Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+copper\s+or\s+galvanized\s+ground\s+rods\s+in\s+red\s+SC\s+clay\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 13:41:54 -0500
Just curious if anyone has experience using either of these over a number of years whether theyre eaten away one any faster than the other. Also the conductivity issue not sure if it matters all that
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00158.html (8,078 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 13:52:23 -0500
good point... maybe make the spacing from the tower closer to 6 or even 8'. I don't know if you can overkill it as long as you take into account the possibility of current saturation in the soil - fo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00159.html (9,927 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 12:39:08 -0800
what do you mean by current saturation? DO you mean that the water in the soil boils (called smoking or steaming rods in some of the literature)? But, in general, soil is fairly linear. As two rods a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00160.html (11,818 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:46:54 -0500
I really do not think that 3 ground rods is anywhere near enough for an adequate lightning ground. John KK9A Just curious if anyone has experience using either of these over a number of years - wheth
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00166.html (8,586 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: "Larry" <lknain@nc.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 23:10:47 -0500
The Polyphaser book on grounding recommended that ground rods be spaced about twice the length of the rods (e.g., 16 feet spacing for 8 foot rods). Presumably that will help with the charge saturatio
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00169.html (13,891 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:37:00 -0800
The reason for rod spacing is to minimize inductive coupling between them, which reduces their effectiveness. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ ____________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00173.html (9,410 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: Kevin Kidd <kkbroadcastengineering@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:46:01 -0600
Which doesn't mean that 2 closely spaced rods are worse than 1 rod but that they just aren't as effective as 2 properly spaced rods. This assuming that the rods are firmly bonded together with a lo-z
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00176.html (11,132 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 12:47:18 -0600
Here's an interesting question: if the concrete base is an effective ground connection, do you get more value by placing the rods a rod length away from the base? If the idea of separation is to prev
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00177.html (10,421 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:07:40 -0800
On 1/9/16 10:37 PM, Jim Brown wrote: On Sat,1/9/2016 8:10 PM, Larry wrote: The Polyphaser book on grounding recommended that ground rods be spaced about twice the length of the rods (e.g., 16 feet sp
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00178.html (11,724 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:14:02 -0800
According to most of the lightning and grounding literature, you can imagine the soil dissipation area of individual rods as half of a ball the radius of the length of the ground rod starting at the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00179.html (14,283 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 09:46:29 -0800
Yes.. just on a superposition of currents basis, you'd say this, without getting into non-linear effects. The real question would be "how far" If you think about the current flowing from a rod or bl
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00184.html (9,907 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 13:08:56 -0500
rod." That assumes the soil content is the same along the depth of the rod. After driving 50 ground rods in sandy soil conditions last spring, there was no substitute for rod depth - at least in our
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00185.html (11,165 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: K6OK via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 10:17:04 -0800
ground connection, do you get more value by placing the rods a rod length away from the base? << Is concrete is an effective ground connection? I have not seen any data regarding the measured _impeda
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00186.html (10,266 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: Kevin Kidd <kkbroadcastengineering@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:47:42 -0600
Paul, My thoughts on long ground rods is that at some point, the reactance of the rod itself will limit it's useful length. What that length is, is totally beyond my skill set... Kevin C. Kidd, CSRE/
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00191.html (11,472 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:36:03 -0800
Agree that RF design is the key AND low resistance is good. Of course there are exceptions, but perhaps not common among ham installations. I climbed several mountains in ME, noting the lightning "gr
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00192.html (13,544 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:21:34 -0800
That assumes the soil content is the same along the depth of the rod. After driving 50 ground rods in sandy soil conditions last spring, there was no substitute for rod depth - at least in our soil c
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00194.html (12,371 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:27:03 -0800
On 1/10/16 10:17 AM, K6OK via TowerTalk wrote: Kelly ve4xt wrote: Here's an interesting question: if the concrete base is an effective ground connection, do you get more value by placing the rods a r
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00195.html (12,502 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] copper or galvanized ground rods in red SC clay (score: 1)
Author: K6OK via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:11:34 -0800
I don't believe this is the case. High R/Lo Z is possible and so is Low R/Hi Z. The subject and content of Section 10 of TIA-222-G, "Protective Grounding," is purely electrical. Mechanical strength i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2016-01/msg00200.html (9,974 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu