These are very good points. I am reading these postings to try to
understand the behavior of actual implementations that lie somewhere between
the extremes you pointed out. In other words, what gets you the most bang
for the buck.... How fast does performance change with increased radial
length and number of radials.


"H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" wrote in message
...
I'm often confronted with problems as a physicist where one can only get a
handle on upper and lower bounds.
Lower bound:
I'd say the minimum number and length of radials is 3 (must define a
plane) and 1/4 wavelength (satisfies boundary conditions).

Upper (infinite sheet of copper)
As Walt and Reg have debated, the "Cleese extreme" (to steal from Reg's
post) is trying to duplicate the "infinite perfectly conducting plane" of
our elementary physics books.
Cheers and beers
H.

73, NQ5H