![]() |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
Cecil then proposed, if I am not mistaken, that P-static was caused by particles striking the antenna, each one making a noise as it discharged into the antenna, and that noise could be reduced by grounding the element at DC. That is really the only point I disageed with. I'm glad you now agree with it. Grounding the feedline obviously reduces everything, including noise. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
Cecil Moore wrote: You just admitted above that shorting the transmission line to ground changes the noise level, i.e. indeed does make a difference. You have agreed with every leading question that I have asked you so it seems we are in agreement. Cecil, When you short ANY transmission line center to ground and the shield is grounded, which is what you asked, ALL signal levels will decrease. They will all go to zero if it is a pefect short. You have a very strange way of defining noise decreases! If I unplug the receiver or place it on standby, noise will decrease also. So will turning off the RF amplifier. So will adding an attenuator. If shorting the center to shield making noise go away and ignoring the fact it also makes the signal go away makes you feel like you have proven something, then I can't go further. That's about the silliest thing I've ever heard as a logical arguement! 73 Tom |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
When you short ANY transmission line center to ground and the shield is grounded, which is what you asked, ALL signal levels will decrease. They will all go to zero if it is a perfect short. Glad you agree. Now would you agree that in a system with arcing, anything that eliminates the arcing and preserves the signal has reduced the noise? A path to ground will do exactly that. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
Cecil Moore wrote: wrote: When you short ANY transmission line center to ground and the shield is grounded, which is what you asked, ALL signal levels will decrease. They will all go to zero if it is a perfect short. Glad you agree. Now would you agree that in a system with arcing, anything that eliminates the arcing and preserves the signal has reduced the noise? A path to ground will do exactly that. Of course I agree when someone shorts the RF input connector of their radio the noise will decrease! Better yet, they should just unplug it and throw it in the closet! Then the noise will be zero! 73 Tom |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
Of course I agree when someone shorts the RF input connector of their radio the noise will decrease! W8JI previously wrote: So when you provide a DC path that does not short the antenna at radio frequencies, it does nothing. In AZ, I provided a DC path (choke) that eliminated arcing and allowed me to make contacts. The elimination of arcing obviously improved my signal to noise ratio. You have stopped asserting that folding doesn't make for a quieter antenna system. Do you now understand why a folded dipole is less noisy than a non-folded dipole in a charged particle environment? Do you understand that the probable cause for high antennas having more particle noise is that the higher you go, the faster the wind blows? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: Of course I agree when someone shorts the RF input connector of their radio the noise will decrease! W8JI previously wrote: So when you provide a DC path that does not short the antenna at radio frequencies, it does nothing. In AZ, I provided a DC path (choke) that eliminated arcing and allowed me to make contacts. The elimination of arcing obviously improved my signal to noise ratio. You have stopped asserting that folding doesn't make for a quieter antenna system. Do you now understand why a folded dipole is less noisy than a non-folded dipole in a charged particle environment? Do you understand that the probable cause for high antennas having more particle noise is that the higher you go, the faster the wind blows? Yes, but there are fewer particles. What, in Yahweh's name, is particle noise? Is it somehow related to the triboelectric effect? What about the effect of the earth's electric field (100 volts/meter)? This is beginning to sound like the Forrest Mims III creation science school of explaining natural phenomena. There are a few articles on what's called "precipitation static" on the web. Generally,it's supposed to be the noise made by corona discharge on objects that have been charged up to high voltages by natural means. You might want to read the articles, Cecil, before you speculate. It could only improve your mind. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
Noise level between two ant types
Tom Donaly wrote: have been charged up to high voltages by natural means. You might want to read the articles, Cecil, before you speculate. It could only improve your mind. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH ......or doing some actual experiments like I have done. 73 Tom |
Noise level between two ant types
Tom Donaly wrote:
Yes, but there are fewer particles. I don't think that is true. Dust is sucked high into the air during the formation of a dust storm. I have seen a wall of dust hundreds of feet high in Arizona. It didn't look any denser closer to the ground. In any case, it is not the number of particles that matter but the average charge per particle which increases with wind speed. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Noise level between two ant types
wrote:
.....or doing some actual experiments like I have done. I have been reporting actual experiences from when I lived in the Arizona desert and I can guarantee you that charged particles exist in the dry-air desert wind. Where does the charge on an antenna come from if not from charged particles? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:38 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com