Exactly!
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 22, 2019, at 7:25 PM, Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> Al Christman K3LC thoroughly sliced and diced the tradeoffs of number vs
> length for given total wire investment is his Mar/Apr 2004 NCJ paper.
>
> N6LF also has a lot to say.
>
> Grant KZ1W
>
>> On 1/22/2019 16:11 PM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
>> “Wes cut his radial length to match the vertical L section height (see N6LF
>>> reference). He didn't reduce the number of radials.”
>> I didn’t think it was the “shortening” OF the length of the radials that
>> would improve performance e.g. going from 10 125’ radials to 10 55’ radials
>> (in the case of a 55’ vertical); rather, it was the fact that 10x 125’ of
>> wire could be better employed to increase the number of radials, albeit
>> resulting in shorter radials, that decreases the ground loss (since most is
>> nearer the base of the vertical). If I’m correct, then shortening a given
>> number of radials should decrease loss or improve performance....
>> 73,
>> Bob AA6VB
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|