Topband: water saturated ground effect-MA160

[BRYON PAUL n0ah VEAL]

> From: herbs at vitelcom.net
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: water saturated ground effec
 
t
Paul,
> 
> What you experienced could be a misleading indication as ground 
> conductivity with moisture depends a lot on the actual type of soil. 
> with a vertical that is less than a quarter wave the direct feed 
> impedance should be very low. YES, THAT IS WHY I NEEDED THE UNUN IN THE FIRST PLACE WHEN I BUILT THE ANTNNA LAST YEAR-

 On a dry salt lake or high salinity soil the results 
> with mixing water would be more noticeable but I don't think this is 
> what you have there.  AGREE-

My point here is that one of the reasons the FCC requires AM stations to 
> have a ground system as part of their application is so there is a 
> constant radiation with a certain power level that will maintain the 
> radiation pattern and microvolts per meter at a given distance. A good 
> adequate radial system is supposed to prevent the very phenomenon you 
> described.
 
HERB, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WROTE, BUT NOT SURE HOW IT APPLIES TO MY SITUATION WHEN THE SWR LAST WENT FROM 1:1 TO 5:1 WHEN I ADDED THE 26 RADIALS EXPOSING THE MISMATCH IMPEDANCE THAT THE AMIDON UnUn WAS ABLE TO MATCH THE COAX TO THE ANTENNA- AT THE TIME, USING THE COMBINATION OF THE UnUn, THE ANTENNA IMPEDANCE WAS ESTIMATED TO BE AROUND 20 OHMS- I TESTED EVERYTHING AGAIN THIS MORNING....STILL GETTING A 2.3:1 SWR MATCH WITHOUT THE UnUn, WHEREAS LAST SEASON, I COULD NOT GET THE SWR BELOW 5:1 WHEN I DIRECTLY CONNECTED THE ANTENNA WITHOUT THE UnUn IN LINE.........WITH THE UnUn THIS MORNING, I CAN GET IT FLAT- ARE YOU SAYING THAT A SOAKED SOIL IN MY SITUATION IS WORSE THAN DRY DIRT?  
 
73!
 
PAUL  TI5/N0AH IN ABOUT 27 HOURS!!!! 
> 
> Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
> >
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK