On 11/15/12, topband-requ...@contesting.com <topband-requ...@contesting.com> wrote: > Send Topband mailing list submissions to > topband@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-requ...@contesting.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > topband-ow...@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 (f6...@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" <k...@myfairpoint.net> > To: <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <F5BC8F70C52D476694CE2BE912E88935@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 <mikew...@gmail.com> > To: topband <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: > <CA+FxYXirr=29fj9bxrzbcsgdf0etxvjwhbkfwfx3ltprofu...@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: <f6...@orange.fr> > To: <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Topband: V84SMD > Message-ID: <E78CF15B16674BE698FA0BE0A3417015@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 <deswy...@xplornet.ca> > To: "Bruce" <k...@myfairpoint.net> > Cc: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <8ee4bc3d-15b0-4057-b75a-5070e4248...@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" <k...@myfairpoint.net> > To: <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <72EA53E9269C4ADDAAD07CAA350B3857@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" <mikew...@gmail.com> >> To: "topband" <topband@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@contesting.com >>> >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:11:16 -0330 > From: Frank Davis <fda...@nfld.net> > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Topband: Pennant Transformer > Message-ID: <63c3e0da-8ff0-4c2e-a950-c6a4bf02e...@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@contesting.com > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:02:37 -0500 > From: Eddy Swynar <deswy...@xplornet.ca> > To: Bruce <k...@myfairpoint.net> > Cc: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <0683266c-fb44-460a-a485-79550bddd...@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" <k...@myfairpoint.net> > To: "Eddy Swynar" <deswy...@xplornet.ca>, <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <9F0E40D958ED4031B774C372200D8AC4@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@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 <mikew...@gmail.com> > To: Bruce <k...@myfairpoint.net>, topband <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: > <ca+fxyxjxcneymydt1ce_oduzodyqfxlx+iwgenmlxqmzo5-...@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 <k...@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" <w...@w8ji.com> > To: "Bruce" <k...@myfairpoint.net>, <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <BEE137A3C8314A9C8D460191D2D6BC56@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 <bria...@yahoo.com> > To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Topband: Limiters - not T/R Relays > Message-ID: > <1353007502.55434.yahoomail...@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" <k...@myfairpoint.net> > To: "Tom W8JI" <w...@w8ji.com>, <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <087AFA2B26484A56AA74B82A1C7018F7@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" <w...@w8ji.com> > To: "Bruce" <k...@myfairpoint.net>; <topband@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@contesting.com >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:16:05 -0800 > From: "Rick Karlquist" <rich...@karlquist.com> > To: "Brian Moran" <bria...@yahoo.com> > Cc: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Limiters - not T/R Relays > Message-ID: > <e7badfd32924d77a5f0c5ff2670d7777.squir...@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" <w...@w8ji.com> > To: "Bruce" <k...@myfairpoint.net>, <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <B6C49A80FEAC48AAA552F08284549472@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 <gran...@pacbell.net> > To: Tom W8JI <w...@w8ji.com>, topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: TX/ RX Antenna Switching > Message-ID: <50a556be.9020...@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@contesting.com >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:11:56 -0800 > From: "Bruce" <k...@myfairpoint.net> > To: "Tom W8JI" <w...@w8ji.com>, <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <948C073A949F46219BD89549CA829ADF@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" <w...@w8ji.com> > To: "Bruce" <k...@myfairpoint.net>; <topband@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@contesting.com >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:04:13 -0500 > From: "Gary Smith" <g...@ka1j.com> > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Covered /bare antennn wire > Message-ID: <50a566dd.24175.1bd7...@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@contesting.com >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 18 > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:19:27 -0500 > From: "ZR" <z...@jeremy.mv.com> > To: "Pete Smith N4ZR" <n...@contesting.com>, <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground > Message-ID: <D0798D261763464487422596802DC938@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" <n...@contesting.com> > To: <topband@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 <k...@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@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@contesting.com >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Topband reflector - topband@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 <wh...@hawaii.rr.com> > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 230+ QSLs On LOW Dipole - There's Hope! > Message-ID: <445187ef-bf62-4b0c-83ba-ff96c7309...@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" <z...@jeremy.mv.com> > To: <rich...@karlquist.com>, "Brian Moran" <bria...@yahoo.com> > Cc: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Limiters - not T/R Relays > Message-ID: <F99D795286E74365A846BF36C1E35C07@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" <rich...@karlquist.com> > To: "Brian Moran" <bria...@yahoo.com> > Cc: <topband@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@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 <p...@n1bug.com> > To: ZR <z...@jeremy.mv.com> > Cc: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground > Message-ID: <50a581b8.5020...@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_...@msn.com> > To: N1BUG <p...@n1bug.com>, ZR <z...@jeremy.mv.com> > Cc: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground > Message-ID: <snt002-w5916f6f992f2e5b53f97eff0...@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: p...@n1bug.com >> To: z...@jeremy.mv.com >> CC: topband@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@contesting.com > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 23 > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 19:29:04 -0500 > From: George Dubovsky <n4ua...@gmail.com> > To: James Rodenkirch <rodenkirch_...@msn.com> > Cc: ZR <z...@jeremy.mv.com>, "topband@contesting.com" > <topband@contesting.com>, N1BUG <p...@n1bug.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground > Message-ID: > <caalhbryy29z817+uwxfm0bxqwwtwtfpbgvp2svbzcm8cqyg...@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_...@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: p...@n1bug.com >> > To: z...@jeremy.mv.com >> > CC: topband@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@contesting.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Topband mailing list > Topband@contesting.com > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband > > > ------------------------------ > > End of Topband Digest, Vol 119, Issue 18 > **************************************** > _______________________________________________ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com