Topband: GAP Vertical Question

Sun Dec 16 22:08:40 EST 2012

>I can  think of NO earthly reason,that makes ANY electromagnetic sense to 
>me, as antenna engineer fo placing a radial system  under the  end of a 
>vertical 1/2 wave antenna - "earth-worms" not >withstanding!

** Another case of not understanding the antenna or the purpose and handling 
of its current maximum. Some antenna engineer.

>>Given that a half wave vertical has a base impedance of over 1000 ohms and 
>>a single ground rod in dirt is 100 ohms at most not a single radial is 
>>needed to obtain close to 100% radiation >efficiency.
>
> > Dave WX7G

** Its not the base that is the problem. The current has to be dealt with no 
matter where it is located on the vertical conductor or its electrical 
length. For want of a better word its image has to be a perfect conductor 
for the antenna system as a whole to be 100% efficient. It is also the 
current and its efficiency that determine the power radiated at the lowest 
angles. Excessive losses and that 10db becomes a simple glaring in your face 
reality.

Carl
KM1H

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Donald Chester" <k4kyv at hotmail.com>
To: <topband at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: GAP Vertical Question

>
> Then, why do broadcast stations that use vertical towers at approximately 
> a half wavelength, purchase valuable real estate and spend thousands of 
> dollars for the copper to install from 120 to 240 or more radials,  each 
> usually a half wave or more in length?
>
> See G. H. Brown: "Ground Systems as a Factor in Antenna Efficiency", IRE 
> Proceedings, June 1937 p. 753.  Brown demonstrated that the distribution 
> of earth currents and ground losses is such that the region of maximum 
> current and loss occurs at a distance of about 0.35 wavelengths from the 
> base of a ground mounted half wave vertical antenna, which was verified 
> experimentally.
>
> There is zero loss at the base of the antenna itself, since there is no 
> base current because the antenna a fed at a current node.  An rf ammeter 
> inserted in the ground lead, as well as one inserted in in the antenna 
> lead attached to the insulated base of the radiator will read zero.  The 
> ground losses occur farther out from the base of the antenna. Low 
> effective earth resistance provided by a good ground system is ABSOLUTELY 
> NECESSARY for vertical antennas of ANY height if one expects good 
> radiation efficiency. The claim that no ground system is needed for a half 
> wave vertical is nothing more than a long-standing popular misconception.
>
> This topic prompted me to dig out and review an anecdote I recall reading 
> in my decades-old copy of CQ magazine's Vertical Antenna Handbook, by USNR 
> Capt. Paul H. Lee, K6TS (1974). He reported receiving mail from a ham who 
> had made the "discovery" that he could tune and operate a half wave 
> vertical without a ground system, feeding it by a parallel tuned tank 
> circuit whose lower end is grounded.  Since an rf ammeter in the  ground 
> lead showed no current, he could dispense with the ground system and its 
> loss.  He suggested to the Capt. that he should "discover the new world of 
> half verticals with no ground system".
>
> Quoting from the text (p. 84):
>
> "The correspondent's claim... is true ONLY IF HE IS CONTENT TO THROW AWAY 
> FROM 40 TO 80 PER CENT OF HIS RADIATED POWER IN THE FORM OF EARTH LOSSES. 
> (the correspondent) stated, 'The ZL's call ME, when I use my  half wave 
> vertical!' This is not surprising, in view of the fact that the half 
> wave's vertical pattern has a lower main lobe angle than a quarter wave 
> would have... However, he would hit the ZL's even harder if he would put 
> in a ground system.  Of course, the half wave vertical is not dependent on 
> a ground plane, however lossy or efficient, for the condition of 
> RESONANCE, since it is resonant in itself because of its half wave length. 
> However, IT IS DEPENDENT ON A GROUND PLANE FOR ITS EFFICIENCY OF 
> RADIATION, as is any vertical antenna...'
>
>
> Don k4kyv
>
>
>
>>Given that a half wave vertical has a base impedance of over 1000 ohms and 
>>a single ground rod in dirt is 100 ohms at most not a single radial is 
>>needed to obtain close to 100% radiation >efficiency.
>
> > Dave WX7G
>
>
>
>> And this statement is based on what?  Publications, measurements,
>> modeling?
>>
>> I have built a number of 1/2 wave verticals without radials and compared
>> them to 1/4 wave verticals with radials.  They are
>> indistinguishable in performance and certainly do not exhibit
>> substantial ground losses AFAIK...
>>
>> Rick N6RK
>
>
>>I can  think of NO earthly reason,that makes ANY electromagnetic sense to 
>>me, as antenna engineer fo placing a radial system  under the  end of a 
>>vertical 1/2 wave antenna - "earth-worms" not >withstanding!
>
>>It's CURRENT that "warms the earthworms"!  NOT electric field intensity!
>
>>...the ground system does NOT act as a "shield" from the "lossy earth" nor 
>>protect the "earth-worms"! There is absolutely NO reason to require a 
>>radial system under a 1/2 wave vertical antenna.
>>Such an antenna will operate just fine on its own in free-space.
>
>>Consider this - to deliver 1000 watts to a 1/4 wave vertical with a REALLY 
>>GOOD ground system and a driving point impedance of say 40 ohms would 
>>require 5 amps of RF current delivered to the >antenna system and ground. 
>>Todeliver that same 1000 watts to an end-fed vertical of 2000-4000 ohms 
>>real would require an antenna current, at  the fed endof 0.5 -0.7 amps! 
>>It's the CURRENT >that produces the losses in the "lossy earth" and "warms 
>>the earth worms". At worst, for the 1/2 wave end fed vertical - a simple 
>>ground rodshould be just fine, and the earth worms should be >quite 
>>comfortable, and the antenna will work VERY well!!  Of course it will be 
>>250-260 feet tall!
>
>>Charlie,K4OTV
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2634/5464 - Release Date: 12/16/12
> 