generic statements 
of “1/4 wave radials for verticals”... if indeed the VF makes going beyond about 1/6th wave 
of very little value (again talking about 32 radials here – not 120) ... then why go through the 
effort?

if this is (more) clearly stated in John’s book please let me know where.

Gary
K9RX

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>