I just want to thank all of you for your kindness and speediness in pointing
out my error as a new vertical antenna user. I am glad several of you had a
laugh on me for burying tuned radials. Thank you for your kindness and
courtesy. Hope to catch each and every one of you on the bands. I am
grateful for the tact and diplomacy that many of you showed me. True Ham
Spirit at it's best.

Based on what I have been told by the gentlemen in this great group I could
have used much shorter radials than any "tuned length". If that is right
then I have achieved a much more effective radial system then what I would
have had I not erred. Is this right? In other words I have more wire in the
ground then I need..right? Now if that is so..does that hurt or help

TY Roy

73 / DX

--

Charlie
Ham Radio - AD5TH
www.ad5th.com
Live Blues Music
www.492acousticblues.com




"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 13:23:24 -0600, "Charlie"
wrote:

|What about the Hustler antenna instructions which provide the "correct
|lengths" for cutting radials? Moreover they need not be "buried 2 inches"
in
|the ground but can safely remain on the ground once grass growth
effectively
|buries them. Also DX Engineering www.dxengineering.com has ground radials
|for sale which are "pre-cut to length". I assume they know what they are
|doing.

Of course they do.... they are separating fools from their money.

|Force 12 also recommends using "tuned radials" with their line of
|vertical antennas. I assume they too know more about antennas then I do.

I'm sure. And they say, among other things (including some
advertising hype) at:

http://force12inc.com/brvinfo.htm

"The most efficient radial system is one that is elevated above
ground." Only then, does it pay (or matter) to tune the radials.

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 21:18:45 -0600, "Charlie"
wrote:

I just want to thank all of you for your kindness and speediness in pointing
out my error as a new vertical antenna user. I am glad several of you had a
laugh on me for burying tuned radials

Don't feel bad Charlie, we read the book. G

I would really suggest you consider purchasing the current edition of
the ARRL Antenna book. There is a whole chapter (3) devoted to the
effects of ground. You'll find in more reliable information in that
book than you ever see in antenna manufacturers' statements and
claims.

Oh, yes when it comes to radials you can't have too much wire in the
ground, but you can hit the wall of diminishing returns.

Bust of luck and 73
Danny, K6MHE

Nobody's laughing at you -- it's a topic that's very poorly understood.

Here's how it works with buried radials. . .

It never hurts to make them longer. But beyond some distance, it doesn't
help appreciably -- if the current on a radial has dropped to a
negligible value at its end, extending it won't do anything.

What is this distance? Well, like so many other things, the only really
honest answer is that it depends. As it turns out, the current fades
more rapidly if you have only a few radials. So if you only have a few,
it doesn't help to make them super long. If you have a lot (say, 60 or
more), increasing the length has more effect -- but your system will
already be so efficient that it won't make much difference.

The classic set of measurements of various ground systems was published
in 1937 as "Ground Systems as a Factor in Antenna Efficiency" by Brown,
Lewis, and Epstein. Their paper has many graphs of the effectiveness of
various combinations of radial lengths and number of radials for various
vertical heights -- for the particular ground at the place of their
experiments, the characteristics of which weren't recorded. Their data
have been interpreted and reorganized countless times and in countless
ways -- a web search should bring you a lot of hits. But some rules of
thumb (and only rules of thumb) for amateurs(*) emerge:

1. There's not much point in making radials much longer than a
free-space quarter wavelength or so.

2. Increasing the number of radials from 16 to 120 or more will probably
net you less than a couple of dB. That might be worth it to you, it
might not.

These assume more-or-less average soil. If your soil is very dry, you
might benefit from more and/or longer radials.

And of course, there's no point in fussing over exact lengths. There's
no need to even make them the same length. Put down what you can and
don't worry about it. Putting in more won't hurt, nor will making them
longer. But you're not likely to notice much difference between a big
installation and a fairly simple one, unless your ground is
extraordinarily poor.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

(*) An increase in field strength of a few percent is a worthwhile
pursuit for AM broadcasters, because it increases the size of their
audience and hence the value of their advertising. Small increments like
that are completely useless for amateurs, though, so our goals are
somewhat different. Keep that in mind when looking through various
analyses and recommendations, since most are oriented toward broadcasters.


Charlie wrote:
I just want to thank all of you for your kindness and speediness in pointing
out my error as a new vertical antenna user. I am glad several of you had a
laugh on me for burying tuned radials. Thank you for your kindness and
courtesy. Hope to catch each and every one of you on the bands. I am
grateful for the tact and diplomacy that many of you showed me. True Ham
Spirit at it's best.

Based on what I have been told by the gentlemen in this great group I could
have used much shorter radials than any "tuned length". If that is right
then I have achieved a much more effective radial system then what I would
have had I not erred. Is this right? In other words I have more wire in the
ground then I need..right? Now if that is so..does that hurt or help

TY Roy

73 / DX

Thanks Roy for a great yet concise answer to this matter. I misunderstood
about tuned radials. I wish I would have done more then a cursory look at
the matter. Basically all I saw was "tuned radials" and "you can't have too
many". Had I read more I would have eventually seen that buried radials need
not be tuned and that a 1/4 lambda would have been adequate. I have over
1300 ft of radials! Don't ask what my pre-cut "tuned radials" cost me!! I
made sure I had plenty and now that this cabbage is boiled I am glad to see
at least I did not do my station a disservice. Most importantly I learned
something.I am not a new ham but am new to this vertical antenna scene.

I am aware of your reputation in this field Roy and I appreciate your warm,
courteous and most of all informative replies. 73 / DX

--

Charlie
Ham Radio - AD5TH
www.ad5th.com
Live Blues Music
www.492acousticblues.com




"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
Nobody's laughing at you -- it's a topic that's very poorly understood.

Here's how it works with buried radials. . .

It never hurts to make them longer. But beyond some distance, it doesn't
help appreciably -- if the current on a radial has dropped to a negligible
value at its end, extending it won't do anything.

What is this distance? Well, like so many other things, the only really
honest answer is that it depends. As it turns out, the current fades more
rapidly if you have only a few radials. So if you only have a few, it
doesn't help to make them super long. If you have a lot (say, 60 or more),
increasing the length has more effect -- but your system will already be
so efficient that it won't make much difference.

The classic set of measurements of various ground systems was published in
1937 as "Ground Systems as a Factor in Antenna Efficiency" by Brown,
Lewis, and Epstein. Their paper has many graphs of the effectiveness of
various combinations of radial lengths and number of radials for various
vertical heights -- for the particular ground at the place of their
experiments, the characteristics of which weren't recorded. Their data
have been interpreted and reorganized countless times and in countless
ways -- a web search should bring you a lot of hits. But some rules of
thumb (and only rules of thumb) for amateurs(*) emerge:

1. There's not much point in making radials much longer than a free-space
quarter wavelength or so.

2. Increasing the number of radials from 16 to 120 or more will probably
net you less than a couple of dB. That might be worth it to you, it might
not.

These assume more-or-less average soil. If your soil is very dry, you
might benefit from more and/or longer radials.

And of course, there's no point in fussing over exact lengths. There's no
need to even make them the same length. Put down what you can and don't
worry about it. Putting in more won't hurt, nor will making them longer.
But you're not likely to notice much difference between a big installation
and a fairly simple one, unless your ground is extraordinarily poor.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

(*) An increase in field strength of a few percent is a worthwhile pursuit
for AM broadcasters, because it increases the size of their audience and
hence the value of their advertising. Small increments like that are
completely useless for amateurs, though, so our goals are somewhat
different. Keep that in mind when looking through various analyses and
recommendations, since most are oriented toward broadcasters.


Charlie wrote:
I just want to thank all of you for your kindness and speediness in
pointing out my error as a new vertical antenna user. I am glad several
of you had a laugh on me for burying tuned radials. Thank you for your
kindness and courtesy. Hope to catch each and every one of you on the
bands. I am grateful for the tact and diplomacy that many of you showed
me. True Ham Spirit at it's best.

Based on what I have been told by the gentlemen in this great group I
could have used much shorter radials than any "tuned length". If that is
right then I have achieved a much more effective radial system then what
I would have had I not erred. Is this right? In other words I have more
wire in the ground then I need..right? Now if that is so..does that hurt
or help

TY Roy

73 / DX

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 21:18:45 -0600, "Charlie"
wrote:

|I just want to thank all of you for your kindness and speediness in pointing
|out my error as a new vertical antenna user. I am glad several of you had a
|laugh on me for burying tuned radials. Thank you for your kindness and
|courtesy. Hope to catch each and every one of you on the bands. I am
|grateful for the tact and diplomacy that many of you showed me. True Ham
|Spirit at it's best.
|
|Based on what I have been told by the gentlemen in this great group I could
|have used much shorter radials than any "tuned length". If that is right
|then I have achieved a much more effective radial system then what I would
|have had I not erred. Is this right? In other words I have more wire in the
|ground then I need..right? Now if that is so..does that hurt or help

I haven't followed this thread since its inception, but I did read
comments from you such as: "If length means nothing I could have gone
with 6 inch radials if I followed your logic...eh?" and "You're
entitled to your opinion on this seemingly controversial topic."

This came across as an attitude problem (further exemplified by your
sarcasm above) that precluded gentler handling of your inexperience,
by me anyway.

In the future, I suggest a more receptive attitude on your part might
elicit less hostile advice.

You did do a great installation job, however, and while you expended
more effort than necessary, it is not for naught.

Thanks for the kind words Wes.
Please fax me a copy of your medical credentials and I'll more genuinely
consider your diagnosis.
Most of the others have been courteous and respectful. Maybe you were absent
that day....73

--

Charlie
Ham Radio - AD5TH
www.ad5th.com
Live Blues Music
www.492acousticblues.com




"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 21:18:45 -0600, "Charlie"
wrote:

|I just want to thank all of you for your kindness and speediness in
pointing
|out my error as a new vertical antenna user. I am glad several of you had
a
|laugh on me for burying tuned radials. Thank you for your kindness and
|courtesy. Hope to catch each and every one of you on the bands. I am
|grateful for the tact and diplomacy that many of you showed me. True Ham
|Spirit at it's best.
|
|Based on what I have been told by the gentlemen in this great group I
could
|have used much shorter radials than any "tuned length". If that is right
|then I have achieved a much more effective radial system then what I
would
|have had I not erred. Is this right? In other words I have more wire in
the
|ground then I need..right? Now if that is so..does that hurt or help

I haven't followed this thread since its inception, but I did read
comments from you such as: "If length means nothing I could have gone
with 6 inch radials if I followed your logic...eh?" and "You're
entitled to your opinion on this seemingly controversial topic."

This came across as an attitude problem (further exemplified by your
sarcasm above) that precluded gentler handling of your inexperience,
by me anyway.

In the future, I suggest a more receptive attitude on your part might
elicit less hostile advice.

You did do a great installation job, however, and while you expended
more effort than necessary, it is not for naught.

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 11:30:51 -0600, "Charlie"
wrote:

|Thanks for the kind words Wes.
|Please fax me a copy of your medical credentials and I'll more genuinely
|consider your diagnosis.
|Most of the others have been courteous and respectful. Maybe you were absent
|that day....

Perhaps. But I can be as kind and courteous as the next guy when it
is reciprocal. Over one hundred hams got their Novice tickets via
classes that I taught at the local community college and I *never* had
a complaint about disrespecting any of them because of their
ignorance. Some of them even repeated the course just for the fun of
it...and I might add they were paying tuition. Likewise the tech
course I taught at the local Air Force base and the grad students I
tutored in a microwave measurements course my boss taught at the U of
Az.

That said, if one of them had told me "You're entitled to your opinion
on this seemingly controversial topic", I would have shown him the
door. I actually like helping the inexperienced, but I don't suffer
fools gladly.