On 11/18/2022 11:51 AM, Jeff Blaine wrote:
N6LF's article should be first stop for anyone serious about the topic.
YES!
I assume that K3LC Al's conclusions on optimal length vs. count would
match up roughly with N6LF's. The key point here is that from getting
the best bang for your radial investment, there's both count and length
to consider.
About ten years ago, and before Rudy, N6LF, had published his landmark
2-part QEX studying about elevated radials, I put together this talk,
which is primarily about radial systems for 160M. None of it is my
original work, but rather summarizing work by others, including K3LC. I
suspect that one of the variables between Rudy, K3LC, and other authors
is their ground conductivity. In general, the worse the soil, the
greater the benefit of a more extensive the radial/counterpoise system.
My soil is terrible -- below the surface of duff from the redwoods, it's
mostly rock.
http://k9yc.com/160MPacificon.pdf
W1SRD's description of his radial system perfectly fits what I did for
my 100 ft Tee, beginning in 2006 when I moved here, and have expanded
over the years. Part of the variability in length in mine is that the
feedpoint is only about 12 ft from the building that houses my shack,
and it's only about 80 ft to the road.
Another point -- the ONLY reason for an earth connection is lightning
protection. And whoever wrote that equipment manual didn't understand
how radials work.
73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|