Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 119, Issue 18

[Radio KH6O]

On 11/15/12, topband-request at contesting.com
<topband-request at contesting.com> wrote:
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
> 	topband at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	topband-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	topband-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Covered /bare antennn wire (Bruce)
>    2. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Mike Waters)
>    3. V84SMD (f6bki at orange.fr)
>    4. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Eddy Swynar)
>    5.  Covered /bare antennn wire (Bruce)
>    6.  Pennant Transformer (Frank Davis)
>    7. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Eddy Swynar)
>    8.  Covered /bare antennn wire (Bruce)
>    9. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Mike Waters)
>   10. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Tom W8JI)
>   11. Limiters - not T/R Relays (Brian Moran)
>   12. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Bruce)
>   13. Re: Limiters - not T/R Relays (Rick Karlquist)
>   14. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Tom W8JI)
>   15. Re: TX/ RX Antenna Switching (Grant Saviers)
>   16. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Bruce)
>   17. Re: Covered /bare antennn wire (Gary Smith)
>   18. Re: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground (ZR)
>   19. Re: 230+ QSLs On LOW Dipole - There's Hope! (Buck wh7dx)
>   20. Re: Limiters - not T/R Relays (ZR)
>   21. Re: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground (N1BUG)
>   22. Re: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground (James Rodenkirch)
>   23. Re: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground (George Dubovsky)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:42:46 -0800
> From: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <F5BC8F70C52D476694CE2BE912E88935 at k1fzPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dry blowing snow or high wind can cause quite some voltage build up on a
> antenna, especially a long one. It is possible to draw quite an arc to
> ground.
> There have been reports of high voltage electrocutions from antenna static
> build up in Short Wave Broadcast stations. A short stick was mandatory for
> maintenance periods.
> And yes, I did work at a shortwave station with 500 KW transmitter output.
>
> So receiving antenna wire insulation could have some benefit if the voltage
> on a bare wire is leaking to a tree limb or across an insulator. Beyond some
> point all insulators can fail.
>
> Indoor antennas do hear static, but I have never seen any evidence of
> voltage build up. ( The building may provide adequate insulation.)
>
>
> Out of curiosity, has anyone ever really done testing of voltage buildup on
> a insulated antenna wire, VS a non-insulated wire ?
> Indoor antennas VS outdoor antennas of equal size?
>
> 73
> Bruce-K1FZ
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:56:48 -0600
> From: Mike Waters <mikewate at gmail.com>
> To: topband <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID:
> 	<CA+FxYXirr=29Fj9BxRzbCsGdF0ETxVjWHBkfWFX3LtProFuDrQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Why not prevent the static buildup in the first place? I use 33K resistors
> from each wire to ground. Schematic is at
> http://www.w0btu.com/Beverage_antennas.html .
>
> The components in parallel with the 33K resistors are 90 volt gas discharge
> tubes, and the resistors are to prolong the life of those GDTs.
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:18:56 -0000
> From: <f6bki at orange.fr>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: V84SMD
> Message-ID: <E78CF15B16674BE698FA0BE0A3417015 at ASUS>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> Hello all, looks like V84SMD is not very active on 160 ! Do we know why ?
> thank  you
> Jacques F6BKI
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:31:55 -0500
> From: Eddy Swynar <deswynar at xplornet.ca>
> To: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
> Cc: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <8EE4BC3D-15B0-4057-B75A-5070E424834E at xplornet.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>
>
> On 2012-11-15, at 3:42 PM, Bruce wrote:
>
>> Dry blowing snow or high wind can cause quite some voltage build up on a
>> antenna, especially a long one. It is possible to draw quite an arc to
>> ground.
>> There have been reports of high voltage electrocutions from antenna static
>> build up in Short Wave Broadcast stations. A short stick was mandatory for
>> maintenance periods.
>> And yes, I did work at a shortwave station with 500 KW transmitter
>> output.
>>
>> So receiving antenna wire insulation could have some benefit if the
>> voltage on a bare wire is leaking to a tree limb or across an insulator.
>> Beyond some point all insulators can fail.
>>
>> Indoor antennas do hear static, but I have never seen any evidence of
>> voltage build up. ( The building may provide adequate insulation.)
>>
>>
>> Out of curiosity, has anyone ever really done testing of voltage buildup
>> on a insulated antenna wire, VS a non-insulated wire ?
>> Indoor antennas VS outdoor antennas of equal size?
>>
>
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> I am not so sure that the notion of insulated vs. uninsulated wire holds
> true in long wire spans...
>
> Case in point: years ago when I first erected my 1500' long Beverage antenna
> here, I was specific in using insulated wire though its entire course
> because it runs through a grove of trees at one point. Well, one day, in the
> advance of an approaching storm front, I decided to ground the end of the
> Beverage in my shack. I could feel a "tingling" sensation as I man-handled
> the wire, negotiating my way to the common ground pipe that I have running
> the length of the back of my operating table...imagine my complete & utter
> shock as I neared the wire to this same pipe, and managed to induce 1/8"
> long blue arcs from the pipe to the wire!
>
> Since that time---FWIW---I have always had a rugged 2.5 mh. RF choke clipped
> between the wire's end where it attaches to the matching transformer, and
> ground. In theory this acts as a static drain, I guess, but does not induce
> signals to ground. I've heard that a multi-megohm resistor will do the same
> thing at this point...
>
> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:35:25 -0800
> From: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband:  Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <72EA53E9269C4ADDAAD07CAA350B3857 at k1fzPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=response
>
>
>
>  Good point Mike, but I am hoping someone has done definitive testing
> between
>  insulated and un-insulated wire concerning voltage build up.  If the
> voltage
>  is lower with insulated wire there is less to bleed off, and possibly
> lower
>  noise activity.
>
>  http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beveragenotes.html
>
>  73 Bruce-K1FZ
>
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mike Waters" <mikewate at gmail.com>
>> To: "topband" <topband at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:56 AM
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
>>
>>
>>> Why not prevent the static buildup in the first place? I use 33K
>>> resistors
>>> from each wire to ground. Schematic is at
>>> http://www.w0btu.com/Beverage_antennas.html .
>>>
>>> The components in parallel with the 33K resistors are 90 volt gas
>>> discharge
>>> tubes, and the resistors are to prolong the life of those GDTs.
>>>
>>> 73, Mike
>>> www.w0btu.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:11:16 -0330
> From: Frank Davis <fdavis at nfld.net>
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Topband:  Pennant Transformer
> Message-ID: <63C3E0DA-8FF0-4C2E-A950-C6A4BF02EF5E at nfld.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>
> Many tnx to all who replied offline with advice and help.
>
> I am on the right track and hope to complete the project today.
>
> 73 Frank VO1HP
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I am in the process of building a pennant.
>
> I'm stuck on the right way to wind the transformer.
>
> I have Type 73 binocular cores but am not clear on how to do it.
> I am feeding the loop with RG6 and my terminating resistor is 910 Ohm 2%.
> The transformer will go at the point of the pennant and should be 12:1 ratio
> ?
> For 75 Ohm cable K6SE info sez - 2 turn primary and 7 turns secondary.
>
> I see on W7IUV website he sez - wind the primary on first.
>  --- so for  two turns I do this:
> one turn is: -  up through one side and down through the other side.
> another turn is - continue up one side and down through the other
> --- that makes two turns...is that correct?
>
> Winding 7 turns would follow same procedure winding the wire over the
> primary wire
> and have the leads out the opposite end of the core from the primary?
>
> I hope you can follow my primitive description.  Am I on the right track?
>
> 73 Frank VO1HP
> _______________________________________________
> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:02:37 -0500
> From: Eddy Swynar <deswynar at xplornet.ca>
> To: Bruce <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
> Cc: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <0683266C-FB44-460A-A485-79550BDDDAEA at xplornet.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>
>
> On 2012-11-15, at 4:35 PM, Bruce wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Good point Mike, but I am hoping someone has done definitive testing
>> between
>> insulated and un-insulated wire concerning voltage build up.  If the
>> voltage
>> is lower with insulated wire there is less to bleed off, and possibly
>> lower
>> noise activity.
>
>
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> I am a tad confused by your reasoning, so please excuse me...!
>
> Are you implying that "some" amount of voltage build-up is OK somehow? I
> don't get the logic in that---to me, it's all or nothing. What's to be
> gained by having less voltage to bleed off, s. more? An RF choke to ground
> doesn't care if it's a lot, or a little: it just does its job, end of
> story...
>
> I'm no expert by any means, but please enlighten me as I think I've
> obviously missed something.
>
> Thanks!
>
> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
> PS: FWIW, I always endeavour here to use insulated wire in ALL of my antenna
> projects---even radials laid atop the ground. I guess in the case of wire up
> in the air, I still subscribe to the belief (urban myth...?) that rain &
> snow discharge themselves on bare wire, "static electrically speaking". For
> the minimal extra expense of insulated vs. bare wire, it's one less thing
> that I have to worry about, rightly or wrongly! Hi Hi
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:06:00 -0800
> From: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
> To: "Eddy Swynar" <deswynar at xplornet.ca>, <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband:  Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <9F0E40D958ED4031B774C372200D8AC4 at k1fzPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi Eddy,
>
> Yes, above some voltage all insulators let high voltage through. Most
> "common" wire insulation is only good for about 600 volts. Take care not to
> become a bleeder resistor. Your idea of the RF choke is better than
> resistors to ground as there should be lower signal loss.
>
> GUD DX OM.
> See you in the pile ups,
>
> 73
> Bruce
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Eddy Swynar
>   To: Bruce
>   Cc: topband at contesting.com
>   Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 10:31 AM
>   Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
>
>
>     Hi Bruce,
>
>
>   I am not so sure that the notion of insulated vs. uninsulated wire holds
> true in long wire spans...
>
>
>   Case in point: years ago when I first erected my 1500' long Beverage
> antenna here, I was specific in using insulated wire though its entire
> course because it runs through a grove of trees at one point. Well, one day,
> in the advance of an approaching storm front, I decided to ground the end of
> the Beverage in my shack. I could feel a "tingling" sensation as I
> man-handled the wire, negotiating my way to the common ground pipe that I
> have running the length of the back of my operating table...imagine my
> complete & utter shock as I neared the wire to this same pipe, and managed
> to induce 1/8" long blue arcs from the pipe to the wire!
>
>
>   Since that time---FWIW---I have always had a rugged 2.5 mh. RF choke
> clipped between the wire's end where it attaches to the matching
> transformer, and ground. In theory this acts as a static drain, I guess, but
> does not induce signals to ground. I've heard that a multi-megohm resistor
> will do the same thing at this point...
>
>
>   ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:07:00 -0600
> From: Mike Waters <mikewate at gmail.com>
> To: Bruce <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>, topband <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID:
> 	<CA+FxYXjxCNEyMYdT1ce_OdUZOdYQFxLx+iwgENmLXqmZO5-GRg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Sure, and I'd be interested in knowing that, too. :-)
>
> I should add that the GDTs were added after a lighting hit in the vicinity
> caused windings to open up on the transformers. The GDTs were to prevent
> that, and the resistors were to minimize the number of times that the GDTs
> conducted (each time they fire, their life is shortened just a little).
>
> You have a good page about Beverages there. I think I may have used some of
> those ideas when I built the ones I have.
>
> 73, Mike
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Bruce <k1fz at myfairpoint.net> wrote:
>
>> Good point Mike, but I am hoping someone has done definitive testing
>> between insulated and un-insulated wire concerning voltage build up.  If
>> the voltage is lower with insulated wire there is less to bleed off, and
>> possibly lower noise activity.
>>
>> http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/**beveragenotes.html<http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beveragenotes.html>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:14:32 -0500
> From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>
> To: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>,	<topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <BEE137A3C8314A9C8D460191D2D6BC56 at tom0c1d32a93f0>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
>> Out of curiosity, has anyone ever really done testing of voltage buildup
>> on a insulated antenna wire, VS a non-insulated wire ?
>> Indoor antennas VS outdoor antennas of equal size?
>>
>
> I tested this extensively years ago, and there was no difference at all
> except if the insulation was in an area of corona discharge.
>
> All of the noise appeared related to corona, which was a function of exposed
>
> sharp points, and all of the charge for a floating wire was the same
> insulated or not.
>
> I discussed this with KB8MU (just recently a SK) from NASA, because he dealt
>
> with ion propulsion and electromagnetics, and what he found on spacecraft
> and aircraft agreed with my earth-based experiments.
>
> I used an electrostatic paint gun with water, and a modified garden hose, as
>
> the charged water source.
>
> I also noticed no difference on real antennas. My higher antennas with sharp
>
> points get p-static, the low antennas or antennas with blunt ends do not.
> Grounding and static drains make no difference except for the popping when a
>
> dielectric charges and arcs.
>
> 73 Tom
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:25:02 -0800 (PST)
> From: Brian Moran <brianmo at yahoo.com>
> To: "topband at contesting.com" <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Limiters - not T/R Relays
> Message-ID:
> 	<1353007502.55434.YahooMailNeo at web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I'm more interested in the 'limiters' aspect of the other thread.
> Back-to-back diodes == bad, but am looking for something to better tame RF
> coming in on my beverages, or whatever leaks by the bandpass filters on the
> 'other' station antenna in a multi-multi.
>
> Some sort of saturable transformer design, like
> http://www.arraysolutions.com/Products/as_rxfep.htm ?
>
>
> PIN diode attenuator?
>
> What are some good references to learn about the tradeoffs and techniques?
>
> -Brian N9ADG
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:36:57 -0800
> From: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
> To: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>, <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <087AFA2B26484A56AA74B82A1C7018F7 at k1fzPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=response
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> Thank you for the information, It sounds very convincing.
>
> As you have said it is difficult to get a A-B test unless instant switching
>
> or direct observation is available.
>
> I was hoping for a test something like, side by side identical wires, one
> insulated, and one un-insulated with voltage measuring devices at the ends.
> Also separated enough not to get Beverage coupling, and using real stormy
> weather measuring.
>
> Over the insulation breakdown voltage, one would expect them to be equal
> anyway.
>
> 73
> Bruce-K1FZ
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>
> To: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>; <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:14 AM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
>
>
>>> Out of curiosity, has anyone ever really done testing of voltage buildup
>>>
>>> on a insulated antenna wire, VS a non-insulated wire ?
>>> Indoor antennas VS outdoor antennas of equal size?
>>>
>>
>> I tested this extensively years ago, and there was no difference at all
>> except if the insulation was in an area of corona discharge.
>>
>> All of the noise appeared related to corona, which was a function of
>> exposed sharp points, and all of the charge for a floating wire was the
>> same insulated or not.
>>
>> I discussed this with KB8MU (just recently a SK) from NASA, because he
>> dealt with ion propulsion and electromagnetics, and what he found on
>> spacecraft and aircraft agreed with my earth-based experiments.
>>
>> I used an electrostatic paint gun with water, and a modified garden hose,
>>
>> as the charged water source.
>>
>> I also noticed no difference on real antennas. My higher antennas with
>> sharp points get p-static, the low antennas or antennas with blunt ends do
>>
>> not. Grounding and static drains make no difference except for the popping
>>
>> when a dielectric charges and arcs.
>>
>> 73 Tom
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:16:05 -0800
> From: "Rick Karlquist" <richard at karlquist.com>
> To: "Brian Moran" <brianmo at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "topband at contesting.com" <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Limiters - not T/R Relays
> Message-ID:
> 	<e7badfd32924d77a5f0c5ff2670d7777.squirrel at webmail.sonic.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Brian Moran wrote:
>>
>> Some sort of saturable transformer design, like
>> http://www.arraysolutions.com/Products/as_rxfep.htm ?
>
> What is interesting about this is that it uses T1-6 transformers,
> which I have been using and recommending for years for RX antenna
> use.  I have repeatedly been told that these are no good because
> they will saturate at too low of a level and cause intermods, etc.
> The design cited is an existence proof that these transformers
> will work just fine in most situations.  I'm only 6 miles from
> a 50 kW AM BC station and I have never had any trouble with
> T1-6 transformers generating spurs.  I will note that the T1-6
> has an especially large core, so it may be that the T1-1, for
> example, is not up to the job.
>
> FWIW, I accidentally transmitted into a beverage using a T1-6 transformer
> with 100 watts, and it did not burn out the transformer.
>
> Rick N6RK
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:25:23 -0500
> From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>
> To: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>,	<topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <B6C49A80FEAC48AAA552F08284549472 at tom0c1d32a93f0>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=response
>
>> As you have said it is difficult to get a A-B test unless instant
>> switching or direct observation is available.
>
> The purpose of my test was to see if p-static was caused by individual
> charged particles as they hit the wire, or some other mechanism like corona
>
> discharge into the charged air or charged cloud of particles.
>
> My thought was if it was charged particles each making noise, the pitch or
> frequency distribution would be at the rate of particle contact, and that
> insulation should mute the effect by slowing rise time of charge transfer
> from particles to the wire.
>
> Clearly the noise was all from corona at sharp points.
>
> This also agrees with the effects people with multiple antennas see, or even
>
> two-way antenna on tall buildings or towers. The highest and most protruding
>
> antenna has the first and worse noise. Grounded elements, fiberglass
> housings, and other tricks make no difference at all. The only thing that
> matters is streamers from the exact point of corona leakage.
>
> We saw this when a repeater moved from side mount on a tower to a building
> roof peak. The fiberglass Station Master was swapped for a grounded folded
> dipole antenna, and both were equally useless in bad weather. The only thing
>
> that improved p-static noise was using an antenna well below the height of
> other sticks on the roof, but that didn't work out because of severe pattern
>
> nulls. We could raise the antenna and watch the noise increase, and at the
> same time actually hear the same sizzling acoustically through our ears and
>
> see it at night from antenna tips.
>
> Everyone with stacked monoband identical Yagis sees this on the top antenna.
>
> The top antenna is always terrible in inclement weather, even though the
> same precipitation strikes all antennas equally and the antennas are all on
>
> the same tower.
>
> This all, since it all always agrees, clearly means the noise has nothing to
>
> do with static drain or insulated or bare conductors. It is all about where
>
> the highest voltage gradient to space around the antenna is, and how easy
> that point can "leak" (generate corona).
>
>
>> I was hoping for a test something like, side by side identical wires, one
>>
>> insulated, and one un-insulated with voltage measuring devices at the
>> ends.
>> Also separated enough not to get Beverage coupling, and using real stormy
>>
>> weather measuring.
>>
>> Over the insulation breakdown voltage, one would expect them to be equal
>> anyway.
>
> Leakage current to earth was identical in my spray tests. It has nothing to
>
> do with insulation breakdown. It is more like the effect of a charged
> plastic comb. The charge obviously distributed right through the insulation.
>
> I suppose if the insulation was really thick the charge migration would be
> pretty slow, but charging of the wire is not what makes the noise we are
> concerned with. The noise comes from corona.
>
> I've had insulated wire Beverages and bare wire Beverages since the 1960's
> or 1970's, often at the same time as mixtures of wire. Neither is any
> quieter for me for local storm static.
>
> My bare wire Beverages here are dead quiet even while Yagi's are useless in
>
> foul weather, unless the Beverage points at the towers or are near tall
> trees.
>
> 73 Tom
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:55:26 -0800
> From: Grant Saviers <grants2 at pacbell.net>
> To: Tom W8JI <w8ji at w8ji.com>, topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: TX/ RX Antenna Switching
> Message-ID: <50A556BE.9020309 at pacbell.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Tom,
>
> Thanks for all your contributions and comments.  I searched the DXE web
> site and was unable to find the limiter you mentioned.  Could you be
> more specific?
>
> Also, a clarification about data on your web site re the RDF table in
> the "How low noise receiving antennas really work" page - I assume the
> "small 4 square" refers to a designs (yours) such as the DXE active 4
> and 8 squares with whip antennas.  Could you confirm that?
>
> I'm considering 80/160 receiving antennas and have the space for three
> Beverages 0.75 to 1.0wl 160m long bidirectional (NE/SW, E/W, NW/SE) made
> from coax, QTH is Redmond, WA.  Also, I'm considering the DXE 4 and 8
> square active arrays with a radius of 0.15 wl (80') on 160m but can't
> get more than about 1/4 wl from a 160m vertically polarized delta loop.
> My 80m rotatable dipole is at 100' up and the tower base at least 100'
> from the nearest 8 square antenna, so hopefully that interaction is
> minimal.
>
> Your inputs would be appreciated.
>
> Grant Saviers KZ1W
>
>
> On 11/14/2012 5:07 AM, Tom W8JI wrote:
>> By the way Buck, there is more to this than some people will tell you.
>>
>> The DXE switch uses a unique RF limiter that kicks in hard at about 23
>> dBm. Below that level there is no intermod at all!! It will not
>> deteriorate the receiver, like normal cheap back-to-back diode systems.
>>
>> If you need a receiver limiter and do not want to hurt receiver
>> dynamic range on modern receivers, it takes far more circuitry than
>> cheap back-to-back diodes.
>>
>> 73 Tom
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:11:56 -0800
> From: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
> To: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>, <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <948C073A949F46219BD89549CA829ADF at k1fzPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=response
>
> Tom,
>
> Thank you for your research and information. You have me convinced
>
> My much lower BOG Beverage has a better signal to noise than my taller
> Beverages in storm events. This aligns to your research.
>
> 73
> Bruce-K1FZ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>
> To: "Bruce" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>; <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:25 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
>
>
>>> As you have said it is difficult to get a A-B test unless instant
>>> switching or direct observation is available.
>>
>> The purpose of my test was to see if p-static was caused by individual
>> charged particles as they hit the wire, or some other mechanism like
>> corona discharge into the charged air or charged cloud of particles.
>>
>> My thought was if it was charged particles each making noise, the pitch or
>>
>> frequency distribution would be at the rate of particle contact, and that
>>
>> insulation should mute the effect by slowing rise time of charge transfer
>>
>> from particles to the wire.
>>
>> Clearly the noise was all from corona at sharp points.
>>
>> This also agrees with the effects people with multiple antennas see, or
>> even two-way antenna on tall buildings or towers. The highest and most
>> protruding antenna has the first and worse noise. Grounded elements,
>> fiberglass housings, and other tricks make no difference at all. The only
>>
>> thing that matters is streamers from the exact point of corona leakage.
>>
>> We saw this when a repeater moved from side mount on a tower to a building
>>
>> roof peak. The fiberglass Station Master was swapped for a grounded folded
>>
>> dipole antenna, and both were equally useless in bad weather. The only
>> thing that improved p-static noise was using an antenna well below the
>> height of other sticks on the roof, but that didn't work out because of
>> severe pattern nulls. We could raise the antenna and watch the noise
>> increase, and at the same time actually hear the same sizzling
>> acoustically through our ears and see it at night from antenna tips.
>>
>> Everyone with stacked monoband identical Yagis sees this on the top
>> antenna. The top antenna is always terrible in inclement weather, even
>> though the same precipitation strikes all antennas equally and the
>> antennas are all on the same tower.
>>
>> This all, since it all always agrees, clearly means the noise has nothing
>>
>> to do with static drain or insulated or bare conductors. It is all about
>> where the highest voltage gradient to space around the antenna is, and how
>>
>> easy that point can "leak" (generate corona).
>>
>>
>>> I was hoping for a test something like, side by side identical wires, one
>>>
>>> insulated, and one un-insulated with voltage measuring devices at the
>>> ends.
>>> Also separated enough not to get Beverage coupling, and using real stormy
>>>
>>> weather measuring.
>>>
>>> Over the insulation breakdown voltage, one would expect them to be equal
>>>
>>> anyway.
>>
>> Leakage current to earth was identical in my spray tests. It has nothing
>> to do with insulation breakdown. It is more like the effect of a charged
>> plastic comb. The charge obviously distributed right through the
>> insulation. I suppose if the insulation was really thick the charge
>> migration would be pretty slow, but charging of the wire is not what makes
>>
>> the noise we are concerned with. The noise comes from corona.
>>
>> I've had insulated wire Beverages and bare wire Beverages since the 1960's
>>
>> or 1970's, often at the same time as mixtures of wire. Neither is any
>> quieter for me for local storm static.
>>
>> My bare wire Beverages here are dead quiet even while Yagi's are useless
>> in foul weather, unless the Beverage points at the towers or are near tall
>>
>> trees.
>>
>> 73 Tom
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:04:13 -0500
> From: "Gary Smith" <Gary at ka1j.com>
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire
> Message-ID: <50A566DD.24175.1BD79AA at Gary.ka1j.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> I used to have an ICE model 303 lightning protector which I believe
> was a gas discharge tube with a toroidal choke in parallel to ground.
>
> I recall the toroidal choke was to continually bleed the electrons
> from the antenna so there would not be a buildup sufficient to cause
> damage and to not create a focus for a lightning strike. I may still
> have it in one of my boxes of Ham Gear still back in the midwest.
>
> I also remember my father running a not too terribly long wire
> outside with a Rf ammeter in series indoors & watching the movement
> increase as a storm approached.
>
> Gary
> KA1J
>
>>
>> On 2012-11-15, at 3:42 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>
>> > Dry blowing snow or high wind can cause quite some voltage build up
>> > on a antenna, especially a long one. It is possible to draw quite an
>> > arc to ground. There have been reports of high voltage
>> > electrocutions from antenna static build up in Short Wave Broadcast
>> > stations. A short stick was mandatory for maintenance periods. And
>> > yes, I did work at a shortwave station with 500 KW transmitter
>> > output.
>> >
>> > So receiving antenna wire insulation could have some benefit if the
>> > voltage on a bare wire is leaking to a tree limb or across an
>> > insulator. Beyond some point all insulators can fail.
>> >
>> > Indoor antennas do hear static, but I have never seen any evidence
>> > of voltage build up. ( The building may provide adequate
>> > insulation.)
>> >
>> >
>> > Out of curiosity, has anyone ever really done testing of voltage
>> > buildup on a insulated antenna wire, VS a non-insulated wire ?
>> > Indoor antennas VS outdoor antennas of equal size?
>> >
>>
>>
>> Hi Bruce,
>>
>> I am not so sure that the notion of insulated vs. uninsulated wire
>> holds true in long wire spans...
>>
>> Case in point: years ago when I first erected my 1500' long Beverage
>> antenna here, I was specific in using insulated wire though its entire
>> course because it runs through a grove of trees at one point. Well,
>> one day, in the advance of an approaching storm front, I decided to
>> ground the end of the Beverage in my shack. I could feel a "tingling"
>> sensation as I man-handled the wire, negotiating my way to the common
>> ground pipe that I have running the length of the back of my operating
>> table...imagine my complete & utter shock as I neared the wire to this
>> same pipe, and managed to induce 1/8" long blue arcs from the pipe to
>> the wire!
>>
>> Since that time---FWIW---I have always had a rugged 2.5 mh. RF choke
>> clipped between the wire's end where it attaches to the matching
>> transformer, and ground. In theory this acts as a static drain, I
>> guess, but does not induce signals to ground. I've heard that a
>> multi-megohm resistor will do the same thing at this point...
>>
>> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:19:27 -0500
> From: "ZR" <zr at jeremy.mv.com>
> To: "Pete Smith N4ZR" <n4zr at contesting.com>,	<topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
> Message-ID: <D0798D261763464487422596802DC938 at computer1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=response
>
> Not that Ive noticed.
>
>  I suspect most Americans are more comfortable with our own measuring system
>
> plus our ham bands where antenna formulas are still published in feet and
> inches.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pete Smith N4ZR" <n4zr at contesting.com>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:14 AM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
>
>
>> CU on the 525 foot band, Carl?  Seriously, I suspect that the reason why
>> many of us work in meters when modeling is simply that some of the most
>> useful software products default to that.
>>
>> 73, Pete N4ZR
>> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
>> http://reversebeacon.net,
>> blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
>> For spots, please go to your favorite
>> ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
>>
>> On 11/14/2012 3:48 PM, ZR wrote:
>>> I cant find the button to convert that metric stuff to good old USA
>>> measurements when posted from this country(-:
>>>
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
>>>
>>>
>>>> I never found a way to model an an antenna over anything but flat,
>>>> level
>>>> ground. Not in EZNEC+ 5.0, anyway.
>>>>
>>>> 73, Mike
>>>> www.w0btu.com
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:41 PM, Ken Claerbout <k4zw at verizon.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone modeled or have experience with a transmit vertical array,
>>>>> say
>>>>> a 4-square, over uneven ground? By uneven I mean a variance of up to
>>>>> 2 - 3
>>>>> meters over the footprint of the array elements.
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>> Version: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2441/5394 - Release Date: 11/14/12
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2441/5396 - Release Date: 11/15/12
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:59:27 -1000
> From: Buck wh7dx <wh7dx at hawaii.rr.com>
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: 230+ QSLs On LOW Dipole - There's Hope!
> Message-ID: <445187EF-BF62-4B0C-83BA-FF96C7309B4F at hawaii.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>
> I did a search for K2UO here and didn't see anything recent, so I thought I
> would post the article again for those with Low Dipoles or tight spaces.
> Mentioned in ON4UN's book.
>
> http://vss.pl/lf/14.pdf
>
> K2UO was #61 for North America (2009) with an antenna that is 12-30ft high
> on flat land was using 100W for the first 75 Countries.  Then added Amp and
> Beverage.
>
> 2009 Data (anyone have the link to current data?)
>
> http://www.qsl.net/160/
>
>
> [CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE] Information transmitted by this email
> is proprietary to Mr. & Mrs. B and is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed, or where ever the hell it
> ends up, and will almost certainly contain information that will offend a
> large portion of the population, which isn't our concern. If you are not the
> intended lucky recipient, or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to
> you without the proper authority of the Wizard of Email or Al Gore, you are
> notified that any thought, use, or consumption of this email is entirely
> your choice. In such case, Bon Appetit....    Note:  A $.02 Internet Tax was
> charged for receiving this email and all funds were given to some family
> somewhere in America or the U.N....  Have a nice day.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:15:01 -0500
> From: "ZR" <zr at jeremy.mv.com>
> To: <richard at karlquist.com>,	"Brian Moran" <brianmo at yahoo.com>
> Cc: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Limiters - not T/R Relays
> Message-ID: <F99D795286E74365A846BF36C1E35C07 at computer1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> Ive made several contacts up to about 2500 miles (West from NH) running 100W
>
> into a single 750' #12 copperweld  Beverage up about 8' using a FT114-43
> autotransformer back in the 80's at a prior home. These were mostly on CW
> during contests; the terminator was a 600 Ohm 100W NI resistor and the #24
> transformer wire still looked as new.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick Karlquist" <richard at karlquist.com>
> To: "Brian Moran" <brianmo at yahoo.com>
> Cc: <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 3:16 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Limiters - not T/R Relays
>
>
>> Brian Moran wrote:
>>>
>>> Some sort of saturable transformer design, like
>>> http://www.arraysolutions.com/Products/as_rxfep.htm ?
>>
>> What is interesting about this is that it uses T1-6 transformers,
>> which I have been using and recommending for years for RX antenna
>> use.  I have repeatedly been told that these are no good because
>> they will saturate at too low of a level and cause intermods, etc.
>> The design cited is an existence proof that these transformers
>> will work just fine in most situations.  I'm only 6 miles from
>> a 50 kW AM BC station and I have never had any trouble with
>> T1-6 transformers generating spurs.  I will note that the T1-6
>> has an especially large core, so it may be that the T1-1, for
>> example, is not up to the job.
>>
>> FWIW, I accidentally transmitted into a beverage using a T1-6 transformer
>> with 100 watts, and it did not burn out the transformer.
>>
>> Rick N6RK
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2441/5396 - Release Date: 11/15/12
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:58:48 -0500
> From: N1BUG <paul at n1bug.com>
> To: ZR <zr at jeremy.mv.com>
> Cc: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
> Message-ID: <50A581B8.5020202 at n1bug.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>> I suspect most Americans are more comfortable with our own measuring
>> system
>> plus our ham bands where antenna formulas are still published in feet and
>> inches.
>
> I suspect most (or at least many) Americans are resistant to change
> and unwilling to give anything different than what they are used to
> a fair try before dismissing it.
>
> When I don't have to deal too extensively with materials made to
> specific sizes for the U.S. market, I do much of my measuring and
> work using the metric system. Why? Because once I got used to it, I
> find it much easier to work with. My notes on projects going back
> over 20 years usually give dimensions in metric (eg. plate line
> dimensions for a VHF amplifier in millimeters). I have grown
> somewhat weary of converting to another system just so that other
> Americans won't grumble about my choice of units. I may stop that
> practice. If other Americans don't understand the measurements and
> can't be bothered to do the conversion, they probably don't really
> want/need the information.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:05:29 -0700
> From: James Rodenkirch <rodenkirch_llc at msn.com>
> To: N1BUG <paul at n1bug.com>, ZR <zr at jeremy.mv.com>
> Cc: "topband at contesting.com" <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
> Message-ID: <SNT002-W5916F6F992F2E5B53F97EFF0510 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Gosh, Paul.....why don't you simply keep measuring in our system and avoid
> the obvious "mental wedgie" you keep forming PLUS you won't be so
> "weary"?!?!?!
>
> 72, Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
>
>> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:58:48 -0500
>> From: paul at n1bug.com
>> To: zr at jeremy.mv.com
>> CC: topband at contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
>>
>> > I suspect most Americans are more comfortable with our own measuring
>> > system
>> > plus our ham bands where antenna formulas are still published in feet
>> > and
>> > inches.
>>
>> I suspect most (or at least many) Americans are resistant to change
>> and unwilling to give anything different than what they are used to
>> a fair try before dismissing it.
>>
>> When I don't have to deal too extensively with materials made to
>> specific sizes for the U.S. market, I do much of my measuring and
>> work using the metric system. Why? Because once I got used to it, I
>> find it much easier to work with. My notes on projects going back
>> over 20 years usually give dimensions in metric (eg. plate line
>> dimensions for a VHF amplifier in millimeters). I have grown
>> somewhat weary of converting to another system just so that other
>> Americans won't grumble about my choice of units. I may stop that
>> practice. If other Americans don't understand the measurements and
>> can't be bothered to do the conversion, they probably don't really
>> want/need the information.
>>
>> Paul
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>  		 	   		
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 19:29:04 -0500
> From: George Dubovsky <n4ua.va at gmail.com>
> To: James Rodenkirch <rodenkirch_llc at msn.com>
> Cc: ZR <zr at jeremy.mv.com>, "topband at contesting.com"
> 	<topband at contesting.com>,	N1BUG <paul at n1bug.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAALHBrYY29z817+uWXFm0BxqwWtWTFpbGvp2SVbzCM8cqYGrpQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> All,
>
> This argument has been going on ever since I got out of Engineering school,
> and frankly, it's not going to stop until "my" generation is gone. I'm an
> EE and I work in my own machine shop in my (new) retirement. I work in
> Imperial units because I THINK in Imperial units - it's what I learned as a
> wee bairn. I KNOW what an inch and a foot are, instinctively, and although
> I have no problem working in metric, I prefer not to because the units are
> non-instinctive - to ME. I care not a whit if metric calculations are
> faster or somehow superior; I don't think in metric - period.
>
> Now, two of my kids are 1990's vintage EEs, and they grew up on metric. I
> was taken aback when one of them - in high school - described a dimension
> to me by holding his fingers THIS far apart and stating: oh, it's about 10
> cm. When his generation largely displaces mine in the workforce, metric
> will have won. It won't be better or worse than Imperial measurement - it
> will just BE. Me, I'll continue working - and thinking - in inches, feet,
> mils, and turning out good work to precise dimensions, while ignoring snobs
> that presume that "I just don't get it".
>
> 73,
>
> geo - n4ua
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:05 PM, James Rodenkirch
> <rodenkirch_llc at msn.com>wrote:
>
>> Gosh, Paul.....why don't you simply keep measuring in our system and
>> avoid
>> the obvious "mental wedgie" you keep forming PLUS you won't be so
>> "weary"?!?!?!
>>
>> 72, Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
>>
>> > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:58:48 -0500
>> > From: paul at n1bug.com
>> > To: zr at jeremy.mv.com
>> > CC: topband at contesting.com
>> > Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
>> >
>> > > I suspect most Americans are more comfortable with our own measuring
>> system
>> > > plus our ham bands where antenna formulas are still published in feet
>> and
>> > > inches.
>> >
>> > I suspect most (or at least many) Americans are resistant to change
>> > and unwilling to give anything different than what they are used to
>> > a fair try before dismissing it.
>> >
>> > When I don't have to deal too extensively with materials made to
>> > specific sizes for the U.S. market, I do much of my measuring and
>> > work using the metric system. Why? Because once I got used to it, I
>> > find it much easier to work with. My notes on projects going back
>> > over 20 years usually give dimensions in metric (eg. plate line
>> > dimensions for a VHF amplifier in millimeters). I have grown
>> > somewhat weary of converting to another system just so that other
>> > Americans won't grumble about my choice of units. I may stop that
>> > practice. If other Americans don't understand the measurements and
>> > can't be bothered to do the conversion, they probably don't really
>> > want/need the information.
>> >
>> > Paul
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 119, Issue 18
> ****************************************
>