Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+A\s+question\s+on\s+L\'s\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+A\s+question\s+on\s+L\'s\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: Peter Dougherty <w2irt@comcast.net>; Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:17:55 -0500; I have a question about this very thing. I'm running an inverted L with the vertical portion going up about 40' or so, and maybe 1000' of radials, mostly cut to about 66' in length each. When I put; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00133.html (8,368 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 05:28:50 -0500; Peter, Some of what you are reading is not correct. First, the bandwidth of a perfect Inverted L at reasonable height is twice as wide as a dipole made from the same wire size. This is because the l; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00136.html (9,524 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: <shristov@ptt.yu>; Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:49:29 CET; Tom, are you saying that the bandwidth is proportional to the diameter/length ratio? Isn't it proportional to the logarithm of the ratio? 73, Sinisa YT1NT, VE3EA _____________________________________; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00137.html (6,730 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:12:58 -0500; Well, I was saying that. Yes, but now even that doesn't make sense to me. When I make an inverted L or vertical with the same size wire as a dipole, the Inverted L or vertical always seems to have a; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00139.html (7,516 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 08:26:00 -0800; The feedline is doing two things to you. First, it is transforming the impedance by virtue of its length. If the line had NO loss, the SWR would remain constant, but the measured values of R and X wi; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00141.html (7,971 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 08:33:14 -0800; I think your hypothesis for what you've observed makes sense, at least for radials on/in the ground, whether the effect is log or linear. Think of it this way -- the other half of the antenna (the ra; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00142.html (7,559 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 23:06:47 -0500; "Think of it this way -- the other half of the antenna (the radial system) is very broadband, so only the top half (the radiator) contributes to narrowing the bandwidth. " Unfortunately if one models; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00151.html (7,608 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "Herbert Schoenbohm" <herbs@vitelcom.net>; Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:06:25 -0400; Pete don't worry so much about the angle if you have clearance from 30 to 45 degrees toward Europe. I would, however, change the configuration of the inverted "L" to a "T" which is a far more efficie; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00154.html (8,575 bytes)
9. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "William Culpepper" <culpepper@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:18:47 -0500; If you had a 1.8 mHz vertical antenna with a ground plane consisting of a quarter wavelength of copper sheet around the base, the loss would probably approximate the loss in one half of a half wavele; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00159.html (7,985 bytes)
10. Re: Topband: A question on L's (score: 1): Author: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:15:33 -0500; The NEC4 model I quoted was for #12 wire (which alas I failed to mention) and was only to demonstrate that the bandwidth issue was not anything inherent about an ideal 1/4 w vertical vs an ideal 1/2; /archives//html/Topband/2007-11/msg00179.html (7,964 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]