|
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
"Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)" wrote:
OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? Go long. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:18:34 -0400, "Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)"
wrote: So, what do I do next? Ask your neighbor where they got dispensation. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
"Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)" wrote in message .. . OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? Rick Check out some new builds in the area and see what earthing arrangements are being put in there. The new properties will obviously have to conform with the latest regulations. If the builders have to use a specially long drill rig, you might be able to bribe them to come and drill you a few new holes. Failing that, its welding a long tube onto whatever you have that will drill through granite and then spending a couple of days drilling downwards. Radio hams are supposed to be renowned for their ingenuity and determination when faced with tricky situations. Build an echosounder or ground resistivity meter and scour the plot looking for a crack you can drive rods down through? The possibilities for experimentation are endless. Mike G0ULI |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
Mike Kaliski wrote:
"Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)" wrote in message .. . OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? Rick Check out some new builds in the area and see what earthing arrangements are being put in there. The new properties will obviously have to conform with the latest regulations. If the builders have to use a specially long drill rig, you might be able to bribe them to come and drill you a few new holes. Failing that, its welding a long tube onto whatever you have that will drill through granite and then spending a couple of days drilling downwards. Radio hams are supposed to be renowned for their ingenuity and determination when faced with tricky situations. Build an echosounder or ground resistivity meter and scour the plot looking for a crack you can drive rods down through? The possibilities for experimentation are endless. What purpose would be served by putting a grounding rod in solid rock? All codes/regs I've seen have alternatives for special situations like this, such as buried plates or several horizontal, interconnected, buried rods. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:18:34 -0400, "Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)"
wrote: OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? My house came with 4-foot rods driven at an angle. I wasn't sure why until I tried driving an 8-foot rod straight down. It stopped at about one foot, even using a special ground rod driver from Glen Martin. So I put in a shorty rod, and attached a few buried wire radials, running them across the yard. Ya do what's ya got to do... If you try the Polyphaser web site, they have a pretty good technical paper on putting in a series of short rods. bob k5qwg |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
wrote in message ... Mike Kaliski wrote: "Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)" wrote in message .. . OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? Rick Check out some new builds in the area and see what earthing arrangements are being put in there. The new properties will obviously have to conform with the latest regulations. If the builders have to use a specially long drill rig, you might be able to bribe them to come and drill you a few new holes. Failing that, its welding a long tube onto whatever you have that will drill through granite and then spending a couple of days drilling downwards. Radio hams are supposed to be renowned for their ingenuity and determination when faced with tricky situations. Build an echosounder or ground resistivity meter and scour the plot looking for a crack you can drive rods down through? The possibilities for experimentation are endless. What purpose would be served by putting a grounding rod in solid rock? All codes/regs I've seen have alternatives for special situations like this, such as buried plates or several horizontal, interconnected, buried rods. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Jim Yes, you're absolutely right. I was just thinking about how to punch down through 8 feet of rock rather than the end purpose. Ground radials, plates or earth mats buried as well as possible in the soil make a lot more sense. Mike G0ULI |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
Mike Kaliski wrote:
wrote in message ... Mike Kaliski wrote: "Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)" wrote in message .. . OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? Rick Check out some new builds in the area and see what earthing arrangements are being put in there. The new properties will obviously have to conform with the latest regulations. If the builders have to use a specially long drill rig, you might be able to bribe them to come and drill you a few new holes. Failing that, its welding a long tube onto whatever you have that will drill through granite and then spending a couple of days drilling downwards. Radio hams are supposed to be renowned for their ingenuity and determination when faced with tricky situations. Build an echosounder or ground resistivity meter and scour the plot looking for a crack you can drive rods down through? The possibilities for experimentation are endless. What purpose would be served by putting a grounding rod in solid rock? All codes/regs I've seen have alternatives for special situations like this, such as buried plates or several horizontal, interconnected, buried rods. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Jim Yes, you're absolutely right. I was just thinking about how to punch down through 8 feet of rock rather than the end purpose. Ground radials, plates or earth mats buried as well as possible in the soil make a lot more sense. Mike G0ULI There are other conciderations as well such as is this an electrical ground to meet some code, a lightning protection ground to keep your insurance in force, or an RF ground to make your antenna work? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T) wrote:
OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? ====================================== Don't know your private land situation , but instead of the 'prescribed' 8ft rods you can obtain an excellent rf earthing system by covering an area with 'galvanised chicken wire mesh 'pegging the mesh to 1 or more short rods or stainless steel pins as used for the BBQ If you have a grass lawn in your garden cover an area ,the larger the better, with the above mesh. Within a few weeks ,if not earlier ,the grass will make the mesh invisible and you will be able to apply a lawnmower over the mesh to cut the grass. Ensure the mesh is well connected to a rod via a jubilee clip which also connected to the shortest possible length of insulated ,thick wire to the shack. The jubilee clip with mesh and wire connected should be protected against corrosion by means of self-amalgamating tape The wire mesh is also a good alternative to multiple radials when using a vertical antenna I remember the situation with a Butternut vertical antenna which initially only had 1 ground spike ,but when surrounded by wire mesh ,signal reports improved by 1 to 2 S-points. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
|
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
"Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)" wrote in message .. . OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? ok, the answer is: first, you get your electrician friend to install or update your grounding to meet the building code. that, by definition, takes care of electrical safety grounding. Second, you ask him this: "if i install an antenna (tell him tv antenna on a tower), how do i ground the tower, and how do i connect it to the existing ground". do what he says right outside your shack and consider that your lightning/rf ground improvement, this is where you connect your single point (equipotential as some people like the big term) ground for the shack entrance. NOTE: VERY IMPORTANT! any ground you do for lighting protection for antennas or for rf MUST be connected PROPERLY to your house power ground... this is not done through the 3rd prong on your power cords. nor is it done through a cold water pipe, nor a piece of 14ga wire wrapped around the ground rod. Third, if you put up a vertical or some other antenna requiring a ground screen to reduce losses that must also be connected the same way to your power ground. the shield of the coax is NOT sufficient. |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
Hey Guys,
Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
"Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T) wrote:
OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? I assume you're subject to the National Electrical Code in some version or another? What do you do? You use a Concrete Encased Grounding Electrode Dig trench, lay wire, fill with concrete, done. (The NEC also allows you to dig trench, lay your 8 foot rod sideways in the trench, and then backfill.. but the CEGE is a better ground) |
Quoted text
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote:
"Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:20:37 GMT, "Dave" wrote: "Rick" wrote in message ... Hey Guys, Being such technical experts as we all are, the concept of "quoted text" in newsgroup articles is far less complicated than any technical subject related to antennas or grounding. Simply, it means when replying to a newsgroup article, the quoted text is the text from the previous articles that you leave in your posting when you send it. Being that most of us read several of the articles in the thread at the same time we really do not need all of the previous article to see what you are talking about. In fact only a few lines would show us what portion of the text you are commenting on if even that. When you quote the entire article, we have to hunt through it to see where you are placing your comments or scroll all the way to the bottom to see where your few lines of info lie. I just received a 78 line article where the poster added 3 lines of his own data.......... If you find this subject difficult to understand, all I am saying is when you reply to a posting, just highlight all or most of the previous material and hit the delete key. Not really difficult. Thanks, Rick K2XT and when you completely change the topic (in this case from ledge to a news group scolding) you should change the message topic, like the previous poster did. Oh you're right. I got it now. But you didn't. Actually I didn't change the topic. I posted it in the newsgroup where the offenders were, so they might see it. I'm not trying to start a fight, just improve things a little. Rick |
But we're built on a ledge! (was "Question on grounding rods")
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:18:34 -0400, "Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T)"
wrote: OK, per the thread on "Question on grounding rods", I'm supposed to use 8-foot grounding rods rather than twice as many 4-foot rods. I can see that. But, we're built on a ledge, one big wide rock that stretches from the seacoast to the Vermont state line (that's why they call New Hampshire the "Granite State"). I can get three feet depth at best before running into solid rock. An electrician friend of mine says I can drive the ground rod in at a 45-degree angle, but that would still run an 8-foot ground rod to a depth of more than 5.5 feet below the surface. Can't be done. So, what do I do next? At 2300 feet up a big hunk of granite in southern VT, we have only about 1 foot of surface soil, below which it is all low grade granite. The house was constructed with a Ufer grounding system. Out at the tower, we installed a system of radial wires from the tower base to get whatever ground we could. All of the antennas here are balanced, and we get out quite well on all bands. The antennas think they are a thousand feet up, and I have good directionality even out of the 40 meter beam when the crank up is fully retracted. Raising the tower is only needed for getting the above the surrounding trees. One of the things that I observe as a result of living/operating from a high ground resistance location is that it seems that we seldom get nearby lightning ground strokes. They seem to hit down in the valley where the soil is more conductive. |
Quoted text
I am glad that you did not also lecture us on the additional elements of
posting style http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting#Top-posting "Rick" wrote in message ... [snip] Oh you're right. I got it now. But you didn't. Actually I didn't change the topic. I posted it in the newsgroup where the offenders were, so they might see it. I'm not trying to start a fight, just improve things a little. Rick |
Quoted text
"John, N9JG" wrote in message . net... I am glad that you did not also lecture us on the additional elements of posting style http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting#Top-posting "Rick" wrote in message ... [snip] Oh you're right. I got it now. But you didn't. Actually I didn't change the topic. I posted it in the newsgroup where the i prefer middle posting. offenders were, so they might see it. I'm not trying to start a fight, just improve things a little. Rick |
Quoted text
I much prefer your example of posting an opinion as opposed to giving us a
sermon. "Dave" wrote in message news:fyUli.30$yx4.22@trndny08... "John, N9JG" wrote in message . net... I am glad that you did not also lecture us on the additional elements of posting style http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting#Top-posting "Rick" wrote in message ... [snip] Oh you're right. I got it now. But you didn't. Actually I didn't change the topic. I posted it in the newsgroup where the i prefer middle posting. offenders were, so they might see it. I'm not trying to start a fight, just improve things a little. Rick |
Quoted text
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:10:05 +0000, Rick wrote:
Oh you're right. I got it now. But you didn't. Actually I didn't change the topic. I posted it in the newsgroup where the offenders were, so they might see it. I'm not trying to start a fight, just improve things a little. Good evening, Rick. Well, I (and presumably others) would have been a lot happier if you hadn't done it by "hijacking" the "we're on a ledge" thread. When you do a followup (reply) to a topic and just change the topic, it messes up threaded newsreaders big time, so that now every time a new article comes in on the "Quoted text" thread, I get a notification that something came in on my "we're built on a ledge" thread when it's really a completely different topic entirely. In the future please, PLEASE start a new thread rather than replying to an old one if you're going to change the topic. Thanks... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com