I don't know about boundary conditions, but when I use this program to
evaluate the following system:

3.62 Mhz, 18.3 meter height (simulating an inverted L with 25.4 ohms Rrad)

Resistivity 25, Permittivity 25

2mm radials, 4mm antenna wire, radials 1 mm depth (actually #14 insulated
wire, stapled to the lawn and sinking in gradually)

...it shows my predicted efficiency with (26) 50' long radials to be about
90%.

My measurements indicated I am getting about 88%. Pretty good agreement.

What causes me to cringe, is that the program shows that I can reduce the
length of my radials from 16.1 meters to a little over 4 meters without
losing ANY significant efficiency. Given everything else I've read over the
years, that just seems to be way too good to be true.

Now, I suppose I could rip up my 26 radials and shorten them all to about 5
meters and re-measure my efficiency, but that's a LOT of work (and it's 97
degrees out with a dew point in the mid 70's). Not going to happen.

Here's the kicker... I have 1000' of remaining wire to put down (and I am
going to add it). If this value of 4 or 5 meters (15 feet, let's say) is
even remotely correct, I can put down 66 more radials (although they would
be interlaced with the existing 26 longer ones of 50' each).

Using my initial length of 50', I can put down 20 more radials, giving me a
total of 46 radials 50' long.

Reg, you program seems to be telling me that I would get the maximum benefit
by putting in 66 more radials approximately 15' long, and that installing
them at 50' would be wasting 35' of wire per radial, and reducing radial
coverage as well.

So...what should I do:

1. Add 66 greatly shortened radials (accepting Reg's program as correct)

or

2. Add 20 radials, maintaining my 50' length that I originally used.

I look forward to comments.

....hasan, N0AN