LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
Old January 26th 14, 03:22 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,067
Default antenna theory made easy

On 1/25/2014 10:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 20:46:48 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

On 1/25/2014 8:41 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 18:54:24 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

Not necessarily. Above ground, the radials provide only a (very low)
capacitive link to the ground. Below ground, they provide a direct link
to the soil. The effect creates a better ground plane for the antenna(s).
(...)
But an even more important point here is maintenance. It's very hard to
cut the grass when radials are above ground.

Not everyone agrees. See item #4:
http://lists.contesting.com/_topband/2002-04/msg00010.html


I'll go with the experts, instead of some amateur posting on the web.


Reminder: This is an amateur radio specific newsgroup.


So? Do the physics change for Amateur Radio stations? I don't think so.

AM radio stations wouldn't go to all of that expense if it weren't
worthwhile. And they have professionals advising them; ones with EE
degrees and years of experience.


Elevated Radial AM Antenna Grounding System by Nott Ltd
http://www.nottltd.com/amgroundsystems.html


I see their claims. But anyone can claim anything (you're proof of
that). I have yet to see any figures that prove elevated radiator
systems are significantly "better" than buried ones.

And additionally, there are other factors which you conveniently ignore.
Probably because you can't read - or are just choosing to ignore facts
which conflict with your ideas.

But that's nothing new, either - and just what a troll does.

A Closer Look at Vertical Antennas With Elevated Ground Systems
http://rudys.typepad.com/files/eleva...al-version.pdf


Ah, another non-professional opinion. But at least he admits results of
multiple tests conflict.

Perhaps there's another reason why AM stations bury their radials?
http://www.thebdr.net/articles/ops/xmtr/NewThreat.pdf
http://www.thebdr.net/articles/steel/gnd/FLAP1.pdf


I doubt that was a concern when most AM radio stations were installed.
How many new ones do you know of?

Besides that, there isn't that much of a market for #22 wire - all
that's really needed when you have lots of radials, even with a 5-10KW
station, because there is so little current through any one conductor
(although buried radials are typically larger just so they last longer).

But once again, you show your ignorance. Typical.


Claiming that I'm wrong (or ignorant) does not automatically prove
your point.


Nope, but it once again calls attention to your ignorance. But I also
know trolls hate to be proven wrong. You're a perfect example.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CENSORSHIP MADE EASY!!! N9OGL Policy 2 January 13th 06 07:56 PM
CENSORSHIP MADE EASY!!! N0VFP General 6 January 13th 06 07:56 PM
TOS'ing Wogie made easy Digital General 7 September 15th 05 01:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017