Yes.
Jim SM2EKM
------------
On 2011-01-15 18:18, Gene Fuller wrote:
> Is the loss equal for all vertical radiation angles ?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Hunt"<steve@karinya.net>
> To:<towertalk@contesting.com>
> Cc:<towertalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2011 4:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Fw: ground radial project
>
>
>> Jim,
>>
>> Agreed!
>>
>> If folk would look carefully at the Brown/Lewis/Epstein paper they would
>> see that it's not so different from Rudy Severn's work. Figure 30 in
>> their paper plots received field strength against number of radials for
>> a quarter-wave vertical radiator. Compared with the theoretical maximum,
>> these are the shortfalls they measured:
>>
>> 15 radials: -2dB
>> 30 radials: -1.3dB
>> 60 radials: -0.7dB
>> 113 radials: -0.2dB
>>
>> To me that doesn't look like a strong case for 120 radials in Amateur
>> Radio useage!
>>
>> 73,
>> Steve G3TXQ
>>
>> On 14/01/2011 21:26, jimlux wrote:
>>> That 120 radial thing is from Brown, Lewis and Epstein, and was
>>> originally formulated as a FCC shortcut to avoid having to do a proof of
>>> performance on a non-directional AM transmitter (i.e. rather than spend
>>> the money to measure field strength on all the cardinal radials and so
>>> forth, you could say, we've installed the FCC standard ground field).
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|