| To: | <towertalk@contesting.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [TowerTalk] 4 square for 80 |
| From: | "Peter Voelpel" <peter.voelpel@t-online.de> |
| Date: | Sun, 25 Sep 2016 00:09:43 +0200 |
| List-post: | <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com> |
I think the majority is using more then an few. 73 Peter, DJ7WW -----Original Message----- From: TowerTalk [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Brown Remember the analysis showing that the loss in radials is the sum of all the I squared R factors from each radial. When we have MANY radials, the current in each is so small that variation doesn't matter. But when there are only a few, the variation can makes a difference. And I think "a few" radials per vertical is what most 4-squares have. _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [TowerTalk] Replacement Bolts for Rohn GB45D, Raymond Benny |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [TowerTalk] Lead-Shot Counterweight, ve4xt@mymts.net |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [TowerTalk] 4 square for 80, Jim Brown |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [TowerTalk] 4 square for 80, Tim Duffy |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |