On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:
On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

On Feb 14, 7:34*am, dave wrote:
On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:

On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

I use them for strain relief. Wrapping a wire or a rope around an
insulator with a 3/4 inch radius puts less wear and tear on either
material per square mm of contact surface than tying the rope directly
to the wire. I cannot prove (off the top o' my head) this
quantitatively, but intuitively it seems right.

Having said that. I am sure there is nothing to gain electrically from
omitting the insulator.

On 02/14/2011 07:49 AM, bpnjensen wrote:
On Feb 14, 7:34 am, wrote:
On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:

On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

I use them for strain relief. Wrapping a wire or a rope around an
insulator with a 3/4 inch radius puts less wear and tear on either
material per square mm of contact surface than tying the rope directly
to the wire. I cannot prove (off the top o' my head) this
quantitatively, but intuitively it seems right.

Having said that. I am sure there is nothing to gain electrically from
omitting the insulator.

http://www.westmarine.com/1/1/81866-...mbles-1-4.html

On Feb 14, 8:27*am, dave wrote:
On 02/14/2011 07:49 AM, bpnjensen wrote:





On Feb 14, 7:34 am, *wrote:
On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:

On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

I use them for strain relief. *Wrapping a wire or a rope around an
insulator with a 3/4 inch radius puts less wear and tear on either
material per square mm of contact surface than tying the rope directly
to the wire. *I cannot prove (off the top o' my head) this
quantitatively, but intuitively it seems right.

Having said that. I am sure there is nothing to gain electrically from
omitting the insulator.

http://www.westmarine.com/1/1/81866-...bles-1-4.html- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yepp, those should work too :-)

On Feb 14, 7:49*am, bpnjensen wrote:
On Feb 14, 7:34*am, dave wrote:

On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:

On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?


Dave -changing-the-subject-line-to-read-
"Kiss It Stupid Simple"
Says more about "YOU" then 'me' ~ RHF

Dave -where-as-'i'-say-
Keep It Simple and Practical ! : [KISAP!]

Wire SWL Antennas : ? The Question Is . . .
Are Your SWL Antennas Fit-To-Be-Tied !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...1cdeb93902f3d3

On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:
On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

On 2/14/2011 10:34 AM, dave wrote:

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

Well, that could be debatable. Do you have any way to quantify the RF
leakage of wet rope vs. a wet insulator to support your contention?

On Feb 14, 9:19*am, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:
On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

On 2/14/2011 10:34 AM, dave wrote:

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

Well, that could be debatable. Do you have any way to quantify the RF
leakage of wet rope vs. a wet insulator to support your contention?

How important would that be for receive?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11-02-14 10:19 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:
On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

On 2/14/2011 10:34 AM, dave wrote:

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

Well, that could be debatable. Do you have any way to quantify the RF
leakage of wet rope vs. a wet insulator to support your contention?


Rainwater doesn't conduct very well. Also, the voltages are very low.
Power lines will arc over insulators, but that's usually caused by filth
accumulating over the insulator knob and the fact that it's a few
thousand volts.



mike
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNWXEMAAoJEJXfKw5kUPt7elcH/1RvNaK44YJACOEMfMFLSVpf
I5M1tvCxAzkpIUzfFYX/2m9iH0ZL0i0fatBIgsgzCNqbbQ1gvAA8yN+nt3402xgO
9NnmlYlXUrvxQisNFzVJb9bZfkRIGFx8wW69p7nRSaRANv9M80 GSfh3om64WRgDe
2Z+qmor5Bst3jFYS5mbMnumnmBiw7oHkpKviWyZSXEHdxTKYNj/RP9Hll0GKvRpw
kMK0W2PEXQAxvH7U05xHyAJ/HnSzqM5DGtlCm+X9//0n1KV0bZhvcx8zeKfJewR8
h7YuPOJf1dzYpWLaaSfYitfiJxoDbDQUaKrWS3ZDmu3VOueq38 owU96a+sb/lzU=
=QEoc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Feb 14, 10:15*am, m II wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11-02-14 10:19 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:



On 02/14/2011 06:51 AM, dave wrote:
On 02/13/2011 08:26 PM, RHF wrote:

-but- I still use Antenna Insulators between the 'Poly'

Why?

On 2/14/2011 10:34 AM, dave wrote:

If you use insulating rope there is no need to buy insulators.

Well, that could be debatable. Do you have any way to quantify the RF
leakage of wet rope vs. a wet insulator to support your contention?

Rainwater doesn't conduct very well. Also, the voltages are very low.
Power lines will arc over insulators, but that's usually caused by filth
accumulating over the insulator knob and the fact that it's a few
thousand volts.

mike

I would guess that, for RX, unless the rainwater also allows a
complete passage to ground for the signal, water on the antenna and
rope is going to do little more than extend the resonant frequency of
the antenna to a longer wavelength. If you're a monitor station for a
major broadcaster, that may be a problem. For a SWL, maybe not so
much.