Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] More Interference Pattern

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] More Interference Pattern
From: David Gilbert via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Reply-to: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 20:50:30 -0700
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>

Hi, Brian.

Yeah, I almost always use the phrase "effective ground plane" when I talk about this stuff but I didn't there.  Also, I know that it's actually a spatially distributed effect, but that gets even clumsier to say each time  ;)

I know that you've done a ton of really good work on ground conductivity and ground effects and as you say I am no doubt seeing some very complex effects given the ground conditions I have here ... very dry soil on top, probably more moist soil down deep, and composition that ranges from sand and fine particles to rocks the size of a bus at varying depths.  I have a drone that I have once or twice used to plot the elevation pattern of an antenna (it works surprisingly well), and I may some day model a couple of antennas and compare their actual measured elevation plots (using the drone) to see what I really have and how much that varies across my lot.

Lots of cool stuff to do ...

73,
Dave   AB7E


On 4/15/2026 6:16 PM, Brian Beezley wrote:
AB7E said:

"Keep in mind that the RF ground plane is almost certainly not at the surface of the physical ground."

Dave, the notion of a ground plane makes sense for perfectly conducting ground. And it's not far off for seawater. But for other types of ground, it can be misleading.

Electrical ground is right where you see it. But it's only part of the story. For generic desert soil like yours, skin depth is 157 feet at 14.2 MHz and 533 feet at 1.8 MHz. That's where antenna-induced ground current has decayed to 37% of its surface value. It's still 13.5% at two skin depths. A lot can change over such distances, especially moisture content, which greatly affects ground permittivity and conductivity.

For any type of soil, the Fresnel reflection coefficient is nonzero at the air/ground interface. Some signal reflection occurs there. For low-loss soil like yours, significant reflection also may occur at deeper soil layers. An upward-going signal reflected from a deep stratified layer may get re-reflected at the surface. It can bounce back and forth within the layer, dissipating power as it travels. This effect can occur at multiple layers. Each upward-going signal that reaches the surface transmits some power into the air. The result can be quite complex. A mathematical treatment is here:

https://msp.org/memocs/2016/4-2/memocs-v4-n2-p03-p.pdf

Some of your inconsistent phase results may stem from subsurface reflections with long path lengths. Unwrapping phase may help.

A fascinating effect is the resonance that can occur for low-loss soil when the distance between subsoil layers is near a multiple of a half-wavelength. I calculated that a sandy aquifer 66 feet below a desert surface (a half-wavelength in ground) can increase effective surface conductivity by a factor of 30 at 3.7 MHz. I suspect such effects seldom occurs in practice because everything has to be just right. You can download a calculator to explore resonance and other stratified ground effects for two soil layers here:

https://k6sti.neocities.org/sg

Subsurface soil can affect both antenna impedance and far-field patterns. NEC models uniform soil only. Its results may not be realistic at your QTH because of the large exposure to subsurface effects for desert soil.

Brian

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
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>