![]() |
Noise level between two ant types
Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
This makes the choices quite complex, and makes generalization impossible. Quote an example, and someone else will quote you a counter-example. Seems the assertion should be that precipitation noise can exist on some antennas but not on others. Just one other thing: PLEASE let's not talk about elements being "grounded", way up there at the top of a tower. How about "DC grounded"? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
People actually seem to think the little particles voving through the air charge the antenna to a different potential than the air around the antenna, and that a "dc" path to earth or "dc" path around an element somehow magically stops RF noise. Please don't accuse people of believing in magic until you understand the physics involved. There's no magic involved. Dry-air dust and snow particles certainly can transfer a charge to an uninsulated wire in the air. It is simple physics to realize that when a highly charged particle touches a conductor, the charges between the two objects will be equalized. It would be magic if the particle and the wire did NOT equalize their charges by transferring excess differential charge when they come into contact. Given a dipole where one element has a DC path to ground and the other element is floating with respect to ground, it is reasonable to expect the charge between the two elements to be different and they often are. The difference in charge will build up to the point where the smallest gap between the two conductors arcs. In my configuration in the Arizona desert, that gap existed at the coax connector at the transceiver and it did indeed arc badly. It woke me up and scorched my rug after I disconnected it from my transceiver. The arc was bright enough to light up the room and certainly caused RF noise. The wind was blowing around 30 mph and there wasn't a cloud in the sky. Given an extreme relative charge between the element with a DC path to ground and the element without a DC path to ground, anything that will bleed off that charge will cure the problem. An RF choke works. A 4:1 voltage balun works. A resistor works. Perhaps we can convince a desert ham to hang an o'scope on a clear-sky, dry-air system on a windy day and report back here with some results. Many other hams have reported the same thing during a dry-air snow storm. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
People actually seem to think the little particles voving through the air charge the antenna to a different potential than the air around the antenna, and that a "dc" path to earth or "dc" path around an element somehow magically stops RF noise. Let's say we have the following bare-wire dipole system link coupled to the receiver (in fixed font). | | dipole element A link coupled | -////- +--------------------------------------------------///////--+ | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | | dipole element B | Let's assume one highly charged particle hits dipole element A and transfers half of its charge. Element A will then have an excess charge one half of which will migrate through the link while equalizing the charge between element A and element B. That charge migration/equalization no doubt results in an RF noise pulse. This experiment can easily be performed by anyone. Rub one's leather soles on a wool carpet, touch one side of the dipole, and listen for noise in the receiver. Guaranteed, it will be there. Now multiply the above by millions of charged particles randomly encountering the bare-wire dipole. The charge on each side of the dipole will never be exactly equal. Thus, continuous broad-band noise will be continuously transferred through the link as long as the particles are transferring charge to the antenna. That's what some hams are hearing during dry-air dust and snow conditions. Some have even reported being able to hear individual particle collisions from large snowflakes. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
Cecil Moore wrote:
Ian White GM3SEK wrote: This makes the choices quite complex, and makes generalization impossible. Quote an example, and someone else will quote you a counter-example. Seems the assertion should be that precipitation noise can exist on some antennas but not on others. Living in this climate, I don't have any particular view or experience about static noise (but ironically we're just about to get one of our few thunderstorms of the year... better go and do something about that). Just one other thing: PLEASE let's not talk about elements being "grounded", way up there at the top of a tower. How about "DC grounded"? By all means; so long as we never forget to include the "DC" part. -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek |
Noise level between two ant types
Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
Tom Ring wrote: wrote: How many Yagi's have floating driven elements without ground paths? None on VHF/UHF/SHF that I build and anyone I know builds. Maybe on HF it's different. I don't know why it should be, though. Although normally all the other elements float on anything but 6 meters. You're both over-generalizing. In VHF/UHF/SHF yagi construction it's quite common to find driven elements connected to the boom or floating. The same choice or a different choice may be made for the parasitic elements. There are many different reasons for these choices, including: * size of elements and boom * mechanical strength requirements * effect of boom on element resonance (depends on mounting method) * long-term effect stability of element resonance * feed impedance of driven element (affects choice of feed method) * number of elements involved * perceived or actual effects of "static". This makes the choices quite complex, and makes generalization impossible. Quote an example, and someone else will quote you a counter-example. Just one other thing: PLEASE let's not talk about elements being "grounded", way up there at the top of a tower. Maybe I should have defined what I meant when I said floating. I think we have been talking about a DC grounded element, and that's what I meant with respect to floating. Virtually all of the homebrew yagis that I have seen, and most of the commercial are gamma match, or T match. The gamma is not going to carry the ground through, but is used almost exclusively on 6 meters where driven elements are rarely insulated from the boom. 2 through 432 are T matches and that DC grounds the driven element regardless of how it's mounted. Going up we see mostly loop yagis, and I've never seen one of those that's not grounded. I know there are regular (non-loop) yagis used 902 and up, but I never seen one to see how they are driven. So, for me anyway, the generalization works. And I'm just watching Silverstone, Ian, so don't tell me how it went! tom K0TAR |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
I don't have a lifetime to spend picking nits with Cecil, but I do resent his immediate implications I haven't looked at the closely for a long time. Do you think the people who report the problems that you haven't experienced and don't understand resent your assertion that they believe in magic? The actual magical thinking is asserting that charged particles don't transfer part of their charge to bare wire antennas. In my experience the vast majority of noise people complain about is caused by corona from the element or something in the immediate area of the element. That may be true but we are not discussing corona noise. Exactly where do I go wrong in the following explanation? 1. A highly charged particle encountering one element of a bare copper wire dipole will transfer approximately half its charge to the wire. 2. A charge unbalance between the two elements of a dipole will cause a differential current to flow in a link coupled system. 3. The differential current may be detected by an RF receiver. Now I'm sure there will be some cases where people disagree with this, but anyone who can A-B-C test antennas will find that other than a pop or arc across a dielectric from antennas that accumulate enough charge to exceed charge leakage the only thing that really matters is how "pointed" the antenna is and how exposed the points are to the air around the antenna. This is simply a false statement. Many desert hams, like myself in the 1990's, have experienced another kind of noise. I've never experienced it from snow, but I can understand how it could happen with snow falling through dry air. The snow phenomenon has been reported here on this newsgroup. All that crud hitting the antenna isn't significantly different in potential than the air around the element, it just has a lower impedance. Absolutely false! Charged dust particles are a fact of life in the Arizona desert. There is often not enough moisture in the air to discharge them. Your limited experience is showing. How often does the relative humidity get down to 10% with high winds and dust in Georgia? As a matter of fact, it is rather silly to claim the particles discharging make noise and then at the same time claim that a DC path somehow reduces or eliminates that noise. I didn't claim it "reduces or eliminates that noise". I claimed it eliminates arcing which is certainly a type of noise. The CLOSER the antenna would be allowed to float to the potential of the particles the LESS change in potential would occur. Pulling the element to earth would make each tiny discharge worse and make more noise, not less. My problem was that 1/2 of the antenna was at DC ground potential and the other half was floating which is typical of a store-bought G5RV. That seems to cause the worst case of arcing. But it is simple physics to realize that each particle acts independently. The charge transfer from each particle causes a tiny differential current between the two elements of the antenna. Millions of unsynchronized collisions per second certainly would produce differential RF noise. A link-coupled balanced dipole system would probably never arc but there would be a differential noise pulse through the receiver as described in the graphic in my other posting. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
|
Noise level between two ant types
Cecil Moore wrote: 1. A highly charged particle encountering one element of a bare copper wire dipole will transfer approximately half its charge to the wire. 2. A charge unbalance between the two elements of a dipole will cause a differential current to flow in a link coupled system. 3. The differential current may be detected by an RF receiver. Only when it is AT THE FREQUENCY the receiver is tuned to. So when you provide a DC path that does not short the antenna at radio frequencies, it does nothing. The only exception to this is if the charge actually causes something to arc, but even then it is a long term buildup of charge. This is simply a false statement. You can a call me a liar if you like, but it doesn't change the facts. All that crud hitting the antenna isn't significantly different in potential than the air around the element, it just has a lower impedance. Absolutely false! Charged dust particles are a fact of life in the Arizona desert. There is often not enough moisture in the air to discharge them. Your limited experience is showing. How often does the relative humidity get down to 10% with high winds and dust in Georgia? I haven't lived in Georgia all my life. Most of my experience with this is actually in Ohio, but on other reflectors like TowerTalk everyone seems to share the same common experiences. As a matter of fact, it is rather silly to claim the particles discharging make noise and then at the same time claim that a DC path somehow reduces or eliminates that noise. I didn't claim it "reduces or eliminates that noise". I claimed it eliminates arcing which is certainly a type of noise. We agree there. So why are you arguing? If it charges the antenna to the point where a dielectric fails the sudden change will make a terrible noise and may even cause damage. This is why no one should have a large element high in the air that does not have a leakage path. The CLOSER the antenna would be allowed to float to the potential of the particles the LESS change in potential would occur. Pulling the element to earth would make each tiny discharge worse and make more noise, not less. My problem was that 1/2 of the antenna was at DC ground potential and the other half was floating which is typical of a store-bought G5RV. That seems to cause the worst case of arcing. But it is simple physics to realize that each particle acts independently. The charge transfer from each particle causes a tiny differential current between the two elements of the antenna. Millions of unsynchronized collisions per second certainly would produce differential RF noise. In that case a ground on the floating side would make no difference, or if anything make it worse. Think about it, or draw it on paper. The charge differential (as you say above) is between the floating particles and the earth. The greater the charge difference, the larger the amount of charge transferred (as you said above). If we agree on what you say above, the "millions of unsynchronized collisions" would not impart less charge to the antenna when it is closer to earth potential, they would impart more. The fact is a dc path doesn't change a thing with one single exception, the dc path prevents an antenna from building a charge in the capaciatnce of the system, and prevents that voltage from building to the point where some dielectric fails. Indeed that happens, and that is why large high antennas should have a leakage path to earth. Even on a clear calm day my 160 dipole at 300 feet, if I let the coax dangle a few feet above earth, will knock a person for a loop when touched. Inactive power lines, when open circuited, have to be clamped to ground for the same reason. On a windy day the recharge rate of the dipole is faster, and faster still in inclement weather. When the weather is bad, there is corona off the antenna that makes a sizzling sound that starts out as a series of slow pops and builds to the point where it almost turns musical or tonal. If lightning flashes even far in the distance, it immediately stops and rebuilds. The higher the antenna and the sharper and more extended the ends, the worse the problem is. Even when no moisture is hitting the wire. 73 Tom |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
You can a call me a liar if you like, but it doesn't change the facts. Being ignorant doesn't make you a liar. The fact is that many hams have experienced charged particle noise. Your denial of such doesn't change the known facts. The meaning of most of your posting escapes me so I will just summarize my position. When I lived in the Arizona, clear-sky wind-driven charged dust particles transferred lots of energy to my bare-wire G5RV. It caused arcing whether the outside braid was grounded or not. It only happened when the wind was blowing and the humidity was very low. I'm not sure what your point of disagreement is so help me out. Do you agree that a charged particle will transfer energy to the bare wire in a dipole when it touches it? If not, why not? If the antenna were link coupled, do you agree that the above transferred energy will try to equalize between the two dipole elements? If not, why not? Do you agree that the equalizing of the charges between elements would cause a current to flow through the link? If not, why not? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com