On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Richard Fry r...@adams.net wrote:
Note that the NEC4.2 analysis I generated and linked at
http://s20.postimg.org/6hfsl64ml/Elevated_vs_Buried_Radials.jpg closely
replicates the measured results of a real-world monopole system elevated
4.9 meters above the
A response to David Raymond's questions on elevated monopole systems
was posted to the listserver on Jan 22, 2014 (link below).
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00189.html
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Guy Olinger wrote:
...the presentation shows the max of the four elevated at *minus* 1.17,
while the buried radials are minus 0.71. That means the 4 elevated are
about a half dB inferior to dense buried.
The text of my post first including the URL for my NEC study (link below)
stated that
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 7:07 AM, Richard Fry r...@adams.net wrote:
But that wasn't necessary to make the point that the system with elevated
radials installed over poor earth having no buried radials in it has
essentially the same performance as the system using 120 x 1/4-wave radials
I'd like to understand how NEC 4 achieves this calibration for MW BC
ground systems.
Do others share this concern? What errors are introduced for other
analysis as a result?
Grant KZ1W
On 1/24/2014 1:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
I have already stipulated many times that NEC
4 is
Guy Olinger postulated for a while, then wrote:
... Run the four elevated over the radial field. ...
You posted that you have NEC4, Mr Olinger. Why not do that yourself then,
rather than ask someone else to do it for you? Post your results and the
bases for them, as I have done for my
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Richard
Fry
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 7:26 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Anyone purchased the ARRL book on Short Antennas
for160???
Guy Olinger postulated for a while, then wrote:
... Run
Guy Olinger wrote:
Careful here ... The presence of 0.4 wavelength buried radials turns the
ground underneath from the typically inferior Carolina medium into a
superior composite medium. Use of four elevated radials **over that
composite medium** is far superior to four elevated over 2-3-4
It would be interesting to see the same modelling over nonconductive
rock earth. I suspect once the soil gets bad enough that there is
essentially no electron mobility the ground plane (elevated radials)
antenna begins to act as if it was in free space - or at least a
substantial fraction of a
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Richard Fry r...@adams.net wrote:
Guy Olinger wrote:
Careful here ... The presence of 0.4 wavelength buried radials turns the
ground underneath from the typically inferior Carolina medium into a
superior composite medium. Use of four elevated radials **over
Guy Olinger posted:
NEC 4.x ground calculation is *tuned* for the *money* paradigm, the
commercial MF BC paradigm. It underestimates ground loss where radials
would not be accepted as kosher by the FCC. ... Just don't equate NEC
to natural law.
Some may believe/promote the concept that
The first permanent use of an elevated radial ground system appears to be
at WPCI, 1490 kHz in Greenville, South Carolina. This installation,
designed by William A. Culpepper, involved replacing a standard buried
system with a four wire elevated system consisting of #10 solid copper
wire,
C. Cunningham wrote:
If you get up to 4 symmetrical elevated radials there's not much to be
gained by adding more. There's been a lot of work done in the broadcast
industry using elevated radials to replace deteriorated buried radial
fields that shows that pretty clearly. It was published in
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Richard Fry r...@adams.net wrote:
The first permanent use of an elevated radial ground system appears to be
at WPCI, 1490 kHz in Greenville, South Carolina. This installation,
designed by William A. Culpepper, involved replacing a standard buried
system with a
Dave W0FLS wrote:
With the radials being 4.9 meters above ground, do the radials literally
come up to the tower and then travel down the leg to connect to the ground
side of the insulator or do they travel in close to the tower and angle
downward?
From the text of that paper, it appears that
I live on a former AM BC site, and cannot see any way that you could
put up
4 elevated radials and disconnect the ground system that was in place.
The ground system here is typical installation and it is bonded with 4 inch
copper strap to everything and anything in sight. The tuning networks
Guy Olinger wrote (responding to a quote from me that he included):
Such characteristics would apply to the use of elevated radial systems by
ham radio operators as well as they do for AM broadcast stations.
Such a statement requires qualification if the basis of the BC experience
includes
No doubt!
Charlie, K4OTV
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Merv
Schweigert
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 2:08 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Anyone purchased the ARRL book on Short Antennas
for160???
I live
A very respected authority on radial systems, Rudy Severns N6LF, has this
to say about 4 elevated radials:
Since my QST article I've done some modeling to explore the sensitivity of
a simple 4-radial system to asymmetries in the radial fan. The modeling
easily replicates Weber's results and the
However, I did run into an antenna design that was significantly different
(to me, anyway) last month, in an old article about inverted-Ls by L.B.
Cebik. He showed an inverted-L fed at the transition from vertical to
horizontal. Open-wire line ran down and away from it at a 45 degree angle.
Wouldn't feeding it up high in the corner like that at least eliminate the
need for radials?
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:
... an inverted-L fed at the transition from vertical to horizontal.
Open-wire line ran down and away from it at
I've built them for 40 and 80 via his modeling years ago. Fed both up high, and
both down low. High feed 'seemed better', but no real way to tell. Worked a RU
station on 80 from KL7 so they do emit a signal. It was a good aerial, easy to
build, with some vertical component to the pattern.
On
Oh, I left out the RU was in Antarctica.
73, Gary NL7Y
I've built them for 40 and 80 via his modeling years ago. Fed both up high,
and both down low. High feed 'seemed better', but no real way to tell. Worked
a RU station on 80 from KL7 so they do emit a signal. It was a good aerial,
the ARRL book on Short Antennas
for160???
Wouldn't feeding it up high in the corner like that at least eliminate the
need for radials?
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:
... an inverted-L fed at the transition from vertical to horizontal.
Open
That's a good one for 80m from KL7! FB!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary and
Kathleen Pearse
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:22 PM
To: topband List
Subject: Re: Topband: Anyone purchased the ARRL book
The only real way to tell is have one of each, and do many instant A-B
comparisons over a period of time.
I just have two 10'+ high elevated radials on my bottom-fed L. It seems to
work well, but I should add more radials this summer. And that's what
I'll probably do before I ever build one of
, January 21, 2014 10:28 PM
To: topband List
Subject: Re: Topband: Anyone purchased the ARRL book on Short Antennas
for160???
The only real way to tell is have one of each, and do many instant A-B
comparisons over a period of time.
I just have two 10'+ high elevated radials on my bottom-fed L
Found paper logs from July 1997…it was VP8CTR on 3796 SSB at our SR, and a
Ukranian base not RU. Still, Cebik's L worked.
73, Gary NL7Y
That's a good one for 80m from KL7! FB!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
Oh, I left out the RU was in Antarctica.
_
Topband Reflector Archives -
The real key is symmetrical, according to the stuff I re-read earlier
today by Rudy, N6LF and K9YC.
Mine aren't symmetrical. The N radial is straight; but the S radial has to
zig-zag, because I'm too close the neighbor's pasture fence. The current is
almost certainly different on each radial.
On 1/21/2014 5:36 PM, Tom W8JI wrote:
When the antenna is less than 1/2 wave long, and if we do not change
the antenna configuration, we can move the feedline around in an
antenna until we turn blue and the only thing that changes is feed
impedance.
AND, potentially, moving the feedpoint
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Charlie Cunningham
charlie-cunning...@nc.rr.com wrote:
There's been a lot of work done in the broadcast
industry using elevated radials to replace deteriorated buried radial
fields
that shows that pretty clearly. It was published in some IEEE transactions
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Mike Waters mikew...@gmail.com wrote:
Wouldn't feeding it up high in the corner like that at least eliminate the
need for radials?
Yeah, but this is 160, and if you can get the bend up 75 feet or so you are
feeding a half-size doublet that consists only of a
I have yet to hear about a ham who had 120 buried bare radials
underneath his two raised radials.
ON4UN's original 80 meter wire 4-square hug around his 160 meter
tower came close to that description. The 4 square had a single
elevated radial for each 80 meter element but they were all over
Thanks, Guy.
If I ever try this, it will very likely be on 80m first, and each half will
be 1/4 wave.
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV olin...@bellsouth.netwrote:
Wouldn't feeding it up high in the corner like that at least eliminate the
need for
Oh, OK. That should have worked. And note who you're talking about. :)
But have you heard of a ham that had 120 1/4 wave bare buried around his
130' insulated tower, and then switched to two raised radials with the 120
left in place.
Commercial BC is in the fix of having to maintain the field
That's certainly true!
Charlie, K4OTV
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Guy
Olinger K2AV
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 11:59 PM
To: Joe Subich, W4TV
Cc: TopBand List
Subject: Re: Topband: Anyone purchased the ARRL book on Short
36 matches
Mail list logo
