Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In , wrote: ..... We pushed poles in the ground with the bobcat and post hole digger, mostly for lightning. Out here where I live, by the time the fire dept gets here with the tanker (no hydrants)you're toast. _ Here's a little trick if you use a pipe for a ground rod: Thread both ends of the pipe. On the top put a fitting that will accept a garden hose. On the bottom put a reduction fitting (to be used as a nozzle). Hold the pipe vertical, turn on the water full blast, then let the water drill the hole. When you are done just unscrew the top fitting, and PRESTO!!! A great ground rod without a lot of fuss. BTW, this doesn't work very well in areas where there are a lot of large rocks in the ground..... _ The hose in the pipe method works very well. It is standard procedure down here to do what you suggested when installing pvc sprinkler systems that must pass under walkways, driveways, etc. You mentioned sal****er...folks have been known to pour bagged salt around their tower, as well, although down here you really don't need it, as the water table is easily accessible at 3 to 5 feet. It's practically impossible to have a rod here that ISN'T in the water table....but I prefer dragging the copper line in the Gulf behind the boat,,,,.remember,,,, N3CVJ said if you're gonna break the law, (dxing is technically against the law on cb) 'tis better to do it from a portable station than from your home. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
In ,
(Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Frank*Gilliland) In , wrote: .... We pushed poles in the ground with the bobcat and post hole digger, mostly for lightning. Out here where I live, by the time the fire dept gets here with the tanker (no hydrants)you're toast. _ Here's a little trick if you use a pipe for a ground rod: Thread both ends of the pipe. On the top put a fitting that will accept a garden hose. On the bottom put a reduction fitting (to be used as a nozzle). Hold the pipe vertical, turn on the water full blast, then let the water drill the hole. When you are done just unscrew the top fitting, and PRESTO!!! A great ground rod without a lot of fuss. BTW, this doesn't work very well in areas where there are a lot of large rocks in the ground..... _ The hose in the pipe method works very well. It is standard procedure down here to do what you suggested when installing pvc sprinkler systems that must pass under walkways, driveways, etc. You mentioned sal****er...folks have been known to pour bagged salt around their tower, as well, although down here you really don't need it, as the water table is easily accessible at 3 to 5 feet. It's practically impossible to have a rod here that ISN'T in the water table.. Now isn't that just special..... as if anyone cares about your mud. ..but I prefer dragging the copper line in the Gulf behind the boat,,,,.remember,,,, N3CVJ said if you're gonna break the law, (dxing is technically against the law on cb) 'tis better to do it from a portable station than from your home. And, of course, there is no reason to doubt his word on the subject. -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, I almost forgot..... coax length!!!!! The low impedance of the ground will be reflected at the radio when the length of the coax & ground strap, from the ground rod to the radio, are 1/2 wavelength. This means 1/2 wavelength -without- consideration of velocity factor because we want a low impedance -ground-. And this means -- you guessed it -- 18 feet of coax! 18 feet? Are you sure? I thought 18 feet was only a convenient length for mobile antennas and could never have any electrical significance. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
(Twistedhed) wrote:
N3CVJ said if you're gonna break the law, (dxing is technically against the law on cb) 'tis better to do it from a portable station than from your home. Where did he say that you lying sack of dog poop? |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
If in sandy loom, then a single ground rod may not be
sufficient. Neighborhood history will apply. Previous lightning damage in the last ten years? If so, then the single point ground may be expanded with more rods; spaced as Frank suggests and to comply with NEC. Other alternatives include looping the house with a buried bare copper wire. But again, this is typically only required for high 'strike frequency' locations - more a function of neighborhood geology. A problem with the water idea is a loose ground rod. A ground rod must be firm in ground when installed. A loose ground rod is not earthed. Ground rod is further compromised if using threaded joints. Ground rod should be monolithic until well below frost line. If antenna is not located near to service entrance and single point ground, then antenna may require its own earth ground. This in addition to the coax ground. IOW either the antenna is part of your structure and earthed at the service entrance ground; or antenna is earthed as if a lightning rod. If the antenna connection to earth ground is significantly shorter than connection to service entrance, then antenna must also have its own earth ground rod located as directly under the antenna as possible. This so that lightning takes a short path to earth; does not seek alternative paths via other items such as chimney or interior wire. If installing for commercial broadcaster reliability, then the inductor from center core is additional protection. But most industry professionals say the center conductor will leak sufficiently to the outer shield making no center conductor connection necessary. IOW that ground block sold in Home Depot or Radio Shack (to earth only outer shield to single point earth ground) is more than sufficient protection for most residences. Again, neighborhood history will apply. Inductor adds only minor improvement; a function of local history and other considerations. Disconnecting to protect equipment is unreliable because humans are not reliable. Humans are only available only 1 in three hours - and that assumes humans are home often. Protection must be installed virtually 24 hours every day and must be fully sufficient even when using the equipment. Disconnecting is just convenient extra protection made unnecessary by properly earthing. Again, you have soil that typically makes poor earth grounds. This will be especially a problem if more conductive earth lies beneath - such as limestone. Ground rod would need be deeper to make contact with that limestone. If geology changes beneath building, then that too can create earthing problems. Point being the best earth ground must be the single point earth ground. If using multiple rods, then those rods need be connected by buried bare copper wire. Some do this by digging a hole, then driving ground rod into bottom of that hole. A four or six inch plastic pipe lines the hole. Buried bare copper wire clamps to earth ground rod AND can be inspected through that covered plastic pipe. Integrity of that wire to rod clamp is important. Forget about salting the earth. Some have lined 'buried copper wire' trench with better material such as trailings from a steel mill. This tends to improve the transition from buried copper wire to earth while not destroying the copper. Tailings are a superior idea to salt since salt will leach away before the year is gone. But most don't bother. They simply bury the wire. Notice the concept. The most critical and essential feature of any protection 'system' is defined by that single point earth ground. The quality of that earth ground and how connections are made to that central earth ground determines system effectiveness. Single point grounding is the most critical component in a protection system. wrote: That's a slick idea, we're sandy loam and clay around here. Next time I sink a ground rod I'll remember the water. -- Go 40 42 12 |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
A benchmark in this technology is Polyphaser. These
application note applies to your questions: http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1002.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1024.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1026.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1025.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1003.asp wrote: That's a slick idea, we're sandy loam and clay around here. Next time I sink a ground rod I'll remember the water. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
In , w_tom wrote:
If in sandy loom, then a single ground rod may not be sufficient. Neighborhood history will apply. Previous lightning damage in the last ten years? If so, then the single point ground may be expanded with more rods; spaced as Frank suggests and to comply with NEC. Other alternatives include looping the house with a buried bare copper wire. But again, this is typically only required for high 'strike frequency' locations - more a function of neighborhood geology. Sandy loam is better than average not just for grounding, but also for ground-wave propogation and gardening. Regardless, it's the subsoil that really matters. Unless you live in the desert, one good rod is enough to provide a direction for the lightning to travel, which is the basic purpose. Any ground, even one in poor soil, can be improved by running radials from the rod, which is far better at dissipating a lightning strike than using multiple ground rods. The only exception to this is, as I stated before, when the main ground rod is located next to a basement. In that case, tie the ground rods together, but maintain a central grounding point at the main ground rod ('star' grounding). And avoid loops! A problem with the water idea is a loose ground rod. Again you are talking about things about which you know nothing. Most of the dirt that is displaced by the rod doesn't make it to the surface, although you do get wet while going down those first couple feet. The resulting mud settles down into the gap and hardens like concrete. Once you turn off the water and let it set for an hour or so, you couldn't pull the blasting thing out with a backhoe. And there is only about a foot or two near the surface that needs to be filled which is easily done by rinsing the muddy splatter back into the hole. A ground rod must be firm in ground when installed. A loose ground rod is not earthed. Ground rod is further compromised if using threaded joints. If the threads were exposed it would probably -improve- the efficiency of the ground by increasing the surface area. But since they aren't, the point is moot. Ground rod should be monolithic until well below frost line. Pipes burst when water is trapped as it freezes. Both the top and bottom of the pipe are open, therefore no bursting. And since the bottom is open, there should be no standing water to freeze -- unless you put it there just to make your life more complicated. If antenna is not located near to service entrance and single point ground, then antenna may require its own earth ground. This in addition to the coax ground. IOW either the antenna is part of your structure and earthed at the service entrance ground; or antenna is earthed as if a lightning rod. Depends on the antenna. If the antenna connection to earth ground is significantly shorter than connection to service entrance, then antenna must also have its own earth ground rod located as directly under the antenna as possible. This so that lightning takes a short path to earth; does not seek alternative paths via other items such as chimney or interior wire. First off, if the line from the antenna to the grounding rod is shorter than the line from the grounding rod to the shack, it might be time to do a little research on alternative antenna systems. Second, and it seems you missed this point the first three times, electricity (lightning included) will take ANY AND ALL paths to ground that are available. It will easily jump from an antenna to a chimney, interior wire, plumbing vent, phone line, or anything else it finds to be a convenient path to earth AS WELL AS the antenna! Anytime the voltage in the path = the spark-gap potential it WILL arc, and to whatever it arcs WILL become a parallel current path. If you think that all the current will go to the closest ground rod and ignore any electrically connected ground path further away, or any other potential ground path connected or not, then you have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE what you are talking about regarding electricity. If installing for commercial broadcaster reliability, then the inductor from center core is additional protection. But most industry professionals say the center conductor will leak sufficiently to the outer shield making no center conductor connection necessary..... Well, I'm going to stop here because this is worse than beating a dead horse. You clearly don't know what you are talking about, and you are very bad at making stuff up to try and hide your ignorance. I don't know what your motivation is to spew your BS but there is no excuse for it. Even if you are a vampire and the public library is only open during daylight hours, or you are permanently confined to your bubble, or too fat to get out your front door, you can still have a friend get some educational materials for you. Or have you ****ed off all your friends by feeding them the same BS that you are trying to pass off in here? Don't bother answering, because I really don't care and it would probably be more BS anyway. Just a word of advice: Most of the people in this newsgroup aren't as technically gullible as you might think (at least not any more). If you want to show people how intelligent you -really- are, quit with the BS and learn a little more about the subject. -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
In , w_tom wrote:
A benchmark in this technology is Polyphaser. These application note applies to your questions: http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1002.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1024.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1026.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1025.asp http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_PEN1003.asp Lot's of theory but no practical value. The use of a star ground ("Single Point Ground") system for lightning protection of the whole building + tower requires the use of an isolated or 'floating' power supply; i.e, an isolated generator or dedicated pole-pig. Marconi discovered this a century ago. And for the record, all high-tech gizmos designed to compensate for the inductive reactance of power and transmission lines during a lightning strike have failed miserably because lightning has no fixed frequency. You can verify this with your local power company or public library. -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Mobile Ant L match ? | Antenna | |||
X-terminator antenna | CB | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna | |||
Dual Base Stations and One Antenna | CB |