TopBand: Elevated Radials

[John Mitchell]

At 02:19 PM 3/23/98 -0700, n7cl@mmsi.com wrote:
>
>>Everything works better over perfect ground. SNIP
>>In fact, if you really have perfect ground, zero radials
>>>is the optimum number.
>>
>>Well, no it isn't.
>
>Well, yes it is. 

HI, this is beginning to seem like ping pong to me, too.  I'm not sure what
good it will do to hash this out again, but I thought SE's results were
quite clear in showing that elevated feed point over perfect ground yields
about a DB, both off the radials and orthogonally with them.  Certainly,
this is significant information and should not be lost in the noise
generated here.

> We (other than you) have been discussing ground
>mounted 1/4 wave tall vertical antennas either with elevated or
>with ground mounted radial systems of varying densities.

There are multiple dimensions to this thread; if's disappointing that you
take ownership, via the royal "we", and exclude the other sides being
discussed.  No matter, there IS a very lively discussion on elevated feed
point versus ground mounted vertical. There's no point in arguing over this.

>
>Or better yet, run it at 12 feet and then do the same thing with it at 32
feet  Let me know if higher isn't better.

Of course it is, but the contention some of us are discussing is that using
resonant, elevated radials at a modest height may be better than ground
mounting the system. Maybe we should name this thread something different to
avoid confusion?
 
Obviously, there may be limitations to how high one can elevate the feed
point and still retain sufficient vertical radiator portion, when one is
dealing with an inverted L., and limited vertical support, for instance. I
am experimenting with this and will keep the group posted when results are in.  

73,
John K4IQ


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
Submissions:              topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-topband@contesting.com