Depends.
You could just keep adding radials when you can afford more copper until
things stop improving.
(Whatever "stop improving" means to you.)
Copper's expensive.

My SteppIR vertical is on an aluminum roof.
(Just my approach to the problem)

And Walt's right.
What is trivially obvious to us wasn't so in 1937.
Maxwell's equations weren't 100 years old yet.
It had only been a few years since Gibbs wrote them in the modern form we
use.
Radio was barely understood by only a few people.

73
H.

NQ5H
"Wayne" wrote in message
news:L0Nwg.5924$yN3.4270@trnddc04...
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