Topband: Measuring Vertical input parameters while installing radials
KB8NTY
kb8nty at wowway.com
Thu Sep 12 13:39:36 EDT 2013
Eddie, LU2DKT,
I read your post with great interest!...Great work there.
I am very much interested in your findings & report.
I wish to request if you can send to me, when you find a method.
Additionally I wish to request for your permission to post your data on my
Blog-Website at:
http://radialstaple.wordpress.com/
Currently working on a upgrade/revision at:
http://www.rossradio.net/
Your valued information may then be shared with all who share our same
interest in RF ground radials!
Of course your data will be given acknowledgment as submitted & produced by
Eddie-LU2DKT.
Running a ground mounted Butternut HF9V here with the addition of 130 ground
radials, was a monumental improvement in both transmit & receive.
They say there is a point of diminished returns-however that point for me
was very subtle.
Looking forward to your valuable data, and hope to publish it on RossRadio
RF Ground Radial site!
-73- Ross, KB8NTY
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message -----
From: <topband-request at contesting.com>
To: <topband at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 12:00 PM
Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 129, Issue 20
> 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. Re: Stacked verticals - followup (David Raymond)
> 2. The Quest to save AM radio (Ken Claerbout)
> 3. Re: Stacked verticals - followup (HAROLD SMITH JR)
> 4. Re: The Quest to save AM radio (rfoxwor1 at tampabay.rr.com)
> 5. Measuring Vertical input parameters while installing radials
> (Eduardo Araujo)
> 6. Re: More anecdotal "stories" to cause one to stop and....
> (Richard Fry)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:01:27 -0500
> From: "David Raymond" <daraymond at iowatelecom.net>
> To: "Bill Cromwell" <wrcromwell at gmail.com>, <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Stacked verticals - followup
> Message-ID: <832F1E4536934B84BE0D014FAA4516F4 at radiocomputer>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
>
> We have a Franklin antenna at WHO, 1040 KHZ, here in Des Moines. I've
> been
> told it is one of the few remaining in the country.
>
> 73. . . Dave
> W0FLS
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Cromwell" <wrcromwell at gmail.com>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 12:34 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Stacked verticals - followup
>
>
>> Hi Ed,
>>
>> The engineer at WTIC responded. That station does not have a Franklin
>> antenna but has "series fed halfwave" during the day and switches in a
>> second one at night, phased to change the radiation pattern. He also told
>> me that their 'sister station', KDKA in Pittsburgh, does use a Franklin
>> antenna. Some members near Pittsburgh may want to roll by for a peek at
>> it.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Bill KU8H
>>
>>
>> On 09/06/2013 04:13 PM, Edwin Karl wrote:
>>> There are several interesting articles if you Google "Franklin Antenna"
>>> they are mechanically BIG and require feeding ingenuity (hams are known
>>> for this feature ...) but are stacked verticals, note- phase the top
>>> element
>>> to avoid cancellation.
>>>
>>> If memory serves me right WTIC in Hartford phased two of these puppies,
>>> but it's been a long time ...
>>>
>>>
>>> 73!
>>>
>>> ed k0kl
>>> _________________
>>> Topband Reflector
>>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 19:29:00 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Ken Claerbout <k4zw at verizon.net>
> To: Topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: The Quest to save AM radio
> Message-ID: <14507091.1201183.1378945740542.JavaMail.root at vms170033>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> "Exactly right. Isn't small government wonderful?" That's really not the
> problem. Many federal agencies, including the one I work at, have plenty
> of money and personnel. It's more a function of priorities and who sets
> them.
>
> Years ago when I was in a Master's program, one of the courses I took was
> Telecommunications Law taught at the George Mason University School of
> Law. It was taught by an adjunct professor who was an attorney at the FCC.
> I was the only engineer in the class. It was a fantastic class, the best
> one of the program! One of the things we looked at was expanding broadband
> access in the US. BPL was prominent at the time. I remember trying to make
> the case about its interference potential to existing services and I was
> basically told I hear you, your right, but you are barking up the wrong
> tree. It was clear many of the decisions were being made by policy types
> and not by people that understood its implications, especially the
> technical part. If BPL was going to be defeated, it would happen because
> it wasn't financially viable, not on technical merits, because it harmed
> existing services. Who could be against greater broadband access for the
> public? Are other services like guys with t
> heir ham radios and AM broadcast stations (who listens to AM) going to
> trump that objective?
>
> I'm more dubious about greater enforcement than some it appears. It's an
> uphill battle on many fronts. Aren't there powerline RFI cases that have
> gone unresolved for years because the FCC won't step in or won't enforce
> their own standards? Besides, how long have guys like K1MAN and KZ8O been
> on double secret probation, and nothing can be done about them?
>
> Ken K4ZW
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
> From: HAROLD SMITH JR <w0rihps at sbcglobal.net>
> To: David Raymond <daraymond at iowatelecom.net>, Bill Cromwell
> <wrcromwell at gmail.com>, "topband at contesting.com"
> <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Stacked verticals - followup
> Message-ID:
> <1378954868.24080.YahooMailNeo at web181503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hello Dave.
> Years ago, 70 or so. I was brought up in Marshall, MO. Television was't
> around.?
> We listened to WHO, KCMO and KMOX most of the time. My folks had a BIG?
> RCA Console with many metal tubes and covered BC, and 2 SW bands. Sure?
> wish I had it now.?
>
> 73 ?Price W0RI
>
>
>
> We have a Franklin antenna at WHO, 1040 KHZ, here in Des Moines.? I've
> been told it is one of the few remaining in the country.
>
> 73. . . Dave
> W0FLS
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Cromwell" <wrcromwell at gmail.com>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 12:34 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Stacked verticals - followup
>
>
>> Hi Ed,
>>
>> The engineer at WTIC responded. That station does not have a Franklin
>> antenna but has "series fed halfwave" during the day and switches in a
>> second one at night, phased to change the radiation pattern. He also told
>> me that their 'sister station', KDKA in Pittsburgh, does use a Franklin
>> antenna. Some members near Pittsburgh may want to roll by for a peek at
>> it.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Bill? KU8H
>>
>>
>> On 09/06/2013 04:13 PM, Edwin Karl wrote:
>>> There are several interesting articles if you Google "Franklin Antenna"
>>> they are mechanically BIG and require feeding ingenuity (hams are known
>>> for this feature ...) but are stacked verticals, note- phase the top
>>> element
>>> to avoid cancellation.
>>>
>>> If memory serves me right WTIC in Hartford phased two of these puppies,
>>> but it's been a long time ...
>>>
>>>
>>> 73!
>>>
>>> ed k0kl
>>> _________________
>>> Topband Reflector
>>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 9:57:13 +0000
> From: <rfoxwor1 at tampabay.rr.com>
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: The Quest to save AM radio
> Message-ID: <20130912095713.WGEQC.24505.root at hrndva-web13-z01>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Unlikely to ever get past the starting gate as AM Broadcast is a worldwide
> allocation and I'd think that many other nations have an opinion on this.
>
> 73 Bob k2euh
>
>
> ---- Mike Armstrong <armstrmj at aol.com> wrote:
>> Brad,
>>
>> *I* say.... GOOD, let them kill AM broadcast and give the band to US.....
>> we will put it to good use.... he he he he. Plus, since so many people
>> have AM broadcast receivers> _________________
>> Topband Reflector
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 05:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Eduardo Araujo <er_araujo at yahoo.com>
> To: Topband <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Measuring Vertical input parameters while installing
> radials
> Message-ID:
> <1378988901.91116.YahooMailNeo at web160704.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi everyone, I recently complete the installation of +100 1/4 radials for
> the 1/4 vertical.
>
> I measured input vertical parameters using AIM4170 from 1600 to 2000Kc
>
> I assumed it is not something new for many of you, but I wonder if the
> information I collected may be of interest for some of the group members.
>
> I have available for sharing BMP or JPG images of each scan which were run
> at 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 60 and +110 radials. Also, I have the .scn files for
> each scan which could be viewed using AIM4170 SW even though you don?t
> have the unit.
>
>
> The good thing looking at the files using the sw is that you can move the
> cursor and have all the values at all fcies from 1600-2000 Kc
>
> In case someone is interested, let me know and I will see the way to share
> it.
>
> ?73 to everyone.... Eddie, LU2DKT
>
> PS: By the way, what a nice toy the AIM !!!, Even though I bought it more
> than one year ago, this is the first time I use it
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:35:01 -0500
> From: "Richard Fry" <rfry at adams.net>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: More anecdotal "stories" to cause one to stop
> and....
> Message-ID: <4D0373FEE0024E75A5830E161C68B4ED at ToshLaptop>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Paul Christensen, W9AC wrote:
>>The surface wave tool most be used in conjunction with the normal modeling
>>application to get a complete and accurate vertical profile from 0 through
>>90 degrees.
>
> Agreed.
>
> That a vertical monopole 5/8 wavelength and less in height, using a less
> than perfect ground plane has a certain takeoff angle above the horizon
> where radiated field is maximum is a very common (almost universal) belief
> of ham radio operators This is based on the use of MoM software such as
> NEC
> to model only its far-field elevation pattern.
>
> The graphic below shows a different conclusion when considering the
> surface
> wave in NEC evaluations, for the parameters shown.
>
> The NEC far-field pattern for 0.1 km shows a maximum field intensity of
> 590
> mV/m at an elevation angle of 23 degrees (the assumed "takeoff angle").
> It
> also shows that the field at an elevation angle of 5 degrees is 348 mV/m.
>
> The NEC surface-wave pattern for 0.1 km shows that the maximum field lies
> in
> the horizontal plane rather than at 23 degrees, and is about 890 mV/m
> rather
> than 590 mV/m.
>
> The surface wave analysis also shows that the field radiated toward
> 5-degree
> elevation is about 850 mV/m, rather than the 348 mV/m shown by the
> far-field
> analysis. Of course, the ratios of these fields are even greater for
> elevation angles below 5 degrees, and infinite in the horizontal plane.
>
> It is true that at great distances from a vertical monopole, the radiation
> present at low vertical angles is much less than at higher angles. But
> that
> does not mean that the greater radiation directed at low elevations __as
> launched by the monopole__ no longer exists. The radiation toward an
> elevation angle of 5 degrees shown in the surface wave plot continues in
> essentially a straight line, to reach the ionosphere.
>
> It is the radiation launched at these low elevation angles that can
> provide
> the greatest single-hop range and fields for skywaves reaching that range,
> even though its existence might be unrecognized, or disregarded.
>
> http://s24.postimg.org/6nchfpt1h/NEC_FF_vs_NF_Calcs.jpg
>
> R. Fry
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 129, Issue 20
> ****************************************
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.3408 / Virus Database: 3222/6660 - Release Date: 09/12/13
>
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3408 / Virus Database: 3222/6660 - Release Date: 09/12/13
More information about the Topband
mailing list