Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+1\/4\s+versus\s+1\/2\s+wave\s+vert\.\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: df2py@t-online.de
Date: 13 Jan 2006 13:21 GMT
Hi reflectees ! Although i dont have the technical background that Tom has, i want to contribute a few findings from the experience of antenna building on other lower frequency antennas. I conducted
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00188.html (7,568 bytes)

2. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:43:22 -0500
resonant circuit, like Tom described. Very easy thing to do. clearly edged by the quarter wave design. But i found, that commercial installations never ever have high impedance fed antennas close to
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00190.html (8,438 bytes)

3. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: KZurawski@aol.com
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:36:53 EST
OK, my intrigue level has spiked. Need to jump in here. When comparing a half wave vertical over lossy ground to a quarter wave vertical over lossy ground, which needs a more low loss, radially large
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00205.html (8,306 bytes)

4. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: mike l dormann <w7dra@juno.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:09:25 -0800
all this vertical antenna on the top of a hill talk is scarring me. i have the same problem, and i plan to put up a YCCC double L, an antenna not heard about on this reflector in quite a while. durin
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00206.html (7,699 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: <w4dlz@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:47:00 -0600
A 1/2 wave vertical has a high impedance feed at the base. The ground currents on a half wave vertical are very very low thereby ground losses are minimal. You are at a high voltage feed point . As f
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00209.html (7,979 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: Sinisa Hristov <shristov@ptt.yu>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:51:44 -0500
Unfortunately, it will not work that well. Progressing from base, the ground current will increase, reaching significant values rather quickly. 73, Sinisa YT1NT, VE3EA _______________________________
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00218.html (8,090 bytes)

7. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:46:18 -0700
What you say is true only for conductive ground losses at the feedpoint. The radiated field also must contend with lossy ground. A couple of other recent postings here have postulated why a quarter-w
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00220.html (10,578 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:18:12 -0500
an absolute they don't the wire from vertical are simply We have to always remember that Eznec and other amateur radio modeling programs assume flat earth and "infinite" distance from the antenna as
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00222.html (9,835 bytes)

9. Re: Topband: 1/4 versus 1/2 wave vert. (score: 1)
Author: "Steve Flood" <flood@ixi.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 11:55:39 -0700
Tom - At what "low angle" value and lower should we become (more) suspicious of model results? 20? 10? 5? 2? I have arbitrarily used values below 5 degrees as those I should ignore - just based on a
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00226.html (8,752 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu