Frank wrote:

Certainly, all valid points. I was more interested in actually doing
precise measurements, but considered it might improve my model accuracy. I
even thought of digging a hole to see how the soil varied. Doubt I would
have dug down 20 or 30 ft. Most of the ground here is clay, and then
probably bedrock, at this elevation of just over 4,000 ft ASL. Ansoft's
HFSS, or CST, could probably handle an accurate, stratified, ground model.

Do a web search for "OWL" (qualifying it with ground
conductivity-related terms to cut down the references to the bird and
other contexts). I believe it stands for "open wire line", and the last
I heard, was the standard way of measuring RF ground conductivity. It
involves a buried open wire line, but that's about all I know about it.

There's certainly nothing wrong with learning to measure ground
characteristics as an educational process. No matter what seemingly
useless learning exercise I undertake, I ultimately learn many other
things from it. By all means, go for it.

I'd love to see some results from one of the good field solving programs
for stratified grounds, even something contrived, and even a simple
vertical with buried or elevated ground system. What I'd like to know is
whether there really is a single value you could assign to a single
homogeneous ground and get the same results. I suspect not, but have no
proof one way or the other.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL