View Single Post
  #22   Report Post  
Old April 10th 07, 12:07 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Richard Clark Richard Clark is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,951
Default high earth resistance

On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:27:21 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

So, does the current go clockwise or counterclockwise? How much goes
that way compared to the radial component? Where can I find a
quantitative or explicit statement of your interpretation?


Hi Roy,

Probably in a library. Field work seems to resolve issues too. It
may even prove your speculation in contradiction to mine. Outside of
these authors, we both seem to be shy of "authoritative references" to
parse that Byzantine statement of theirs.

I can only further speculate that BL&H were remiss in specifically
quantifying loss (you aren't asking me for numbers you are already
aware of, are you?), while offering numerous formulaic relationships
of loss against many factors. If we look at their data and observe
that adding radials lowers loss, but not by any precise relationship,
are we left without quantifiable proof, or the obvious implication of
strong correlation? Was there deceit in their arriving at some
conclusions through inference? As Reggie would note, they didn't
actually measure earth at all! Such a retort was met with indignity
in the past, is it now their impeachment?

However, as to counter/anti/clockwise, What impels current to follow
any such presumption? There are two sides to every wire laying in a
plane and phase mappings for earth currents that are symmetrical about
them. To anticipate your challenging me on that statement (clearly
BL&H never, explicitly say this), I can only offer a modest sense of
observing the bleeding obvious. Myself, I don't find BL&H so obscure
to impose this remarkable characteristic that current leaves the wire
on only one side.

Brown, Lewis and Epstein were REPORTING, not inventing, nor offering
pedant readings of scripture. Scribes, such as we are, are free to
interpret within the bounds of their own data, assumptions, and
conclusions. I've offered mine that conforms to many of their points.
If you have your own, you must survive by the same strictures. Given
the specific contention, I am especially intrigued in how you would
answer why the current departed the wire, and where it goes in light
of a potential map created by the phase shifts.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC