Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+tuning\s+elevated\s+radials\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+tuning\s+elevated\s+radials\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Ford Peterson" <ford@cmgate.com>; Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 20:35:00 -0500; I'm working on building an elevated radial vertical. After installing the radials, I have a question about what I'm finding. Using a small toroid that I split in two, I wound 9 turns on each half, gl; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00035.html (8,697 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "K9AY" <k9ay@k9ay.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 09:07:08 -0500; .... ___________________ Ford, You hit one of my "hot buttons" -- I have not seen any convincing evidence that equalizing currents in elevated radials is a valid exercise. Even if it is, the "soluti; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00037.html (8,924 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Ford Peterson" <ford@cmgate.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 10:05:08 -0500; Gary, and others... My thinking has been that the characteristic null that is supposed to occur at zenith is a good thing. If nearby QRN arrives at a high angle, then the deep null at zenith should b; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00038.html (10,202 bytes)
4. Topband: tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@comcast.net>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 12:55:38 -0400; Ford, Questions and comments. Q: I like the rf probe idea...and I think I can draw the circuit you created...but rather than speculate, can you either send me something directly...or post here if eas; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00039.html (8,256 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 14:31:50 -0400; convincing evidence exercise. supposed to occur at zenith is a good thing. If nearby QRN arrives at a high angle, then the deep null at zenith should be a good first line of defense against noise. I; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00040.html (9,998 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Ford Peterson" <ford@cmgate.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 13:47:19 -0500; ...snip... Tom, Are you saying that a simple elevated radial system is 5 or 6 dB down from the classic 120 buried radials? This seems to run in conflict with things I've read elsewhere. Ford-N0FP for; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00041.html (8,409 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: Phil & Ann Duff <na4m@arrl.net>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:11:27 +0000; Ford - Dick Weber K5IU presented a paper in 1995 at the W5 DX Bash that included some work Dick had done in the area of elevated radial current imbalances with regards to remotely tuned low-band vert; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00042.html (9,469 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:25:03 -0400; Are you saying that a simple elevated radial system is 5 or 6 dB down from the classic 120 buried radials? This seems to run in conflict with things I've read elsewhere.> In all the actual real-world; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00043.html (10,172 bytes)
9. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 10:38:16 -1000; We could balance the radial currents by putting series resistances in them. Given the choice, I would rather have less resistance and higher current regardless of balance. Especially considering the; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00044.html (8,394 bytes)
10. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:02:09 -0400; imbalance in much less reduction in bandwidth. Hi Phil, We have to read papers very carefully. Without an actual FS test or verification, postulations prove nothing. If it is desirable to shorten th; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00045.html (10,601 bytes)
11. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Mike Harris" <mike.harris@horizon.co.fk>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:00:33 -0300; G'day all, bandwidth. I was going to refer to the G6XN recommendation. I have used this technique on my 30M vertical. The vertical element is 30 feet long with the base 3 feet from the ground. Two gu; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00047.html (9,716 bytes)
12. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: VR2BrettGraham <vr2bg@harts.org.hk>; Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:34:54 +0000; And then described his efforts in balancing current between the radials. I have been thinking about adding common loading coil to elevated radials here (from ON4UN book, refers to K5UL I think) in or; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00048.html (9,170 bytes)
13. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: Phil & Ann Duff <na4m@arrl.net>; Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 01:08:06 +0000; Hi Tom - Umm - I suppose K5IU would be best to defend his paper but... I think his paper and references seem to address radial current imbalances with regard to vertical antenna patterns with no ment; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00049.html (8,397 bytes)
14. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 17:47:02 -0400; current no mention measurements not in The fact remains unequal currents in equal length radials proves each radial is located in a greatly varied electrical environment. Perhaps the radials are at; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00051.html (9,770 bytes)
15. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Ford Peterson" <ford@cmgate.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 22:49:16 -0500; Tom, I think I see your point. From the limited experimentation I have done so far, I can assert that the ground topology at the site is very obviously varied. For example, one radial (the one that s; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00054.html (11,737 bytes)
16. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 04:12:54 -0400; <<So what's the fix? It seems to me that the area underneath this vertical needs to be beefed up. Even though the tower insulators are about 10 degrees above the earth, should I consider attaching th; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00055.html (10,269 bytes)
17. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Herb Schoenbohm" <herbs@vitelcom.net>; Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 13:02:27 -0700; What happens if the elavated radials have a ground connection at the far end, prefereably slopng to earth? I know this is against conventional "Marconi" wisdom but even going so far as running a few; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00058.html (9,338 bytes)
18. Re: Topband: Tuning elevated radials (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 19:51:22 -0400; connection at the far It then becomes a conventional ground system with directly coupled earth currents. even going so far mitigate some of the If you want to read one brief summary of a multiple tu; /archives//html/Topband/2005-09/msg00062.html (11,239 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 18
Page: [1]