Article: 221105 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: ml <m@di.net>
Subject: Re: Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions
References: <Pt6dnVUTrbcKTVbeRVn-ig@comcast.com> <a5SdnR54pJtCjVHeRVn-sw@comcast.com> <m-B6DD09.20590617012006@news.verizon.net> <feqdnaCk27gJ3FPeRVn-qw@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <m-B40A62.19484718012006@news.verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:48:52 GMT


Sorry your email address dosn't work   but thanks for clarifing the 
hookup i must have missread the original statement you made  whereby i 
thought you said the pro was completely disco  i totally understand if 
it had anything connected that explains it!!

however you confused me more so, now that you said the pro getting fried 
somehow 'saved' your other gear from being damaged... i can't see how 
that happened unless you feel the rig it self actually absorbed ALL the 
energy  i presume the odds of that are slim  

so can you help unconfuse me??

and it was great to read about how the mil does stuff  pretty cool  

again sorry about your damage  hope you had arrl rig insurrance


m



In article <feqdnaCk27gJ3FPeRVn-qw@comcast.com>,
 Amos Keag <A.K01@comcast.net> wrote:

> ml wrote:
> 
> > Hi
> > 
> > FYI, seems your email addr here dosn't work, if it's a real one
> > 
> > Dear Amos
> > 
> >   i saw your post and hope you wouldn't mind if i asked you a quick 
> > quesiton
> > 
> > 
> > Your Icom that was damaged, was unplugged from everything  so how did 
> > lightning 'get to it'??
> > 
> > I was kinda distrubed trying to figure it out
> > \
> 
> Ground Loop.  Took time to find it though.
> 
> The Astron RS-35 power supply connects utility power neutral to the 
> case. It also connects the 13.8 volt return to the case. [This is 
> commercial common practice but is prohibited in Military Systems 
> design.] Although everything on the operating table was isolated from 
> the utility power and external antennas, everything was connected 
> together by coax braid, connections to the operating position common 
> 'ground', and the 13.8 volt return.
> 
> Remember, this strike caused large area damage. Close to 50 homes 
> suffered some damage. Several homes took up to 6 weeks to have their 
> internet functioning again.
> 
> The lightning strike tripped all [ALL] ground fault interruptors in the 
> house. The ground loop in my system connected chassis and power returns 
> and coax cable together. The weak link were circuit boards in my 756 Pro 
> II filter and tuner. The boards VAPORIZED. Smoke all over the place. 
> Pungent smell, etc. That failure protected my IC-746, Kenwood TM-G707, 
> etc from damage. [Expensive fuse!!]
> 
> I wonder if it also protected my swimming pool pump and heater from 
> damage <grin>?


Article: 221106 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Asimov" <Asimov@-removethis-bbs.juxtaposition.dynip.com>
Subject: Re:Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions
Message-ID: <MSGID_1=3a167=2f133.0_43cecdb8@fidonet.org>
References: <19272-43CE864F-1277@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:01:28 GMT

"Richard Harrison" bravely wrote to "All" (18 Jan 06  12:17:51)
 --- on the heady topic of "Re:Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions"

 RH> From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
 RH> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:222822

 RH> Asimov wrote:
 RH> "An acquaintance had a direct hit on his tower and even his tv`s
 RH> remote control head."

There seems to be a problem with the compression. I wrote "remote
control fried." not "head."!


 RH> Did he hear a voice boom from the clouds saying: "Dammit! Missed
 RH> again!"?

 RH> A good tower ground should mitigate lightning`s fiversion through a TV

What is a "fiversion"... ah "diversion", right! Damn that compressor
is F&^^%$@@**


 RH> remote control. But, I`ve seen stories of "ball lightning" chasing
 RH> about inside a house.

That is what he said. Briefly saw a fireball wizz around the room.

 A*s*i*m*o*v




Article: 221107 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Jerry" <joxendi@bellsouth.net>
References: <NcCdnfPb0YLnxD7eUSdV9g@ptd.net> <U2bvf.9016$UF3.6954@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> <dpjjij$567$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <11rr4922agp1acd@corp.supernews.com> <dpkmb6$87k$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <D0Wwf.30677$qw4.6169@bignews5.bellsouth.net> <1sYwf.5083$fb4.758@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> <vshxf.162196$aS5.24125@bignews4.bellsouth.net> <dq498d016ak@enews4.newsguy.com> <Qjixf.119$H71.20@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <yGjxf.162244$aS5.88702@bignews4.bellsouth.net> <Ge2dneQFMt0b8FXeRVn-hw@adelphia.com>
Subject: Re: WTB Outbacker Mobile HF Antenna
Message-ID: <I0Czf.1873$jn2.114@bignews3.bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:37:20 -0500


"Mike Coslo" <mremovethiscoslo@adelphia.net> wrote in message 
news:Ge2dneQFMt0b8FXeRVn-hw@adelphia.com...
> Jerry wrote:
>> "kd5sak" <kd5sak@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message 
>> news:Qjixf.119$H71.20@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>"Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com> wrote in message 
>>>news:dq498d016ak@enews4.newsguy.com...
>>>
>>>>ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>>>>I used to think that way too. Only bought the cheap stuff until one day 
>>>>someone gave me a bottle of Glenlivet scotch. I rarely buy it because I 
>>>>don't want to mortgage the house, but now I *do* know the difference. 
>>>>:-)
>>>>
>>>>Bill, W6WRT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Have to agree, bought some really high dollar Scotch for New Years Eve in 
>>>1954 while in Japan. Flavor wasn't the same but it was as smooth as 
>>>chocolate milk. I was asleep before midnight. Had to quit that sort of 
>>>thing though, my Dad was alcoholic and I figured I'd probably inherited 
>>>the gene.
>>>
>>>Harold Burton
>>
>>
>> That's just it for me. I don't want to run the risk, and after seeing 
>> what it did to friends and relatives as well, it made up my mind in high 
>> school. Tried it. It tasted AWFUL no matter what, so I prefer a Coke. Oh, 
>> if someone insists I take a sip with him, I will. But since I simply do 
>> not like the taste of alcoholic drinks, I simply drink enough to satisfy 
>> the buyer and let it go. I just don't like it the same way some people 
>> don't like broccoli or cauliflower and I never will. :)
>
>
> Well good for you if you don't like Little John Barleycorn. But I find it 
> ironic that you consider that cola beverages taste good. I always 
> considered them as probably what carbonated battery acid tastes like.
>
> And the caffeine in them is also a drug, of which a lot of people take too 
> much of.
>
> - 73 de Mike KB3EIA -
>
> ..... at this time sipping on small glass of Akvavit....


What?  You mean I have to give up coffee, too?  LOL!


73

J 




Article: 221108 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt)
Subject: Re: Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:41:33 -0000
Message-ID: <11sud4trs50t074@corp.supernews.com>
References: <Pt6dnVUTrbcKTVbeRVn-ig@comcast.com> <feqdnaCk27gJ3FPeRVn-qw@comcast.com> <11st5vd8qeie574@corp.supernews.com> <o76dneoDssudc1PeRVn-rA@comcast.com>

In article <o76dneoDssudc1PeRVn-rA@comcast.com>,
Amos Keag  <A.K01@comcast.net> wrote:
>Maybe my terms are not up to date.
>
>My electrical service connection is 3 wire 240 volts AC at 60 Hz. Within 
>the distribution panel RED is connected to one feed; BLACK is connected 
>to the other feed and white is connected to the common connection 
>[return]. The common connection is then distributed throughout the house 
>as the bare wire in standard wiring. The common, white and return, 
>connection is connected to an external earth connection [ground] by an 8 
>foot ground rod.. So, the WHITE wire serves as return for both RED and 
>BLACK circuits and has a single earth connection. So, your 3 prong 
>socket contains connections to power as follows: HOT [either RED or 
>BLACK] circuit, RETURN [WHITE] and GREEN [GROUND] [supposedly zero 
>current carrying. A GFI works on this part of the connection].
>
>In the ASTRON RS 35 the primary wiring has the GREEN connected to the 
>chassis. The BLACK/WHITE go to the transformer primary. This is fine.

Yes, that's all fine, and per code.

In US wiring terminology, the green wire is "ground".  It's present
entirely for safety purposes - it's not supposed to carry any current
back to the panel during normal operation.  It carries current only
in the event of a fault.  It's what the external chassis should be
tied to, for metal-chassis equipment with a three-wire cord.

Black is "hot".  I'm told that this color was chosen because black is
traditionally the color of death.

White is "neutral".  It's the current return for the hot supply.  It
should never be tied to the chassis, for two reasons:

[1] The occasional hot/ground reversal thanks to an mistake in the
    house wiring.  You really don't want your chassis floating at 120 VAC
    above local ground.

[2] The neutral pin at the outlet can be pulled several volts above
    ground voltage, if some load on that circuit is drawing a healthy
    number of amperes, due to I^2*R drop in the house wiring.  If the
    chassis were tied to neutral, and this occurred, someone might
    manage to get a shock if they touched both the chassis and a
    truly-grounded pipe or wire.

>With a nearby lightning strike that blew the utility 3 phase transformer 
>and affected approximately 50 consumers there are several possible 
>causes of trouble. Among these are imbalance in utility service [i.e. 
>the 240 into the house becomes seriously imbalanced] a lightning induced 
>magnetic transient that couples to all ground loops, or my system was 
>still connected to antennas and power.
>
>I had ALL connections to antennas and power plugs removed except the 1/2 
>inch copper pipe earth connection at the service panel. My neighbors 
>lost garage door openers, multiple tv sets, numerous telephone circuits, 
>numerous internet circuits, COMCAST had to rewire approximately 1/4 mile 
>of cable tv in front of the house, several homes lost expensive stereo 
>and sound lab setups. In my house all ground fault interuptors 
>activated. And two circuits in my PRO II exploded to charcoal with dust 
>and stench. The LAN blew up, and one computer was lost.

Ouch!  My condolences!

When a strike of that magnitude occurs nearby, I have a feeling that
the Law of Chaos prevails.  The current will do whatever it (censored)
well wants to.  Even some equipment which is entirely unplugged might
take enough of a pulse via induction to suffer some damage to
sensitive components.

Glad to hear that you managed to recover the cost of replacement!

-- 
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org>                                   AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
  I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
     boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!


Article: 221109 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
Subject: Lightning Arrestor & Protection Of Receiver ?
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 07:52:38 -0500
Message-ID: <CdSdnW2_R4YMFlLenZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@comcast.com>

Hello:

Very interesting comments on my question of a few days ago re lightning 
arrestors.
Thank you all for trying to educate me on this subject; really find it 
confusing.
Thread is a bit buried by now, so thought I'd start another one.

I fully understand that the best approach is to (also) just disconnect 
everything.

But if not around, here's what I don't understand and concerns me.

Assuming a "nearby" strike, and a subsequent emp pulse that's picked up by a 
receive only antenna
wire strung outside:

No matter how quickly an arrestor's gas tube fires, and diverts the pulse to 
a good RF ground, the fact that it takes
a few hundred volt threshold to fire makes "any" gas tube type of arrestor 
almost worthless re the protection of a receiver whose front end certainly 
won't take a few hundred volts, even for u-seconds, probably.

Do you agree with this statement, or am I missing something ?

Thanks,
Bob 




Article: 221110 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Miller <NOSPAM@neosoft.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <gk8vs15alefmq1i29mlr6i8pad4j9304du@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:38:29 GMT

On 19 Jan 2006 06:04:29 -0800, john.minkjan@gmail.com wrote:

>Question:
>
>Is you are making a HF-ground (radials just below the surface) Should
>these radials be insulated or not?
>
>73 John

In one of my antenna books, by W6SAI, he recommended uninsulated wire
for buried radials.

bob
k5qwg


Article: 221111 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "John, N9JG" <john@gotwals.XremoveY.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <gk8vs15alefmq1i29mlr6i8pad4j9304du@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <kQNzf.500863$084.442782@attbi_s22>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:00:32 GMT

To cut down on copper corrosion, I use enameled #14 magnet wire.

"Bob Miller" <NOSPAM@neosoft.com> wrote in message 
news:gk8vs15alefmq1i29mlr6i8pad4j9304du@4ax.com...
> On 19 Jan 2006 06:04:29 -0800, john.minkjan@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>Question:
>>
>>Is you are making a HF-ground (radials just below the surface) Should
>>these radials be insulated or not?
>>
>>73 John
>
> In one of my antenna books, by W6SAI, he recommended uninsulated wire
> for buried radials.
>
> bob
> k5qwg 




Article: 221113 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: 19 Jan 2006 16:28:53 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

john.minkjan@gmail.com wrote:

> Question:
> 
> Is you are making a HF-ground (radials just below the surface) Should
> these radials be insulated or not?
> 
> 73 John
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Insulated will reduce corrosion. Don't bury them any deeper than
necessary. Lying on top of the ground is better. Dirt is not a good
antenna element.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221114 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: fmmck@aol.com (Fred McKenzie)
Subject: Re: FS:  Heathkit Manuals
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:36:44 -0500
Message-ID: <fmmck-1901061436440001@aca705f8.ipt.aol.com>
References: <9clis15i74n2k362ccco25fomq0nkr55h8@4ax.com> <43ca251a$0$36837$dbd43001@news.wanadoo.nl> <4303qhF1kq9u9U1@individual.net>

In article <4303qhF1kq9u9U1@individual.net>, Reinhard Zwirner
<reinhard_zwirner@web.de> wrote:

> > good that these stuff is available from half a dozen sites for free...
> 
> Where?
> 
> Very interested

Reinhard-

I was hoping someone would answer.

These sites may not be what you're looking for but contain some references
to Heath.  Check out:

http://www.circuitarchive.co.uk/heath.htm
http://bama.sbc.edu/
http://www.d8apro.com/heath1.htm
http://www.mods.dk/

73, Fred, K4DII


Article: 221115 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Tom the Canuck" <tvaus@sympatico.ca>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Message-ID: <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:26:12 -0500


"JJSomar" <jjsomar@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de...
>                 Paypal Magic !!!!! Earn ?5000 within 2 weeks with
ease!!!!!.
>
>
> Read this message until the end, and you will find out how the money flows
in easy !!!!.
> Follow the steps and it WILL work. Trust me !!!!!.
>
> It's NOT illegal and it is NOT a scam !!!!!.
>

It's *nice* to see another sucker join the bottom of the pyramid scheme.
I wonder when the structure will collapse . . . .

Tom the Canuck.




Article: 221116 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 06:43:42 +1000
From: Kev <kevcat@optunet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Dick Smith Radio Direction Finder - Docs now in PDF
References: <dpr260$aht$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au> <43C15BA4.3F39@orcon.net.nz> <43C98DF6.2958@orcon.net.nz> <43CF18B0.70E8@orcon.net.nz>
Message-ID: <43cff9fe$0$10954$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>

Glenn McAllister wrote:

> Scanned and kindly converted to PDF by Ken, ZL1WKT.
> 
> Hosted by Al at
> http://www.webdingers.com/K6345RadioDirectionFinder.pdf
> and also by me at
> http://www.freewebs.com/cqdx/dserdfk6345.htm
> 
> Glenn McAllister wrote:
> 
>>My email address is my callsign at orcon dot net dot enn zed
>>
>>de Glenn ZL2TLD

Fantastic
Thanks for doing that

Now at least I can see what's what in this thing

Cheers

Kev


Article: 221117 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:05:58 GMT

On 19 Jan 2006 16:28:53 GMT, "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com> wrote:

>john.minkjan@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Question:
>> 
>> Is you are making a HF-ground (radials just below the surface) Should
>> these radials be insulated or not?
>> 
>> 73 John
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Insulated will reduce corrosion. Don't bury them any deeper than
>necessary. Lying on top of the ground is better. Dirt is not a good
>antenna element.

Bill, I often see the assertion that it is better to not bury radials.

Can you point me to any reputable texts or experimental evidence that
shows the difference between shallow buried radials and radials lying
"on top of the ground"?

Corrosion is often cited as a reason to use insulated buried radials,
but is corrosion a significant risk in most locations. We widely use
buried copper water pipes here, and copper clad earthing electrodes
for the MEN power supply earthing, yet they don't seem to suffer
significant corrosion in most places.

It seems to me that insulated buried radials are likely to be less
effective in a lightning protection role.

Owen
--


Article: 221118 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Allodoxaphobia <bit-bucket@config.com>
Subject: Re: what are Microwave Antennas?
Date: 19 Jan 2006 21:13:12 GMT
Message-ID: <slrndt0078.gi0.bit-bucket@shell.config.com>
References: <1137700291.373977.273720@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

On 19 Jan 2006 11:51:31 -0800, Bug3 wrote:
> Wondering what are microwave antennas, what do they do, how do they
> work, etc?
> Are they used in wirless laptops, etc.?
> I can use a lot of information on this subject, I have to wirte 3 or 4
> pages on this and don't really know much about them need to read as
> much as possible.

Just send me your teacher's email address and I'll submit the report 
directly.

Also, send me your English teacher's email address.

You'll find the world's biggest freakin' FAQ site here:

  http://www.google.com/search?as_epq=microwave+antenna


Article: 221119 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
From: Dave Oldridge <doldridg@leavethisoutshaw.ca>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com>
Message-ID: <Xns9750880B39C41doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:22:26 GMT

"Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com> wrote in news:xn0ehew7u3qjhj000
@cnews.newsguy.com:

> john.minkjan@gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> Question:
>> 
>> Is you are making a HF-ground (radials just below the surface) Should
>> these radials be insulated or not?
>> 
>> 73 John
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Insulated will reduce corrosion. Don't bury them any deeper than
> necessary. Lying on top of the ground is better. Dirt is not a good
> antenna element.

Electric fence wire is adequate and cheap.  I use it right on the surface, 
as you say.  It's a bit springy so you may have to work it to straighten 
it, though.

-- 
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667


Article: 221120 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "John, N9JG" <john@gotwals.XremoveY.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <Xns9750880B39C41doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <OVTzf.501279$084.368852@attbi_s22>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:55:58 GMT

Ok, but do you use steel or aluminum fence wire? Galvanized steel fence wire 
will rust in a few years.

"Dave Oldridge" <doldridg@leavethisoutshaw.ca> wrote in message 
news:Xns9750880B39C41doldridgsprintca@64.59.135.159...
>
> Electric fence wire is adequate and cheap.  I use it right on the surface,
> as you say.  It's a bit springy so you may have to work it to straighten
> it, though.
>
> -- 
> Dave Oldridge+
> ICQ 1800667 




Article: 221121 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Fred W4JLE" <w4jle@w4jle.com>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:36:25 -0500
Message-ID: <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET>

Now this is not a scam, simply send $1.00 from your paypal to
w4jle@w4jle.com. I won't do anything for you, you will get nothing in
return, and if I get enough suckers to bite I will go to OUTBACK Steak House
and enjoy a meal on you.

At least you know this won't cost more than a dollar, you need not worry
about getting screwed, I have already told you up front you are. So get your
guarenteed low cost screw job today!

<hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Tom, realize that many newsgroup readers are so young that they are not
> familiar with the Ponzi scam.  Otherwise they would not buy programs
> that perpetuate the scheme (or scam).
>
> http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/ponzi/
>
> Harry C.
>




Article: 221122 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Fred W4JLE" <w4jle@w4jle.com>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET> <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:00:33 -0500
Message-ID: <e88ac$43d01a1f$471d24c1$11563@ALLTEL.NET>

Of course, Seniors over 55 may get their guarenteed screwing fo $.90 a
whopping 10% discount, again send your payment to w4jle@w4jle.com DO IT
TODAY! This offer may end at any time...

"GBrown" <gkbrown@gwi.net> wrote in message
news:XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net...
> Do I get a seniors discount?
> .
> .
> .
> "Fred W4JLE" <w4jle@w4jle.com> wrote in message
> news:d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET...
> > Now this is not a scam, simply send $1.00 from your paypal to
> > w4jle@w4jle.com. I won't do anything for you, you will get nothing in
> > return, and if I get enough suckers to bite I will go to OUTBACK Steak
> House
> > and enjoy a meal on you.
> >
> > At least you know this won't cost more than a dollar, you need not worry
> > about getting screwed, I have already told you up front you are. So get
> your
> > guarenteed low cost screw job today!
> >
> > <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > > Tom, realize that many newsgroup readers are so young that they are
not
> > > familiar with the Ponzi scam.  Otherwise they would not buy programs
> > > that perpetuate the scheme (or scam).
> > >
> > > http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/ponzi/
> > >
> > > Harry C.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>




Article: 221123 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "SINYpyro" <*removethis*vanquish@earthlink.net>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Message-ID: <X9Vzf.3243$vU2.2707@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:21:27 GMT

Kill yourself?

"JJSomar" <jjsomar@gmx.de> wrote in message 
news:dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de...
>                Paypal Magic !!!!! Earn ?5000 within 2 weeks with 
> ease!!!!!.
>
>
> Read this message until the end, and you will find out how the money flows 
> in easy !!!!.
> Follow the steps and it WILL work. Trust me !!!!!.
>
> It's NOT illegal and it is NOT a scam !!!!!.
>
>
> The only thing you need is :    - E-MAIL ACCOUNT
>                                - PREMIER (FREE) or BUSINESS PAYPAL ACCOUNT
>                                - ?5 on this account (The only investment)
>                                - 30 minutes of your time
>
> There is no limit on how much money you can recieve, and you haven't got
> anything to lose with this Business program. I will explain how it works 
> !!!!!.
>
>
> Follow these 4 easy steps and it WILL work !!!!!.
>
>
> STEP 1 : SIGN UP FOR A FREE PAYPAL ACCOUNT !!!!!.
>
>         Paypal is a free and safe way to pay and receive money on the 
> Internet.
>         Creating a account is as easy as creating a MSN account.
>         Copy and paste the next line in your Internet browser and sign up.
>         HTTP://WWW.PAYPAL.COM
>
>         Be sure to sign up for a FREE Premier or Business account and not 
> for
>         a Personal account. You cannot receive CREDITCARD payments with
>         a Personal account and we can't have that. Do we !!!!!.
>
>
> STEP 2 : SENT ?5 TO YOUR PAYPAL ACCOUNT
>
>         This is your only investment to receive the money with ease.
>
>         With your Paypal account, send ?1 to each e-mailadres listed 
> below.
>         !!!!! IMPORTANT !!!!! Be sure to use this SUBJECT : *PLEASE PUT ME 
> ON
>         YOUR EMAIL LIST* when you send the money.
>
>         1) dexxatol@netcourrier.com
>         2) armygirl8568@hotmail.com
>         3) bovenpietje@hotmail.com
>         4) tjoewonli@hotmail.com
>         5) jjsomar@gmx.de
>
>
> STEP 3 : PUT YOUR E-MAILADRES ON THE LIST
>
>         After you have send ?1 to each e-mailadres, put your e-mailadres 
> on the
>         5th place. Remove e-mailadres number 1, and move each e-mailadres 
> 1
>         step up the ladder. !!!!! IMPORTANT !!!!!  BE SURE THAT THE 
> E-MAILADRES
>         YOU USE IS THE SAME AS YOU USED TO SIGN UP AT PAYPAL.
>
>         Remember that this is LEGAL. You are creating a service : an 
> e-mail
>         servicelist.
>
>
> STEP 4 : UPLOAD OR COPY THIS MESSAGE TO NEWSGROUPS, FORUMS ETC
>
>         There are 32.000 newsgroups. Upload or copy this message to at 
> least
>         200 newsgroups or forums etc, but remember that the more your 
> upload
>         the more people will see your message and the MORE MONEY WILL FLOW 
> IN.
>
>         How to upload to newsgroups and forums? :
>
>         After you have followed step 1,2,3 and 4, save this message (and 
> copy
>         so you can use it again). Use your Internet browser and Outlook 
> Express
>         or another newsreader and try to find FORUMS, NEWSGROUPS, BULLETIN
>         BOARDS, DISCUSSION GROUPS, CHAT SITES and ONLINE COMMUNITIES. Use
>         GOOGLE or use a NEWSERVER. Use every option to post this message.
>         Download PostXpert to send 1 message to more NEWSGROUPS at the
>         same time.
>
> !!!!! REMEMBER !!!!! The more you post this message the more MONEY WILL 
> FLOW IN.
>
>
> Why does this Business program work so well !!!!!.
>
> Lets asume that from the 200 (or more) messages that you have posted, only 
> 5
> people respond, you will have your ?5 back that you have invested. Those 5
> people will each send at least 200 messages with your e-mailadres on 
> number 4.
> That's 5 x 5 x ?1 = ?25. The next 25 people will also send 200 messages 
> with
> your adres on number 3. That's 25 x 5 x ?1 = ?125. The next 125 people 
> also send
> 200 messages with your name on number 2. That's 125 x 5 x ?1 = ?625. Those 
> 625
> people again also send 200 messages with your name on number 1. That will 
> give
> us a total off 625 x 5 x ?1 = ?3.125. This is only a EXAMPLE with 5 
> reactions.
> You WILL get MORE responses than that.
>
> Remember that most newsservers will leave the posted messages on there 
> servers
> for about 2 weeks. If you will post your message again, it WILL again 
> start
> from the beginning. So you can repeat this over and over again.
>
> Everyday MILLIONS of people are ONLINE and reading these messages, JUST 
> LIKE
> YOU RIGHT NOW. I also was sceptical in the beginning and have read a lot 
> of
> these messages. I also thought that it was bullshit. Until I thought : 
> What the
> hell!, only ?5. What's ?5 and a couple of minutes of my time to solve my 
> money
> problems.
>
> !!!!! REMEMBER !!!!! Follow every step, and IT WILL WORK, TRUST ME. !!!!!
>
>
>
> !!!!! BEST WISHES AND GOOD LUCK !!!!!
>
>
>
>
> 




Article: 221124 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: - exray - <exray@coqui.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:28:05 -0400
Message-ID: <11t0847nt2gj29a@corp.supernews.com>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET>

Fred W4JLE wrote:

> Now this is not a scam, simply send $1.00 from your paypal to
> w4jle@w4jle.com. I won't do anything for you, you will get nothing in
> return, and if I get enough suckers to bite I will go to OUTBACK Steak House
> and enjoy a meal on you.
> 
> At least you know this won't cost more than a dollar, you need not worry
> about getting screwed, I have already told you up front you are. So get your
> guarenteed low cost screw job today!

Sounds like a scam to me!  What if I send you a dollar and insist on 
medium rare and the next guy who sends a dollar wants well-done?  Are 
you going to decide? Will you be sending our money back?
Sorry, I see this as only leading to problems.  I'm not falling for it.

-Bill


Article: 221126 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: John Ferrell <johnferrell@sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: Starting point for antenna design
Message-ID: <a8ffs1tfv8gd1tq4739pqclfvketfktv55@4ax.com>
References: <Fyhxf.213965$V7.122439@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <1qncs191l12sktnafsutgk2oh8qnpo6jdb@4ax.com> <snuxf.192$or4.159@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:11:39 GMT

You miss my motives!
I have a Cushcraft A4 beam that works very well with my Ten Tec
Pegasus transceiver (inboard LDG tuner). In my eyes it is the perfect
rig!

I am not breaking any new ground. I am simply doing the lab exercise
of validating the EZNEC calculations. I may find it worthwhile to drop
to an 8-foot radiator and higher (10-Meters?) for ease of
construction. The principal area of interest is in radiators less than
1/4 wave in length.

At the moment, I am especially interested in the different feed
arrangements. I am starting with the "Gotham"  style of a single base
loading coil and minimal radials then I plan on an autotransformer
arrangement.  I have a fair amount of room, a lot of scrap metal and
wire is cheap! The principal limitations are time and my level of
intellect...

Staying on track will be a problem, moving the load up the radiator is
already looking appealing!


On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:14:32 GMT, Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net> wrote:

>John Ferrell wrote:
>> My current project is "What can I do with a 20 foot radiator?" Working
>> out the details (the devil is indeed in the details!) sure is a lot
>> easier with EZNEC than it is with physical modeling.
>
>Assuming a 20 ft. vertical with 20 ft. radials, how about
>feeding it with an autotuner, like the SGC-230, and using
>it for 40m-10m? It will also work at reduced power output
>on 75m.
John Ferrell W8CCW


Article: 221127 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Frank" <ve6cb@nospam.telus.net>
References: <1Qxxf.8331$dW3.1056@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com> <zZqdnZMfoYoxpFreRVn-ig@adelphia.com> <0NOxf.465$Jd.220@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Brain Teaser
Message-ID: <29Qxf.94004$6K2.41559@edtnps90>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:01:02 GMT

> Will Mathcad solve simultaneous equations?
> -- 
> 73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

It can handle matrices.

Frank 




Article: 221128 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Brain Teaser
References: <1Qxxf.8331$dW3.1056@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com> <zZqdnZMfoYoxpFreRVn-ig@adelphia.com> <0NOxf.465$Jd.220@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> <29Qxf.94004$6K2.41559@edtnps90>
Message-ID: <4NQxf.494$Jd.25@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:43:44 GMT

Frank wrote:
>>Will Mathcad solve simultaneous equations?
> 
> It can handle matrices.

So how would you put these two equations in a matrix?

2*sin(B) = sin(A)/[2*sin(A)-1]

2*cos(B) = cos(A)

:-)
-- 
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221129 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "amdx" <amdx@worldnet.att.net>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:41:47 -0600
Message-ID: <14990$43d04031$18d6b488$14336@KNOLOGY.NET>

   Most young people, after paying social security taxes for a few years,
and listening to the news, ARE familiar with a Ponzi scheme. (or scam)
              Mike

<hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Tom, realize that many newsgroup readers are so young that they are not
> familiar with the Ponzi scam.  Otherwise they would not buy programs
> that perpetuate the scheme (or scam).
>
> http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/ponzi/
>
> Harry C.
>




Article: 221130 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "amdx" <amdx@worldnet.att.net>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET> <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:49:08 -0600
Message-ID: <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET>

> Do I get a seniors discount?
>            GBrown

 You seniors!  ya had 40 years to save yer money, an now
you want the youngsters to pay more so you can get a discount.

                                                    hurumph
                                                         Mike




Article: 221131 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: 20 Jan 2006 02:08:57 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com>

Owen Duffy wrote:

> Bill, I often see the assertion that it is better to not bury radials.
> 
> Can you point me to any reputable texts or experimental evidence that
> shows the difference between shallow buried radials and radials lying
> "on top of the ground"?
> 
> Corrosion is often cited as a reason to use insulated buried radials,
> but is corrosion a significant risk in most locations. We widely use
> buried copper water pipes here, and copper clad earthing electrodes
> for the MEN power supply earthing, yet they don't seem to suffer
> significant corrosion in most places.
> 
> It seems to me that insulated buried radials are likely to be less
> effective in a lightning protection role.
> 
> Owen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Your mind is already made up. Do as you like.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221132 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Crazy George" <a013823@attglobal.net>
References: <1137691091.471022.293300@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: looking for antenna recommendation
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:46:37 -0600
Message-ID: <43d04f29@kcnews01>

You can use that antenna, and don't need the triplexer.  I would suggest
looking for an appropriate fixed mount, something which will clamp to the
rear rack for the bike, and use the mag base for other vehicles with larger
area for a magnet to stick to.  The antenna merely unscrews from the mount,
so moving (or stealing) it is simple.

-- 
Crazy George
W5VPQ
My real address is my ham call <at>ARRL.NET  The ATTGlobal is a SPAM trap.
<greg@littlebear.com> wrote in message
news:1137691091.471022.293300@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I'm looking for a recommendation for an external antenna to use with my
>
> Yaesu VX-7R handheld.
>
> This antenna would spend most of its life on a bicycle (on a rear rack
> behind the seat), which is how I commute to/from work.  However, I'd
> like to be able to use it occasionally on a car/truck so I'm thinking a
>
> magnetic base would be the most flexible.
>
> Ideally it would cover all of the VX-7R's bands, or at least the
> 6M/2M/70CM bands and it would have a cable with an SMA connector at the
>
> end.
>
> Ideally it would be something like Diamond's CR627B antenna
> (http://www.rfparts.com/diamond/cr627b.html) but without needing a
> triplexor and with a magnet mount.
>
> Now I realize that such a thing might not exist which is why I'm open
> to suggestions that I drop the 6M band requirement which would lose me
> the grounding requirement which would lose me the restriction against
> magnet mount.
>
> Ideas?
>
> greg
>





Article: 221133 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 02:51:18 GMT

On 20 Jan 2006 02:08:57 GMT, "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com> wrote:

>Owen Duffy wrote:
>
>> Bill, I often see the assertion that it is better to not bury radials.
>> 
>> Can you point me to any reputable texts or experimental evidence that
>> shows the difference between shallow buried radials and radials lying
>> "on top of the ground"?
>> 
>> Corrosion is often cited as a reason to use insulated buried radials,
>> but is corrosion a significant risk in most locations. We widely use
>> buried copper water pipes here, and copper clad earthing electrodes
>> for the MEN power supply earthing, yet they don't seem to suffer
>> significant corrosion in most places.
>> 
>> It seems to me that insulated buried radials are likely to be less
>> effective in a lightning protection role.
>> 
>> Owen
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Your mind is already made up. Do as you like.

I note that you decline to subtantiate the reasons underlying your
advice.

Has anyone references to sound evidence that supports Bill's advice
that radials "Lying on top of the ground is better." than buried.

Owen
--


Article: 221134 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET> <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net> <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET>
Message-ID: <QsYzf.10821$H71.4431@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:06:24 GMT

amdx wrote:
>  You seniors!  ya had 40 years to save yer money, an now
> you want the youngsters to pay more so you can get a discount.

I won't live long enough to get back all I paid into social
security plus interest.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221135 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "David G. Nagel" <nagel@core.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:22:25 -0600
Message-ID: <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com>

Owen Duffy wrote:
> On 20 Jan 2006 02:08:57 GMT, "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Owen Duffy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Bill, I often see the assertion that it is better to not bury radials.
>>>
>>>Can you point me to any reputable texts or experimental evidence that
>>>shows the difference between shallow buried radials and radials lying
>>>"on top of the ground"?
>>>
>>>Corrosion is often cited as a reason to use insulated buried radials,
>>>but is corrosion a significant risk in most locations. We widely use
>>>buried copper water pipes here, and copper clad earthing electrodes
>>>for the MEN power supply earthing, yet they don't seem to suffer
>>>significant corrosion in most places.
>>>
>>>It seems to me that insulated buried radials are likely to be less
>>>effective in a lightning protection role.
>>>
>>>Owen
>>
>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>>Your mind is already made up. Do as you like.
> 
> 
> I note that you decline to subtantiate the reasons underlying your
> advice.
> 
> Has anyone references to sound evidence that supports Bill's advice
> that radials "Lying on top of the ground is better." than buried.
> 
> Owen
> --

Owen;

Given the expertise that Bill has accumulated over  the years and the 
good advise he has given to anyone who asks I think that your attitude 
needs modification. When you were in school did you challenge your 
teachers this way? I think not. If you diagreed you kept it to your self 
or checked it out on your own.
For what it's worth everything that I have read tends towards placing 
the radials on the open ground, usually staked down so as to prevent 
tripping or getting caught in a lawn mower.


Dave WD9BDZ

Note to Bill: I know you don't need anyone to defend you but this guy 
isn't going to take any answer from anyone. I suggest that we drop him 
as a thread. I just know his response is going to be at me demanding 
positive confirmation. ;^)..


Article: 221136 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:16:39 GMT

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:22:25 -0600, "David G. Nagel" <nagel@core.com>
wrote:


>Owen;
>
>Given the expertise that Bill has accumulated over  the years and the 
>good advise he has given to anyone who asks I think that your attitude 
>needs modification. When you were in school did you challenge your 
>teachers this way? I think not. If you diagreed you kept it to your self 
>or checked it out on your own.

Dave,

I don't agree, I have never had a teacher worth his salt who responded
to polite questions as Bill did.

No, I don't believe something just because I read it on the 'net, I
would like to know why.

>For what it's worth everything that I have read tends towards placing 
>the radials on the open ground, usually staked down so as to prevent 
>tripping or getting caught in a lawn mower.

Yes, I see lots of web articles describing that in ham stations, but
it is not the only approach that I see documented and talked about.

In my limited experience, I have not seen commercial HF installations
with radial / ground wires laid above ground in preference to being
buried. The only cases I can recall were because of rock.

Whilst there are articles around about the performance of shallow
buried radials, I have not seen any that deal quantitatively with
radials laid on the ground, or pinned to the ground as you describe,
and the effects of those different installations on antenna
efficiency. That is what I was asking about.

Equally, there a plenty of articles where the author insists that
radials cannot work near the ground and they need to be some distance
above, some stating a quarter wave above.

They can't all have "better" efficiency, the only way to know is to
seek reasons why a configuration is better.

Bill proposed a "better" configuration and declined to explain why /
how it is better.

Owen
--


Article: 221137 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Charlie" <charlie@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:31:32 -0600
Message-ID: <11t0te46fg2pd47@news.supernews.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <ehqvs15nfbeceg68lpkj26o47s4te3d1ad@4ax.com>

I used about 1300 ft of insulated copper wire for my 72 radials. I chose to 
pin mine to the ground witrh fenc e staples. I did this work in the dead of 
winter. I then also covered them with a thin layer of soil.  Come spring the 
grass grows and the radials are hidden and beneath the applied soil layer so 
as to not interfere with the lawn mower.

Pictures of my installation for my Hustler 5BTV at this web page

1. http://www.ad5th.com/5-BTV.html

-- 

Charlie-AD5TH
www.deepsouthnet.net


"Gary Schafer" <gaschafer@comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:ehqvs15nfbeceg68lpkj26o47s4te3d1ad@4ax.com...
> If you are also going to use the radials for a lightning protection
> ground then bare wire is much better.
>
> 73
> Gary  K4FMX
>
>
> On 19 Jan 2006 06:04:29 -0800, john.minkjan@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>Question:
>>
>>Is you are making a HF-ground (radials just below the surface) Should
>>these radials be insulated or not?
>>
>>73 John
> 




Article: 221138 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: 20 Jan 2006 05:58:10 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehfhhg2lfsw000@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com>

David G. Nagel wrote:

> Dave WD9BDZ
> 
> Note to Bill: I know you don't need anyone to defend you but this guy
> isn't going to take any answer from anyone. I suggest that we drop
> him as a thread. I just know his response is going to be at me
> demanding positive confirmation. ;^)..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks, Dave. He's history. (I wonder if he'd like positive
confirmation?)

73, Bill W6WRT


Article: 221139 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <vb11t150tt2t2gcagf5ojo5jjf5snhu5ma@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 06:56:42 GMT

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:19:04 -0800, Richard Clark <kb7qhc@comcast.net>
wrote:


>These three paragraphs reveal arguments that vary by application,
>rather than by degree.  It seems to me that most AM stations' ground
>fields are shallow buried in gravel simply to permit foot traffic. The
>HAARP site uses a grid that is elevated sufficiently to allow
>vehicular traffic.  Neither really attend lightning as they are more
>ground screens and principally constructed for RF.

Yes, I understand that a ground system may be called upon to perform a
role as the other terminal of a Marconi for instance, and as the drain
for lightning or other EMP. Hence my earlier comment that a rule of
thumb that buried radials should be insulated seems to deny fullest
lightning protection to mitigate a small risk of corrosion.

>
>I found a much more compelling report in:
>UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
>Rural Electrification Administration
>REA BULLETIN 1751F-802
>SUBJECT: Electrical Protection Grounding Fundamentals
>Which is vastly more comprehensive and directly answers these
>questions when viewed in the terms of the resistivity of the earth
>connection.

OK, I found it and it is substantial. It will be an interesting read,
thank you for the pointer. It appears to be focused more on power /
lighting protection that an antenna ground system.

For others, the URL is
http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/publications/pdf_files/1751f802.pdf
.

One of the things that intrigues me is the common "expert" advice to
cut radials for 7MHz to 33' long and bury them. It seems to me that
when buried and considering the wire as a transmission line, the
velocity factor will be somewhere between 0.3 and 0.8 depending on the
soil type, so that 33' is likely to be closer to a half wave
electrically, and present a relatively high and reactive impedance at
the antenna base if it were not for the attenuation of the wave on the
radial. It would seem a length more like 17' to 20' would be a better
estimate by the SWAG method (Scientific Wild Arsed Guess), although if
ground attenuation is high enough, it could be cut shorter and the
extra wire used for another radial for a more effective solution.

More when I digest some of the article.

Thanks again... Owen
--


Article: 221140 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:48:00 -0800
Message-ID: <11t1ceh5gjs7i95@corp.supernews.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com>

Owen Duffy wrote:
> 
> Bill, I often see the assertion that it is better to not bury radials.
> 
> Can you point me to any reputable texts or experimental evidence that
> shows the difference between shallow buried radials and radials lying
> "on top of the ground"?
> 
> Corrosion is often cited as a reason to use insulated buried radials,
> but is corrosion a significant risk in most locations. We widely use
> buried copper water pipes here, and copper clad earthing electrodes
> for the MEN power supply earthing, yet they don't seem to suffer
> significant corrosion in most places.
> 
> It seems to me that insulated buried radials are likely to be less
> effective in a lightning protection role.
> 
> Owen

You're asking some good questions.

Many years ago, I was doing some ground system experiments with a 
vertical antenna. I had strung a bunch of radials, consisting of small 
insulated hookup wire, on the surface of the ground and I was measuring 
antenna input impedance. I was surprised to discover distinct resonance 
effects as the radial lengths were changed, something which I hadn't 
expected -- they were acting more like elevated than buried radials. It 
was summertime and the clay ground was pretty dry.

Then I took some pieces of mild steel wire and "stapled" the wires down 
to conform with the ground and bring the wires into close contact with 
it. The resonant effects disappeared and the radials acted more like 
buried ones. I concluded that even a very small air gap between the 
radials and the ground provided some independence from the ground.

More recently I've done some modeling to try and understand the 
phenomenon a bit better. I'll give those results in my response to 
another of your recent postings.

Oh, as for corrosion -- I'm sure it depends on the soil. But there's no 
harm in using insulated wire, as far as RF ground effectiveness goes. I 
suppose it would limit the lighning protection voltage to the insulation 
voltage, however.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


Article: 221141 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Dr.Ace" <NoSpam@BedfordSucks.com>
References: <CdSdnW2_R4YMFlLenZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Lightning Arrestor & Protection Of Receiver ?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:58:48 -0500
Message-ID: <94765$43d0b434$4e0bd10$27948@DIALUPUSA.NET>


"Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com> wrote in message 
news:CdSdnW2_R4YMFlLenZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Hello:
>
> Very interesting comments on my question of a few days ago re lightning 
> arrestors.
> Thank you all for trying to educate me on this subject; really find it 
> confusing.
> Thread is a bit buried by now, so thought I'd start another one.
>
> I fully understand that the best approach is to (also) just disconnect 
> everything.
>
> But if not around, here's what I don't understand and concerns me.
>
> Assuming a "nearby" strike, and a subsequent emp pulse that's picked up by 
> a receive only antenna
> wire strung outside:
>
> No matter how quickly an arrestor's gas tube fires, and diverts the pulse 
> to a good RF ground, the fact that it takes
> a few hundred volt threshold to fire makes "any" gas tube type of arrestor 
> almost worthless re the protection of a receiver whose front end certainly 
> won't take a few hundred volts, even for u-seconds, probably.
>
> Do you agree with this statement, or am I missing something ?
>
> Thanks,
> Bob
>

Hi Bob,
I'm Ace - WH2T.
Here's my story.
So far I have been very lucky. Neighbors closest on my north and south sides 
have both been hit, BAD SEVERE strikes. We live on a hill.
  I had a strike take out a cheap portable TV that was in the kitchen and it 
blew a fuse in a VCR. It also came in the telephone line and blew up some FM 
intercoms that were connected to the telephone line. After that happened I 
had a commercial lightning arrestor installed by my electric power company 
at the electric meter.

  I use 2 HF antennas, a 272 ft delta loop and a 160 meter band 1/4 wave 
inverted L antenna, both antennas go thru my MFJ-989C Tuner . When I am not 
on the air I leave the antenna switch on the tuner in the "Dummy Load" 
position. That connects a 300 watt 50 ohm resistor to the radio's antenna 
jack and grounds both antennas.

 The main lightning problems I have had in the 12 years at this QTH are 
surges coming in the telephone line.
I noticed when I moved here that all the telephone jacks in the house were 
black. I lost 9 computer modems in short order. I installed the smallest 
fast blow fuses I could find in both sides of the telephone line (they are 
under 100 ma) . The next time there was a nearby strike it blew both fuses 
and still blew my computer modem.
  After that I installed three 130 Volt MOVs outside the house in the 
telephone box , one across the telephone line and one from each side of the 
telephone line to ground. I also installed a very small pigtail neon lamp 
between or across the 2 sides of the telephone line. It acts as a gas tube 
type of arrestor, and lights when the telephone rings, or when lightning 
strikes nearby; the threshold to fire is under 100 volts. I also installed a 
DPDT knife switch , to break the telephone line when the computer is not 
connected to the internet. No further problems. I live out in the country 
dial up is all that is available here other than expensive satellite access.
 Anyway , now on to your question.

I got the following Info from another ham.

>From my commercial broadcast days the lightning control solution for
tall insulated base AM towers (which were always experiencing direct
lightning strikes) was to use 2 inch diameter copper balls spaced 1/4
to 1/2 inch from each other (depending on peak RF voltage present) at
the base of each tower on heavy arms as a lightning spark gap. Then
the 1/4 inch tubing feeding station RF into each tower base would be
formed into a 3 turn loop with a 12 inch diameter, with about 2 inch
spacing between each turn.  I would do the same with the coax feeding
repeaters and studio-transmitter links on these towers.  I never lost
any equipment using these techniques.



I realized I have to mention that I use an inductive RF coupling-
impedance transformer in my homemade transmatch in order to eliminate
a direct dc path from the ladder line to the transceiver input.  I
also use high tension teflon coated wire for the primary turns in the
transformer.  Lightning would be common mode on the transmission line
and therefore not inductively coupled through the transmatch.  The
issue then becomes voltage breakdown between transformer primary and
secondary windings (along with minor capacitive coupling), hence the
teflon coated wire.

Concerning possible lightning on the ladder line, I use adjustable
spark gaps from each conductor to ground outside of my building.



I hope this is of some help.

Ace - www.WH2T.com




Article: 221142 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Dr.Ace" <NoSpam@BedfordSucks.com>
References: <1137539656.712611.283320@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 05:06:26 -0500
Message-ID: <ad086$43d0b5fc$4e0bd10$27996@DIALUPUSA.NET>


"Maarten" <maartenkoning2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:1137539656.712611.283320@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I seek some help, advise or suggestions on HF antenna's. I've bought a
> house with a plot of approx 330 x 80 ft / 100 x 23 mtr available for HF
> antenna's.
> But when I research HAM HF antenna's, home build or commercially
> available, I only find a lot of small, smaller and smallest HF
> antenna's (eg. wire antenna's, inverted V, T2DF) that don't take full
> advantage of the size of my land available. On the other end of the
> spectrum there are plans for very, VERY large antenna's like Rhombic
> and Beverage. For this size of antenna's my plot is to small.
>
> Do you have suggestions for HF antenna's I should check out? Let me
> know in this forum or pm me. Thanx in advance. 73
>
> Maarten
> maartenkoning2002 (at) yahoo.com
>

Check out -
http://www.bloomington.in.us/~wh2t/ant.htm

I discuss some large antennas.
73, Ace - WH2T




Article: 221143 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 02:07:20 -0800
Message-ID: <11t1dipb6b2jvde@corp.supernews.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <vb11t150tt2t2gcagf5ojo5jjf5snhu5ma@4ax.com>

Owen Duffy wrote:
> . . .
> One of the things that intrigues me is the common "expert" advice to
> cut radials for 7MHz to 33' long and bury them. It seems to me that
> when buried and considering the wire as a transmission line, the
> velocity factor will be somewhere between 0.3 and 0.8 depending on the
> soil type, so that 33' is likely to be closer to a half wave
> electrically, and present a relatively high and reactive impedance at
> the antenna base if it were not for the attenuation of the wave on the
> radial. It would seem a length more like 17' to 20' would be a better
> estimate by the SWAG method (Scientific Wild Arsed Guess), although if
> ground attenuation is high enough, it could be cut shorter and the
> extra wire used for another radial for a more effective solution.

Modeling clearly shows that using elevated radials which are too long 
degrades the efficiency. A quarter wavelength can be determined by 
constructing a dipole at the height of the proposed radial system and 
adjusting it to resonance. The maximum length of the radials is half the 
length of that dipole. If you make them longer, efficiency drops. Very 
close to the ground, the length of a quarter wavelength decreases 
substantially, so a free-space quarter wavelength can easily be too long.

Modeling presents a very idealized situation, overly so when dealing 
with ground. But I believe the general trends and conclusions are 
instructive. I modeled a 40 meter vertical over average ground. It had 
four 34 foot radials, which were quarter wave resonant when elevated 
very high. As I lowered the radials from one foot high to 0.1 inch high, 
the gain dropped 4 dB. The main cause of the drop was that the radials 
were becoming too long at the low height above ground. Shortening them 
to 19.6 feet, the resonant length at that height, increased the field 
strength by 2.45 dB. Burying them lowered the field strength to 1.7 dB 
below the field strength when 0.1 inch above the ground and of proper 
length. There wasn't any substantial change in field strength as the 
length was increased beyond about 30 feet, or when the depth was varied 
>from 0.1 to 6 inches. These changes in field strength are solely due to 
changes in efficiency; the pattern shape stays the same.

When modeled at 0.1 inch above the ground, the radial current 
distribution is approximately sinusoidal, as in elevated radials. When 
buried, even an inch, the current decays in an approximately exponential 
fashion away from the center. In the case of the modeled antenna system, 
the current was substantially zero beyond about 40 feet.

Conclusions are:

1. A small number of radials just above the ground are theoretically a 
bit more efficient than the same number of buried radials, providing 
that they're not longer than a resonant quarter wavelength at that 
height. I say theoretically, though, because I believe it would be 
impossible to maintain current balance in the radials at a low height. 
So one or two radials would likely hog all the current, resulting in a 
less efficient system.

2. Making elevated radials too long, even if the elevation consists of 
being just above the ground, can seriously reduce the antenna 
efficiency. Buried radials, on the other hand, are insensitive to length 
provided they're sufficiently long. This latter fact is well known. I've 
found in other modeling I've done that making elevated radials shorter 
than a resonant quarter wavelength doesn't negatively impact the 
efficiency. So if you have to guess, guess on the short side.

The amount of differences you'll see in real antenna systems will vary 
quite a bit depending on ground characteristics, frequency, and number 
of radials. And it would be impossible to suspend radials precisely over 
a perfectly flat and homogeneous ground as I've done with the models. 
But I believe the conclusions are valid.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


Article: 221144 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <co4Af.11114$_S7.2200@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:07:36 GMT

Owen Duffy wrote:
> Whilst there are articles around about the performance of shallow
> buried radials, I have not seen any that deal quantitatively with
> radials laid on the ground, or pinned to the ground as you describe,
> and the effects of those different installations on antenna
> efficiency.

Will NEC-4 accurately model radials at different depths?
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221145 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <vb11t150tt2t2gcagf5ojo5jjf5snhu5ma@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <%W4Af.15171$Yu.2670@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:44:43 GMT

Owen Duffy wrote:
> One of the things that intrigues me is the common "expert" advice to
> cut radials for 7MHz to 33' long and bury them. It seems to me that
> when buried and considering the wire as a transmission line, the
> velocity factor will be somewhere between 0.3 and 0.8 depending on the
> soil type, so that 33' is likely to be closer to a half wave
> electrically, and present a relatively high and reactive impedance at
> the antenna base if it were not for the attenuation of the wave on the
> radial.

You seem to be referring to the feedpoint impedance of a
single radial the virtual impedance of which would depend
upon the magnitude and phase of the forward and reflected
wave on the radial wire. The single-wire transmission line
formula gives a Z0 for each radial as less than 100 ohms.
Given the probability of a high degree of attenuation and
the number of radials in parallel, the impedance presented
at the base is likely to be relatively low no matter what
the length of the radials assuming an electrical length
of longer than 1/4WL.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221146 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Miller <NOSPAM@neosoft.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <f3n1t1pt81vcukq70f84ddpoci5l3ilr01@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <ehqvs15nfbeceg68lpkj26o47s4te3d1ad@4ax.com> <11t0te46fg2pd47@news.supernews.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:50:35 GMT

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:31:32 -0600, "Charlie" <charlie@usc.edu> wrote:

>I used about 1300 ft of insulated copper wire for my 72 radials.

So they're about 18 feet long, giving you a short, dense pattern?

bob
k5qwg

> I chose to 
>pin mine to the ground witrh fenc e staples. I did this work in the dead of 
>winter. I then also covered them with a thin layer of soil.  Come spring the 
>grass grows and the radials are hidden and beneath the applied soil layer so 
>as to not interfere with the lawn mower.
>
>Pictures of my installation for my Hustler 5BTV at this web page
>
>1. http://www.ad5th.com/5-BTV.html


Article: 221147 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <vb11t150tt2t2gcagf5ojo5jjf5snhu5ma@4ax.com> <11t1dipb6b2jvde@corp.supernews.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 07:20:06 -0600
Message-ID: <43d0e2c9_5@newsfeed.slurp.net>

"Roy Lewallen"  wrote
> 2. Making elevated radials too long, even if the elevation consists of 
> being just above the ground, can seriously reduce the antenna efficiency. 
> Buried radials, on the other hand, are insensitive to length provided 
> they're sufficiently long. This latter fact is well known. I've found in 
> other modeling I've done that making elevated radials shorter than a 
> resonant quarter wavelength doesn't negatively impact the efficiency. So 
> if you have to guess, guess on the short side.
_____________

NEC studies of a 1/4-wave vertical radiator working against three 1/4-wave 
horizontal radials at 120 degrees, when all elements are elevated 12 feet 
above a perfect ground plane show virtually identical peak gain as when the 
same radiator minus the radials is mounted with its base at the perfect 
ground plane, and connects to it though two ohms (about the same ground loss 
as produced by 120 buried radials, each 1/4-wave long).

As few as four elevated radials have been used at AM broadcast sites where a 
typical system of 120 buried radials was impossible due to rocky terrain. 
The FCC "efficiency" of these radiator systems meets/exceed  FCC 
requirements for radiation at 1 km.

Conclusion:  a few elevated radials can be the electrical equivalent of a 
classic "Brown, Lewis & Epstein" system of 113  (or 120)buried radials.

RF 



Article: 221148 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:56:28 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <dqqq6c$h20$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com>


"Owen Duffy"  wrote
> Whilst there are articles around about the performance of shallow
> buried radials, I have not seen any that deal quantitatively with
> radials laid on the ground, or pinned to the ground as you describe,
> and the effects of those different installations on antenna
> efficiency.
========================================

Owen, you may be interested in Program RADIALS3.

Once radials are buried in the ground, just below soil surface, I
don't think depth of burial matters very much.  But things happen very
fast when resting on the soil surface and conductor height is raised
only slightly.

Consider a single counterpoise wire. When resting on the soil surface
propagation velocity along the wire is about half of the free space
velocity. Propagation velocity increases fast as height increases.
When height is greater than length the VF is very nearly 1.

When resting on the ground there is an equivalent loss resistance
distributed along the wire due to the mutual impedance with the
ground.  The input resistance at resonance is high. Q is very small.
But a lot depends on soil resistivity.

With increasing height the coupling with ground decreases and so does
the input resistance. When height is greater than length the input
resistance is due only to conductor loss resistance and resonant Q is
high.

Resonant frequency increases with height due to the increase in VF.
The increase in VF is due to decrease in capacitance to ground when
considered as a transmission line.

Changes in capacitance, VF, resonant frequency, and induced loss in
the ground, mostly occur in first few inches of height above ground
but cannot be neglected until height is roughly greater than length.
---- 
...........................................................
Regards from Reg, G4FGQ
For Free Radio Design Software go to
http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp
...........................................................




Article: 221149 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <vb11t150tt2t2gcagf5ojo5jjf5snhu5ma@4ax.com> <11t1dipb6b2jvde@corp.supernews.com> <43d0e2c9_5@newsfeed.slurp.net>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:09:59 -0600
Message-ID: <43d0ee79_3@newsfeed.slurp.net>

"Richard Fry"
> NEC studies of a 1/4-wave vertical radiator working against three 1/4-wave 
> horizontal radials at 120 degrees, when all elements are elevated 12 feet 
> above a perfect ground plane... etc
____________

I neglected to include that the frequency in these studies was 1 MHz, so 
elevation of the system was about 0.012 wavelengths (Reg).

RF 



Article: 221150 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: HamPoll.Com wants your opinions
Message-ID: <qn7Af.15211$Yu.2035@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:31:38 GMT

HamPoll exists in order to give amateurs a chance to speak for themselves 
and to provide accurate, reliable polling data on a variety of issues 
related to the amateur radio service.

You are welcome to browse the polling data we have, but we especially 
encourage US amateurs visiting here to register with thier callsign and vote
in the HamPoll Polling Station.

Whether you come to browse, to discuss or submit new polls, or to tender 
your vote, be sure to visit regularly as new polls are included from time to
time and the poll data changes as more hams participate day to day.

Stop by at: http://www.hampoll.com

Charles Brabham,  N5PVL
HamPoll Administrator





Article: 221151 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:44:52 -0600
Message-ID: <12633-43D10574-1718@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net>
References: <ad086$43d0b5fc$4e0bd10$27996@DIALUPUSA.NET>

Congratulations Dr. Ace!

You sure know how

to trash a place!

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI



Article: 221152 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen <n7zzt@127.0.0.1>
Subject: Re: noise bridge
References: <678ea$43ccf378$42a1bfc2$9536@FUSE.NET>
Message-ID: <7S7Af.171$2o5.140@dukeread11>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:04:10 -0700

jawod wrote:

> As I read through the various opinions regarding antenna load,
> impedance, etc., most of the arguments seem to be mathematically oriented.
> 
> Does anyone use a noise bridge (as mentioned in ARRL pubs) to determine
> the feedpoint impedance?

I use one rather often as a means of tuning my antenna for best reception on
HF (not transmit). I have had a general or 2 test my assumption and they
seem to hold up (with some minor tweaking to clean up stray impedances).


> 
> Is there a source for these bridges?

mfj makes a nice antenna noise bridge. its simple to use too (only 1 knob -
power).This device is used concurrently with a tuner for best results.

-- 
DE N7ZZT
Eric Oyen
Phoenix, Arizona
e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com
the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence 
has its limits.


Article: 221153 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Bob <bob3bob3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: what are Microwave Antennas?
References: <1137700291.373977.273720@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <vvd7a3-30d.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:59:26 -0600

Hmmm

Well I can see that the term doesnt have a rigid definition as such. The 
antenna part is obvious and I hope doesnt need me to elaborate. The word 
microwave generally means a "small wavelength", probably anything higher 
than the frequency of 1Ghz but it may be defined more accurately 
elsewehere. The wavelength is inversely proportional to the frequency 
and at 1GHz is about 300mm.

Microwave communciation is generally characterised by short distances 
and line of sight or visible paths between one end and the other. 
Examples might be mobile phones (900MHz, 1.8GHz, 2.4GHz), WiFi computer 
links (2.4GHz, 5.6GHz), high capacity data links (2-25GHz) and so on. 
(1000MHz=1GHz) Once the path becomes obstructed or goes over the horizon 
the signal gets severely attenuated.

Antennas are designed and manufactured for the service and range required.

- Something to control a toy truck with you'll want to radiate in as 
wide as a coverage angle as possible. When you tilt the controller back 
and forth you still want it to work. Keep in mind that microwave 
radiation also reflects of objects pretty well, so for short range this 
is often the mode of operation.
- A WiFi antenna on a laptop and a users mobile phone generally needs to 
radiate in a roughly horizontal direction but at every azimath. By 
concentrating the radiation in a desired direction you get better range 
or can get away with using less power. The WiFI and mobile phone base 
station on tbe other hand may have more stringent radiation and 
directionality requirements. The service area may be deliberately 
restricted by the choice of antennas
- A high capacity microwave data link will pretty well always use high 
gain high directive antennas at each end. This is so you can make the 
signal work (say) upto 50km with low power. It is also very important 
for these links to only have a direct (non reflective) path between each 
other. The extra time delay introduced by a reflection can foul up the 
link operation. (You may have heard the term "multipathing")

Generally speaking an antenna is made up of half wavelength elements at 
the desired frequency, arranged to concentrate the radiation in the 
desired direction. (look up the antenna terms 'colinear' and 'yagi') 
More in common use are antennas that use large reflectors behind the 
element connected to the cable. (look up 'parabolic dish', 'gridpack' & 
'patch antennas'. What you see on a comms tower is the same theory of 
operation as a deep space tracking dish.

The theory of operation of a microwave antenna is pretty much the same 
as an antenna made for a lower frequency, just everything is much smaller!

 From here on in you'll have to do some research on what antenna gain is 
and how to build it into the structure.

Cheers Bob VK2YQA

Bug3 wrote:
> 
> Wondering what are microwave antennas, what do they do, how do they
> work, etc?


Article: 221154 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
Subject: Re: Lightning Arrestor & Protection Of Receiver ?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:15:14 -0600
Message-ID: <19272-43D128B2-1581@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net>
References: <94765$43d0b434$4e0bd10$27948@DIALUPUSA.NET>

Ace, WH2T wrote:
"I realized I have to mention that I use an inductive RF coupling -
impedance transformer in my homemade transmatch in order to eliminate a
direct d-c path from the ladder line to the transceiver input."

Lightning is a threat to antennas and to items connected with them.
Static charges may build in a time of clear skies, especially ahead of a
thunderstorm. Guy-wire insulators  often flashover to announce a storm
is approaching.

Radio towers in broadcast stations get lightning strikes over and over
again, but loss of equipment or even air time is minimal.

The beacon atop a tower is most exposed, but it is protected by a
vertical metal rod attached to the tower near the beacon and extending
well above it. Often this rod is an 8-ft Copperweld groundrod bolted to
the tower with its tip point skyward. Pits on the rod show it takes
hits. Beacon survival shows it does not take hits. The protection works.

Guy-wire insulators are often doubled or tripled at the tower attachment
points to discourage flashovers here.

An air gap is provided across the tower base insulator. In theory,
lightning ionizes rhe air in the gap and shunts the charge to ground
before it gets into the feeder system. Spacing is usually adjusted to
only slightly wider than the gap will breakdown on the transmitted
signal. I`ve examined many of these ball gaps and horn gaps and seen no
evidence of flashover.

To discourage lightning, a turn or two is often made in the conductor
feeding the tower. I haven`t seen pts on the balls or horn gaps
indicating that the tiny inductance added by a turn or two in the
feedwire does any good.

A static-drain choke which has a very high impedance at the operating
frequency, but has a low d-c resistance, is often connected across the
tower`s base insulator on the line side of the base impedance matching
unit. It may be placed on the tower side of the matching unit if there
is no d-c continuity through the matching unit.

All the stations I`ve worked in had an air-core 1:1 coupling transformer
in the tower matching unit. Primary and secondary share the same axis
but are seoarated by a metal rake which serves as a Faraday screen. It
is a picket fence between the coils. The tines of the rake have no
electrical connection at one end, but the backside of the rake connects
all the tines together and firmly grounds them.

The rake allows magnetic coupling between the coils but prohibits
electric field coupling between the coils. The rake is a very effective
lightning stopper. It is full of pits where lightning has struck. 

 Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI 



Article: 221155 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Lightning Arrestor & Protection Of Receiver ?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:34:23 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <dqrdvv$7ev$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
References: <CdSdnW2_R4YMFlLenZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@comcast.com>

When lightning directly strikes either the antenna or the dwelling,
despite all the precautions, ANYTHING can happen.

The direct strike is just as likely to be on the dwelling and its
occupants as the ordinary radio antenna.

So concentrate precautions on your house, the more valuable of your
possessions. Only then think about your inverted-L and your radio
equipment.

Just a logical way of thinking about things.

A direct strike will probably never happen anyway.
=========================================




Article: 221156 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "amdx" <amdx@worldnet.att.net>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <14990$43d04031$18d6b488$14336@KNOLOGY.NET> <1137784735.650874.68910@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:58:59 -0600
Message-ID: <d8ac9$43d14102$18d6b488$28611@KNOLOGY.NET>

>still there are enough of the young guys and girls that are
> ignorant of the Ponzi type scam
>
> Curmudgeonly yours,   Harry C.
>
 A class on consumerism ("they want to take your money") should be a
required
class in middle school.
 And don't get me started on all the bogus, weight loss products, grow tall
products, second grade teacher developed common cold product, herbs that
will stop diabetes and
heart disease, anti hairloss products, improve your memory, shrink your
prostate, grow penis, cleanse your blood, detoxify your liver, give you more
energy, stop your joint pain, make you more appealing to the opposite sex, ,
improve your eyesight, slow
the ageing process, improve your circulation, make exercise easy, prevent
cancer, make
your skin beautiful, health restoring magnetic shoe inserts, magnetic water
enhancers.
  I think you got me started ;-0
And speaking of curmudgeons, Andy Rooney said
" Happy birthday?--I DON'T THINK SO."
                     Mike, I promise to enjoy my day! Bye





Article: 221157 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <3mi2t15vgba1h1ctc421tk6olunkuigtvk@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <dqqq6c$h20$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:43:15 GMT

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:56:28 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
<g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com> wrote:


>Owen, you may be interested in Program RADIALS3.

>For Free Radio Design Software go to
>http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp

Reg, did I miss something. RADIALS3 doesn't seem to be in the index at
http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp/page3.html#S301%22

Owen
--


Article: 221158 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
Subject: Re: Lightning Arrestor & Protection Of Receiver ?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:51:20 -0600
Message-ID: <20330-43D14D48-1860@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net>
References: <dqrdvv$7ev$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>

Reg, G4FGQ wrote:
"The direct strike is just as likely to be on the dwelling and its
occcupants as the ordinary radio antennas."

True, unless the antennas are much taller than the dwelling. That was
the case of the radio stations. Occupants were safe, protected by the
tall radio towers. Just as the towertop rod protects the beacon. the
tower protects the nearby structures under it (within its "cone of
protection"). Agreed that people are more important than radios. I don`t
want to cede people or radios.

Here on the Gulfcoast of the U.S.A., the climate is semitropical and
thunderstorms are abundant. Radio towers are struck by lightning
repeatedly by nearly every passing thunderstorm and these are frequent.

Where I`ve worked, buildings on the station`s property were never
struck, nor was a serious electric surge ever transmitted into any
building other than one of the "dog houses" at the towers where it is
expected.and prepared for the stroke.

The buildings on radio station properties are protected by big lightning
rods, the towers, just as Benjamin Franklin predicted in 1735.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI



Article: 221159 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:05:51 GMT

Owen Duffy wrote:
> I often see the assertion that it is better to not bury radials.

Here's a data point for all. I'm taking down my 102 ft dipole
and putting back up my 130 ft dipole. I measured the resonant
frequency and feedpoint impedance of the 102 ft dipole both
while hanging in the air as a V and laying on the ground.

Hanging in the air: Resonant at 4.52 MHz with a feedpoint
impedance of 22 ohms.

Laying on the ground: Resonant at 2.17 MHz with a feedpoint
impedance of 108 ohms.

Laying the insulated wires on the ground resulted in a
reduction of VF of about 50%. The marked increase in
feedpoint impedance was due to the attenuation of the
reflected waves arriving back at the feedpoint and
agrees closely with my calculations of such.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221160 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
Message-ID: <OkcAf.12300$F_3.4931@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:10:06 GMT

Cecil Moore wrote:
> Laying the insulated wires on the ground resulted in a
> reduction of VF of about 50%. The marked increase in
> feedpoint impedance was due to the attenuation of the
> reflected waves arriving back at the feedpoint and
> agrees closely with my calculations of such.

I forgot to say: Note that the dipole laying on the ground
was close to one wavelength, yet the feedpoint impedance
is not all that high. It would appear that 1/2 wavelength
buried radials do NOT present a high impedance.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221161 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <43D181DC.19682475@worldnet.att.net>
From: "John O. Kopf" <kopfj@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 00:35:02 GMT

Just forward all of the pyramid scam messages to:
FEDERAL TRADE COMISSION PYRAMID SCAM PROSECUTION <uce@ftc.gov>

A copy to the sender saying that posting this is a FEDERAL OFFENSE helps
as well!  :>}

JK



hhc314@yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> amdx, still there are enough of the young guys and girls that are
> ignorant of the Ponzi type scam and buy these worthless software
> packages that annoy us all on a daily basis. SNIP


Article: 221162 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 00:55:13 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <dqs0ph$grb$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <dqqq6c$h20$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <3mi2t15vgba1h1ctc421tk6olunkuigtvk@4ax.com>


"Owen Duffy"  wrote
>
> >For Free Radio Design Software go to
> >http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp
>
> Reg, did I miss something. RADIALS3 doesn't seem to be in the index
at
> http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp/page3.html#S301%22
>
> Owen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Very sorry Owen.  My mistake.

The name of the program is RADIALS2.

It deals only with buried radials.

I am at present trying to write a program about coil-loaded
counterpoises and artificial grounds at low heights. But it's a beast
to model mathematically.
----
Reg.




Article: 221163 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:38:08 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <dqsab0$heu$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <OkcAf.12300$F_3.4931@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>

"Cecil Moore"  wrote
 It would appear that 1/2 wavelength
> buried radials do NOT present a high impedance.
>
===============================
Cec,

. . . .  as demonstrated by program RADIALS2

which treats radials as transmission lines.  As they truly are.

The permittivity of soil surrounding buried radials is high. It is due
to the moisture content of the soil.  Water has a high permittivity K
= about 80.  If the moisture content is 20 percent then the
permittivity is roughly K = 16 plus a little bit for the dry content.

The poor, low conductance of the dielectric material, in conjunction
with wire inductance, also has an effect.

The soil is mainly, minute rock particles and a little air.  Rock has
K = 4 or 5.  Air = 1.

Velocity factor of any transmission line  = 1 / Sqrt( Permittivity ).

In some circumstances, there may be no point in having radial lengths
longer than 1/10th or 1/12th of the free-space wavelength.

If the soil has any magnetic material in it then the velocity is even
lower.  But it's a waste of time trying to tune buried radials by
sprinkling iron filings around your garden.

The attenuation along buried radials is usually so high that even
1/4-wave resonance doesn't show up.  Impedance versus length at low HF
is a smooth curve approximately equal to Zo.  But input impedance of a
set of radials is NOT equal to the impedance of the individual wires
all in parallel. They interact with each other. The Law of Diminishing
Returns applies.

In perfectly dry desert sand with a resistivity of 5,000 or 10,000
ohm-metres and K = 3, the 1/2-wave resonance may appear on an
impedance vs frequency curve.  Program RADIALS2 shows this effect as
evidence of reasonable modelling accuracy.

This is a case of ground loss decreasing as soil resistivity increases
further.  It appears attenuation is a maximum  when soil resistivity
is around several hundred ohm-metres (377?). Which is quite a poor
soil.

(I once had a garden of sandy soil. Resistivity was 400 ohm-metres
even in wet weather. Eventually I moved house. SR fell to 70.  On the
160m band 7 radials, each about 10 feet long, plus the cold water
pipe, were good enough with a 3/8 wave inverted -L.  I never tried
B,L,E's 118 radials, 1 wavelength long.)

But in bone dry sand-desert soil, just rock mixed with air, at low HF
one would not use a system of radials under a 1/4-wave vertical.  The
antenna could be a horizontal dipole lying on the ground.  ;o)
----
...........................................................
Regards from Reg, G4FGQ
For Free Radio Design Software go to
http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp
...........................................................




Article: 221164 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Tom the Canuck" <tvaus@sympatico.ca>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET>   <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net>   <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET>   <QsYzf.10821$H71.4431@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <Q42dnVY9e9WoJkzeRVn-ug@gwi.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Message-ID: <kDjAf.22367$xk1.619062@news20.bellglobal.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 00:27:41 -0500

"GBrown" <gkbrown@gwi.net> wrote in message
news:Q42dnVY9e9WoJkzeRVn-ug@gwi.net...
> And, how do you know that they didn't pay into the system. Was it the
color
> of there skin, there facial features, or did you have an inside scoop?
What
> makes you think there not citizens? Part of the problem is jumping to
> conclusions.
> I do understand your point and it does happen but to just blurt out
> statements that mite be false, well...............
>
> --
>
> <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Same here Cecil.
> >
> > The young kids don't have a clue about Social Security, because it
> > isn't important to them at their time in life, nor was it for me when I
> > was 25.  None of us ever thought that we would live to see 65, hence it
> > was just like income tax, something that you simply had to pay.

Wow there GBrown,
    Don't blast Harry C. He has a point. Up here in the great white north
    known as Canada, I have seen deadbeats claim Social Insurance.
    They do nothing to contribte to society, they just wait for 'check day'
    to pay the rent, and blow the rest on beer and drugs only to be broke
    in a day or two until the next month*. My taxes go towards paying them.
    Is that right? I think not. Is it the same in the states? If one day I
need to
    do the same, rest assured it will NOT be wasted on beer and drugs. I
    have paid into this for many years. I would just want something back
from
    all the $$$ I had deducted from my pay should I ever need it.
Tom the Canuck.

* Do they eat food? Utilities? I do not know and do not want to..
   What they do for the rest of the month is beyond me.




Article: 221165 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Tom the Canuck" <tvaus@sympatico.ca>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <14990$43d04031$18d6b488$14336@KNOLOGY.NET> <1137784735.650874.68910@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <43D181DC.19682475@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Message-ID: <sUjAf.22371$xk1.620633@news20.bellglobal.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 00:45:58 -0500


"John O. Kopf" <kopfj@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:43D181DC.19682475@worldnet.att.net...
> Just forward all of the pyramid scam messages to:
> FEDERAL TRADE COMISSION PYRAMID SCAM PROSECUTION <uce@ftc.gov>
>
> A copy to the sender saying that posting this is a FEDERAL OFFENSE helps
> as well!  :>}
>
> JK
>
>

Hey John,
    I like your post. Good idea.
    What about those telemarketing companies that sell
    worthless products from Canada to the US?
    There is a telemarketing company in the building where
    I worked. Being a smoker, I got to know a few of the
    frequently replaced telemarketing sales staff.
    The company in question sells a 'directory' of businesses
    in the states. While smoking, I asked one of the sales people
    what the product they were selling was good for. The reply
    was toilet paper. I would tend to agree. I believe there were
    several complaints to the attorney general of a particular state(s)
    and I had a smile on my face when the local police raided their
    place of business. Too bad they were back up and running the
    very next week. How can we stop these assholes? It puts a bad
    name on Canada. I feel ashamed that they can operate freely here.
Tom the Canuck.




Article: 221166 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Dr.Ace" <NoSpam@BedfordSucks.com>
References: <ad086$43d0b5fc$4e0bd10$27996@DIALUPUSA.NET> <12633-43D10574-1718@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net>
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:09:18 -0500
Message-ID: <1816$43d1d00b$4fc61f3$6762@DIALUPUSA.NET>


"Richard Harrison" <richardharrison@webtv.net> wrote in message 
news:12633-43D10574-1718@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net...
> Congratulations Dr. Ace!
>
> You sure know how
>
> to trash a place!
>
> Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI
>

Richard,
   Yes, that's a fact.
         73, Ace - WH2T





Article: 221167 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Tom the Canuck" <tvaus@sympatico.ca>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET>   <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net>   <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET>   <QsYzf.10821$H71.4431@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <Q42dnVY9e9WoJkzeRVn-ug@gwi.net> <1137822271.315866.144350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Message-ID: <22kAf.22374$xk1.621232@news20.bellglobal.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 00:56:12 -0500

Harry C,
    For what it is worth, I stand behind you 100%.
    I hope you do not close your borders to your northern neighbours.
    Read my post just above yours.
Tom the Canuck.


<hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1137822271.315866.144350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> GBrown, the fact that they couldn't speak fluent English may have
> prejudiced my conclusion. It isn't very clear to me why the Social
> Security offices need interpreters. After all, anyone who has been in
> this country sufficiently long to seek Social Security benefits should
> at least be conversant in English, since that is the language that is
> spoken here.
>
> When you see many people who appear to be under the age of 30 and
> cannot speak fluent English seeking SSI benefits, the red flag should
> go up for everyone. Where is the Green Card? Damn, what was wrong with
> the Ellis Island immigration procedure, and why did the US eliminate
> it? At that time your entry into the US was judged on your health,
> skills, and ability to provide for yourself and your family in the
> United States. During that era, no one came to the US for a free lunch,
> unlike today.
>
> Realize that unless we secure our borders and return to the strict
> immigation policies of circa 1910, the US will become a human dumping
> ground for misfits from the balance of the world, and constructive
> citizens will no longer be able to support it and flee to other nations
> who, for the above reasons, close there borders to other than those
> that can contribute significantly to their country -- and for good
> reason.
>
> I am pissed off because some of those "new arrivals" are immediately
> able to collect larger benefits from Social Security than I who have
> been paying into the system for more than 50 years!  Yet, we wonder why
> Social Security is about to go bankrup!  Dhuh!!!!
>
> Sorry for the curmugenous attitude, but the pot of US money has
> limitations, and I believe that it should first be utilized for the
> benefit of US Citizens who have contiributed to the system for many
> decades, and not be wasted on on freeloaders who have obviously never
> made any contribution to the system.
>
> Curmudgeonly yours,  Harry C.
>




Article: 221168 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
Subject: Re: [question] current/voltage amplitude inducted in antenna
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:09:42 -0600
Message-ID: <5543-43C92246-711@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net>
References: <dq9cde$b10$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl>

Peter wrote:
"What amplitude can it be?"

A receiving antenna has a radiation resistance. The load which extracts
most power is a conjugate match for the antenna. With radiation
resistance perfectly matched to receiver input resistance, the radiation
resistance becomes the Thevenin equivalent source resistance feeding an
identical receiver input resistance. 1/2 the voltage induced into the
receiving antenna is used to re-radiate energy received by the antenna.
The other 1/2 appears across the receiver`s input resistance.

For a professional explanation of this topic, see Kraus` 3rd edition of 
"Antennas" page 32. "All about antennas at a glance".

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI 



Article: 221169 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Dr.Ace" <NoSpam@BedfordSucks.com>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET>   <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net>   <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET>   <QsYzf.10821$H71.4431@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <Q42dnVY9e9WoJkzeRVn-ug@gwi.net> <1137822271.315866.144350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 02:18:39 -0500
Message-ID: <98d8f$43d1e047$4fc61f3$7169@DIALUPUSA.NET>


<hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:1137822271.315866.144350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> GBrown, the fact that they couldn't speak fluent English may have
> prejudiced my conclusion. It isn't very clear to me why the Social
> Security offices need interpreters. After all, anyone who has been in
> this country sufficiently long to seek Social Security benefits should
> at least be conversant in English, since that is the language that is
> spoken here.
>
> When you see many people who appear to be under the age of 30 and
> cannot speak fluent English seeking SSI benefits, the red flag should
> go up for everyone. Where is the Green Card? Damn, what was wrong with
> the Ellis Island immigration procedure, and why did the US eliminate
> it? At that time your entry into the US was judged on your health,
> skills, and ability to provide for yourself and your family in the
> United States. During that era, no one came to the US for a free lunch,
> unlike today.
>
> Realize that unless we secure our borders and return to the strict
> immigation policies of circa 1910, the US will become a human dumping
> ground for misfits from the balance of the world, and constructive
> citizens will no longer be able to support it and flee to other nations
> who, for the above reasons, close there borders to other than those
> that can contribute significantly to their country -- and for good
> reason.
>
> I am pissed off because some of those "new arrivals" are immediately
> able to collect larger benefits from Social Security than I who have
> been paying into the system for more than 50 years!  Yet, we wonder why
> Social Security is about to go bankrup!  Dhuh!!!!
>
> Sorry for the curmugenous attitude, but the pot of US money has
> limitations, and I believe that it should first be utilized for the
> benefit of US Citizens who have contiributed to the system for many
> decades, and not be wasted on on freeloaders who have obviously never
> made any contribution to the system.
>
> Curmudgeonly yours,  Harry C.
>

Harry,
 I agree with you. The waves of human parasites flowing into this once great 
country are drowning our economy.
SEE
Life Long Welfare for Soon to be Citizens
http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2004-07/24/article04.shtml

Another situation that comes to mind was the "Lost Boys" from the Sudan. The 
US flew them over here paid for their housing and all other expenses.
I am not against charity but charity begins at home. We have homeless, 
jobless, disabled Vets, etc.. that are not taken care of. Why the hell 
should we as a country bring or allow to enter foreigners that only desire 
to leach off what little fat is left of our land.
May God bless the U.S.A.
        Ace - WH2T 




Article: 221170 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Tom the Canuck" <tvaus@sympatico.ca>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de> <X9Vzf.3243$vU2.2707@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Message-ID: <T1lAf.22386$xk1.625098@news20.bellglobal.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 02:04:17 -0500


"SINYpyro" <*removethis*vanquish@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:X9Vzf.3243$vU2.2707@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Kill yourself?
>
<snip>

Why kill yourself when you can stay alive and fight this crap.
No need to resort to physical violence (I don't like the idea)
but instead use our intelligence to fight back.

Why not swamp the offender's inbox with e-mails.

SUBJECT: "How to make a million dollars easily from your home"

INSTRUCTIONS (body text):
Send me $2.00 by mail and I will send you complete instructions to be rich
quickly.
Please include a stamped self-addressed envelope.

(IMPORTANT: Get a PO Box for the address)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Your snail mail reply:
"WHAT TO SEND TO SUBJECT ON PAPER (they paid for it):"

SNAIL-MAIL SUBJECT:
(use this for your e-mail)
How to make a million dollars easily from your home

What to do to start::
SEND THIS E-MAIL:
Send me $2.00 and I will send you complete instructions to be rich quickly.
Please include a stamped self-addressed envelope.

{Insert your address here}

WHAT TO DO:
Mail the above paper message when you have $2 and envelope.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

This can also work if you take out a classified ad in a local news paper.
There should be at least 1,000,000 morons in a large metropolis. Just send
the
same info but change it to say 'take out a classified ad'.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

Why not sell 'solar powered cloths dryers' for $50.
Ship the sucker a cloths line. Technically you are not
in the wrong. It is 'solar powered' after all, unless it is
a cloudy day.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-


Give back some crap to the target who has been cross posting to various NG.
I was amazed to learn I posted to rec.radio.amateur.* groups. Your replies
were
there as well. I may check them out, it has been a long time since I made an
FM
transmitter.

======================================================
{back to pyro for a moment}

Just a thought, I know about the electric firing panel for pyro displays.
Lots of wires and switches. Is there any need for an RF ignition system?
It could cost a few more $$$ but you eliminate the long run of wires from
the
panel to the pyro items you want to ignite. A secure comm protocol would
prevent ignition by 'outside' sources. A laptop could be added to control
the
timing of events.to be fired.  A simple User Interface to make it moron
proof.
What do you guys think? Just looking for ideas. Start another thread if you
like the idea. We can discuss details. I have made embedded systems for
about
the last 20 years. This idea is possible.
======================================================

Sorry, feeling a bit malicious tonight, (===pyro thought not included===)
Tom the Canuck.

P.S. $2 will NOT work in Canada.
        We have those $1 and $2 coins to deal with.
        (Maybe up the cost to $5 CDN)
        $50 should work out just fine.







Article: 221171 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Tom the Canuck" <tvaus@sympatico.ca>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET>   <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net>   <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET>   <QsYzf.10821$H71.4431@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <Q42dnVY9e9WoJkzeRVn-ug@gwi.net> <1137822271.315866.144350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <6dydnXcJcZzMU0zeRVn-hw@gwi.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Message-ID: <snlAf.22392$xk1.625803@news20.bellglobal.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 02:27:18 -0500


"GBrown" <gkbrown@gwi.net> wrote in message
news:6dydnXcJcZzMU0zeRVn-hw@gwi.net...
> Harry, I understand your point, completely. I was getting at the fact that
> how are we to judge who or who isn't eligible for SSI. I worked all my
life
> and it wont be long before I can step up to the SSI office and sign my
> forms. I wish there were a way to weed out the imposters but you have to
> start home. There are people in this country, citizens, that take full
> advantage of the soft hearted liberals and reap the rewards. I really
don't
> know if there is a good fix to and old problem.
> Gary

Mr. GBrown,
    In a sense I do not care what creed, colour, or nationality a person
comes from.
    We are all human and live on this tiny blue marble called Earth.
    {yes there are assholes in every group, even yours, ignore them, I do}
    Let us judge by what a person does, not where they come from. Does it
matter?
    If you contribute to our "society" (needs improvement) they are fine, if
they live off
    the labours of others I object. Perhaps we should adopt the thinking
that we are all
    one people on this planet. Are you going to blast me because my parents
came from
    Estonia? (If you don't know where it is, look it up)
    Ignorance and prejudice are rampant on our planet. Can we not do better?
    What about your "equality and liberty for all" in your constitution? Did
that include
    owning slaves from Africa? Open your eyes, see the world for what it is,
embrace
    other ideas from other cultures and learn from them. Tunnel vision is a
downfall for
    the existence of mankind.
    This is what I think, you may thing otherwise. I can not stop you from
thinking the
    way that you do, you can not stop me from thinking my way.
Tom the Canuck.




Article: 221172 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: John Westerlage <john_westerlage@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: About Benjamin Franklin and Lightning
Message-ID: <HeqAf.20986$PL5.15929@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 12:59:19 GMT


While researching lightning protection and grounding
in general I stumbled across the following:

< http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-59/iss-1/p42.html >

Benjamin Franklin's groundbreaking (pun fully intended)
work on the subject.

john, N5DWI



Article: 221192 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
Date: 22 Jan 2006 07:23:08 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehicwzwtna000@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <xn0ehhzdsnst7000@cnews.newsguy.com> <YcDAf.13592$H71.13338@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>

Cecil Moore wrote:

> Guess I'll go
> back to my 2x4 support system. Darn!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2x4s have served well for years. :-)

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221193 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: <pledgeasmoke@otmale.com>
References: <m-F0D3B3.14114521012006@news.verizon.net>   <m-32A8E0.16332621012006@news.verizon.net> <1137880377.666765.324890@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <X6yAf.9077$TK2.6354@bignews1.bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: comet vert?no radals
Message-ID: <K7LAf.14975$0N1.12259@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:45:30 GMT

An idea,
so if one took a random length say 30 foot length of twin feed,
stuck a big 50 ohm resistor on one end and a ballun to bring it to 50 ohm 
resonance at the other,
in the tuner via coax. would it be 50 ohms wide banded because it sees the 
50 ohm 'dummy load' at the far end as a match, and radiates a signal 'of 
sorts'  from the twin feed. If one used the tuner to miss match the 
'antenna' The worse the match the more signal would squirt from the feeder. 




Article: 221194 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <43D38B6C.24B2290C@earthlink.net>
From: "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <14990$43d04031$18d6b488$14336@KNOLOGY.NET> <1137784735.650874.68910@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <43D181DC.19682475@worldnet.att.net> <sUjAf.22371$xk1.620633@news20.bellglobal.com> <43D2B26F.E715A14B@worldnet.att.net> <tyyAf.13429$H71.605@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <5a773$43d2ba04$97d56b99$16471@ALLTEL.NET>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:41:36 GMT

Fred W4JLE wrote:
> 
> I always answer them really loud, then I tell them to hold on while I get my
> hearing aid. Wait about 5 minutes and say hello again really loud. If they
> are still there tell them the batteries are dead and to hold while you get
> new batteries. Wait 5 more minutes and once again loud hello, if they are
> still there cuss and say you got the wrong batteries and their not
> working...
> 
> You get the idea, totally frustrate them. I have never had one wait beyond
> the initial getting the hearing aid.


   Sometimes I let them get all the way through their spiel, then I tell
them that it really sounds great and that if I ever get well enough to
go back to work, I might be able to buy it  It really pisses them off.
;-)  Other times I just tell them right away that I am 100% disabled,
and in too much pain to put up with them.  Of course, being on the
national "Do not call list" stopped almost all of those irritating
calls.  The only problem I have is some deadbeat is, or has given out my
phone number when they bought crap on credit. I keep a list of these
calls and if I get a second call from a company I scream at them while
demanding that they leave me alone, or I will have a lawyer on their ass
for trying to collect someone else's debt from me.

   The only ones too stupid to listen was "Countrywide" which was some
kind of mortgage or lending company who had someone different call each
time, from different phone numbers.  They finally left a message on my
answering machine with an "800" number stating that it was an emergency,
but didn't identify themselves.  It was their headquarters, and I really
tore into them, informing them that I had repeatedly told their phone
monkeys they had the wrong phone number, that I was a 100% disabled
veteran, and that I was not going to put up with even one more phone
call.  I laughed and told them that if I did get one, that I would call
friends at a TV station to have their local office investigated by their
news department for violating a lot of different laws, and that I was
going to turn over my hand written logs of all of their calls, along
with their misleading telephone message.  I asked what they thought that
would do to their business in the area, just before I hung up my phone. 
I never heard from them again. :)

-- 
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida


Article: 221195 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Frank" <ve6cb@nospam.telus.net>
References: <BbWdnVM-DdblME_enZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcast.com> <6NDAf.97704$AP5.43927@edtnps84> <43D3106E.4020100@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 8405a working and measuring resonance?
Message-ID: <zcMAf.98030$AP5.67414@edtnps84>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:58:55 GMT


"dansawyeror" <dansawyeror@comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:43D3106E.4020100@comcast.net...
> Frank,
>
> The Smith Chart shows that a termination value other then 50 Ohms is 
> required to calibrate the 8405a to zero phase for the frequency and cable. 
> That said there are two zero points, I will have to think about the effect 
> of these on the measurements.

Dan,

I am not sure how you arrived at the above conclusion.  The procedure should 
be as follows:  Short the end of the coax at the antenna location, then 
adjust the line stretcher for a 180 degrees phase shift.  This is your 
reference reflection coefficient of -1 (i.e. 1 < 180).  Remove the short and 
verify the reflection coefficient is 1 < 0.  Connect a known 50 ohm load, 
which should provide a return loss of  > 30 dB.  The angle of the reflection 
coefficient is irrelevant.  If the return loss of the 50 ohm load is 
significantly less than 30 dB, then either your load is not very good, or 
you have poor coupler directivity.  Attach the antenna, measure, and record, 
the magnitude and angle of the reflection coefficient.  Repeat the procedure 
for all frequencies of interest.  You will then be able to plot the result 
on the Smith Chart.  At the frequencies you are working, which I believe is 
in the 100 to 200 MHz range, it is doubtful that the non-ideal short/load 
standards parasitics will effect the results significantly.

I have done such measurements countless times, although with HP VNAs, which 
makes the procedure far less tedious.

Hope this helps,

Frank 




Article: 221196 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: John Ferrell <johnferrell@sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: comet vert?no radals
Message-ID: <n467t1lckmnl6lc2c28q1e0t1mke67rghk@4ax.com>
References: <m-F0D3B3.14114521012006@news.verizon.net> <m-32A8E0.16332621012006@news.verizon.net> <1137880377.666765.324890@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:14:41 GMT

On 21 Jan 2006 13:52:57 -0800, jgboyles@aol.com wrote:

>
>ml wrote:
>> In article <m-F0D3B3.14114521012006@news.verizon.net>, ml <m@di.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > i see this month arrl magazine  qst  reviews a new hf  comet verticle
>> > that dosn't use radials
>> >
>> > i am just wondering how does this work?
>> >
>> > it specifies that its not a stelar performer has low swr   but dosn't
>> > explain the technology""  it uses to 'work' w/o radials
>> >
>> >
>> > anybody know?
>> >
>> >
>> > thanks
>>
>> i reamain eager for an answer to my question
>
>  Just a guess, but I'll bet that thingey down at the bottom of the
>antenna is a resistor.  Although it says it doesn't need radials, they
>would help, although they might mess up the broadbanded appeal of the
>antenna.
>Gary N4AST

Is a resistor used in matching a bad thing? My intuition is that it
is, but I have no math to back up the position.

One of my current projects is to understand the matching problem for
an electrically short vertical. 

Using EZNEC+, when I run the SWR function with the radiator (simulated
real ground) I get an indication of Z = R + j. If I add an inductive
load at the bottom of the radiator equal to the j value it brings the
match into a reasonable range. At this point I have not grasped the
relationship  of the "R" in the equation. If I use the figure for R
equal to 10% of the XL, the match gets even better, but not 1:1. 10%
comes from the suggested estimate in the help file. 

Question 1: What is this "R" thing? I started out thinking it was
series DC resistance and lower is better. My interpretation of the
EZNEC results contradict this position. More "R" seems better.

Question 2: Is this an effective method of matching a 50 ohm line to
the vertical radiator?

I do understand this is a math model and it ignores radiation from the
inductor.

Question 3: Looking ahead, I think the next matching technique should
be an inductor in series with the ground end of the radiator and the
ground. The 50 ohm line would feed a tap on the coil 50 ohms up from
ground. 
Do I compute XL from the bottom to equal 50 or is this strictly a cut
& try thing?

I have yet to physically model anything with these tests but I am
getting close to it.
 
I know there are better matching methods than what I am attempting,
this is an academic exercise for me!



John Ferrell W8CCW


Article: 221197 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Ralph Mowery" <rmowery28146@earthlink.net>
References: <HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com> <tqydneekV8fpOE7eRVn-uA@comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Pulling Cable in Conduit
Message-ID: <sXNAf.3715$rH5.3152@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:57:12 GMT


"gb" <onw9mapsgb@no.arrl.spam.net> wrote in message
news:tqydneekV8fpOE7eRVn-uA@comcast.com...
> "jimbo" <jimbo62@spamex.com> wrote in message
> news:HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >I am getting close to pulling some cable through a 1 1/4 inch PVC conduit
> >that runs about 20 feet from the third floor attic to the basement. The
> >contractor claims the conduit is a "straight shot" with no bends. I have
> >three LMR240 cables with PL259 connectors on each end. And I would also
> >like to pull a 450 ohm length of ladder line. (Measures about 1 inch.)
And
> >I would like to pull at least two 16 gage insulated control wires.
> >
> > Any advice would be appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks, jimbo
> >
>
> A Google search should get you the electrical handbooks and codes (e.g.
> NEC ) for the maximum fill for each conduit size.  As a rough rule NEVER
> fill a conduit more than 70% to 75%.
>

The NEC is mostly for wires for the AC lines.  It will not apply for the
antenna wires.

The ladder line is not going to work too well in the conduit with the other
wire.  There is a minimum distance that it should be placed from other
conductors.





Article: 221198 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Pulling Cable in Conduit
From: Ed <Huckleberry_REMOVE_@newsguy.com>
References: <HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <Xns97535DF6EA03Bspectrumhogstarbandn@198.186.192.196>
Date: 22 Jan 2006 17:12:41 GMT



> I am getting close to pulling some cable through a 1 1/4 inch PVC 
> conduit that runs about 20 feet from the third floor attic to the 
> basement. The contractor claims the conduit is a "straight shot" with 
> no bends. I have three LMR240 cables with PL259 connectors on each 
> end. And I would also like to pull a 450 ohm length of ladder line. 
> (Measures about 1 inch.) And I would like to pull at least two 16 gage 
> insulated control wires.
> 
> Any advice would be appreciated.
> 


   I think you can get those three coax lines down the straight conduit 
if you stagger the PL-259 connectors, however, once you have a couple 
cables in the conduit, you may find there isn't enough room for a PL-259 
to squeeze by, so you may need to remove the connectors, pull the cables 
and then reinstall them.  Three LMR240s and two control cables are going 
to fill that conduit more than you realize!  

   As far as the Ladder line goes,   DON'T !  It will be nearly useless 
packed in  with all that coax and wire as it needs several inches of 
SPACE around it to function properly, with no nearby metal objects.  That 
coax braid in close proximity will drastically reduce its effectiveness.


   Ed   K7AAT
  


Article: 221199 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <dqv364$358$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
Message-ID: <8XPAf.21173$PL5.4948@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 18:13:24 GMT

Reg Edwards wrote:
> Height of tower.

Approximately 30 feet.

> Length of vertical radiator.

22 feet.

> Number and length of radials.

4 x 22 feet.

> Any loading coils?

No, an SGC-230 at the base.

> Imagine what might happen if the radials were removed.

I imagined that and got very high angle radiation on
some bands. The tower becomes part of the radiator.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221200 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <U%PAf.21174$PL5.11922@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 18:18:28 GMT

nm5k@wt.net wrote:

>>I'm putting a vertical back up for transmitting and will
>>probably receive on my horizontal dipole.
> 
> Why? Doesn't make sense. If the vertical is best for
> transmit, it should be the best for receive 98% of the time.

That's certainly not true at my QTH. The vertical has two
extra S-units of noise on receive compared to my dipole.
I'm assuming the two extra S-units of noise on receive
won't affect my transmitted signal. When I had my 40m
vertical up, I never heard any signal that was better
received on the vertical. +12 dB of noise is virtually
impossible to overcome in actual practice.

> But almost all my GP's
> had the radials attached to the mounting plate, which in
> turn was mounted to the mast.

Conductive mast?
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221201 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Bob <bob3bob3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Pulling Cable in Conduit
References: <HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com> <7t97t11hullq3bo0qdrml0bb7u942hfnv8@4ax.com> <86GdnSMf7o9wM07eRVn-ig@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <phtca3-2gi.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 11:55:37 -0600

Yes a very negative effect and not a good idea.. If you look in the 
history of this NG you will see some numbers about minimum separation 
distance from other metal.

If you really want to run a balanced feeder you can use two pieces of 
coax with the shields connected at each end. The Z will be twice that of 
the original coax. (I use this as a Q section on 20m feeding a loop of 
about 170 ohms) Dunno about losses in this case (which open wire feeder 
are great for reducing) and of course the Z is going to be kind of lower 
than 450r.

Cheers Bob VK2YQA

jimbo wrote:

> 
> Thanks for the replies. The ladder line would be used when the other 
> lines were not being used. Does the proximity of other unpowered lines 
> affect the ladder line operation for receive and transmit?
> 
> Thanks, jimbo


Article: 221202 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Larry Gauthier \(K8UT\)" <MyCallsign@ARRL.NET>
References: <HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Pulling Cable in Conduit
Message-ID: <lSPAf.438$%b1.395@fe04.lga>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:08:08 -0500

Jimbo,

It's going to be crowded in that conduit, so don't rely upon gravity to get 
that stuff down the pipe. Three suggestions:

1. Buy a 25 foot electrician's steel snake (Home Depot, Lowe's, ...), use 
this to pull the wires through; or drop a length of poly line/guy string as 
a pull line. If gravity does not get the pull string through the conduit, 
tie a lightweight object to the line and suck/pull with a leaf blower or 
vacuum cleaner.

2. Stagger the pl-259's and open cable ends as much as possible so that this 
looks like a pointed, rather than a blunt, object going through the conduit.

3. When you're pulling the wires into the conduit, do your best at the feed 
point to keep the wires "straight" and not twisting into the conduit. This 
takes less space and permits you to do item #4 .

3. ADD A PULL STRING IN THE CONDUIT WITH THE WIRES! So when you're all done, 
three months from now, and you realize you just want to add one more little 
4 conductor cable (or whatever!), you can do it without completely 
dismantling the cables. {been there, done that}

-- 
-larry
K8UT
"jimbo" <jimbo62@spamex.com> wrote in message 
news:HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>I am getting close to pulling some cable through a 1 1/4 inch PVC conduit 
>that runs about 20 feet from the third floor attic to the basement. The 
>contractor claims the conduit is a "straight shot" with no bends. I have 
>three LMR240 cables with PL259 connectors on each end. And I would also 
>like to pull a 450 ohm length of ladder line. (Measures about 1 inch.) And 
>I would like to pull at least two 16 gage insulated control wires.
>
> Any advice would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks, jimbo
> 




Article: 221203 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Pulling Cable in Conduit
References: <HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com> <7t97t11hullq3bo0qdrml0bb7u942hfnv8@4ax.com> <86GdnSMf7o9wM07eRVn-ig@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <t8QAf.21178$PL5.4093@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 18:27:37 GMT

jimbo wrote:
> Thanks for the replies. The ladder line would be used when the other 
> lines were not being used. Does the proximity of other unpowered lines 
> affect the ladder line operation for receive and transmit?

Especially transmit. You will lose a lot of your transmitted
power to the conductors surrounding the ladder-line. Ladder-
line should be run a few inches away from anything.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221204 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
Date: 22 Jan 2006 17:52:38 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehj6363ufl4001@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>

nm5k@wt.net wrote:


> Why? Doesn't make sense. If the vertical is best for
> transmit, it should be the best for receive 98% of the time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nope. Verticals are notorious for picking up local man-made noise.
Man-made noise starts out with random polarization but the horizontal
component is quickly "shorted out" by the earth's conductivity, leaving
only the vertical polarized component. This is why AM broadcast
stations universally use vertical polarization; better groundwave
coverage. They are not concerned with skywave or local noise.

For skywave, either one works fine, but a horizontal antenna is quieter.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221205 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:28:29 -0800
Message-ID: <11t7u80f9s1gi0a@corp.supernews.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <OkcAf.12300$F_3.4931@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <dqsab0$heu$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>

Reg Edwards wrote:
> 
> . . . .  as demonstrated by program RADIALS2
> 
> which treats radials as transmission lines.  As they truly are.
 >. . .

I disagree. Transmission lines have two conductors. Radials don't. The 
fields from transmission lines are confined to the region between the 
conductors. The fields from radials can couple quite strongly, altering 
their performance a great deal. It might be possible to model a radial 
system as a system of coupled transmission lines. Is that what your 
program does?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


Article: 221206 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Miller <NOSPAM@neosoft.com>
Subject: Re: Lightning Arrestor & Protection Of Receiver ?
Message-ID: <fcu7t1tlnv8jeahe6pkudp6rl0aaqqkj3p@4ax.com>
References: <CdSdnW2_R4YMFlLenZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@comcast.com> <94765$43d0b434$4e0bd10$27948@DIALUPUSA.NET>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 21:37:04 GMT

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:58:48 -0500, "Dr.Ace" <NoSpam@BedfordSucks.com>
wrote:


>
>  I use 2 HF antennas, a 272 ft delta loop and a 160 meter band 1/4 wave 
>inverted L antenna, both antennas go thru my MFJ-989C Tuner . When I am not 
>on the air I leave the antenna switch on the tuner in the "Dummy Load" 
>position. That connects a 300 watt 50 ohm resistor to the radio's antenna 
>jack and grounds both antennas.

I have the same tuner. Are the antennas really grounded when in dummy
load position? Looking at the circuit diagram, I can see the coax
braid is always grounded, and one side of the balanced line is always
grounded. But are both sides of all antennas grounded when in the
dummy load position? From what I can see, the coax center conductors,
and one side of the balanced line are left floating.

bob
k5qwg



>
>I hope this is of some help.
>
>Ace - www.WH2T.com
>


Article: 221207 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: comet vert?no radals
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 14:02:03 -0800
Message-ID: <11t806t8v6m6mdc@corp.supernews.com>
References: <m-F0D3B3.14114521012006@news.verizon.net> <m-32A8E0.16332621012006@news.verizon.net> <1137880377.666765.324890@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <n467t1lckmnl6lc2c28q1e0t1mke67rghk@4ax.com>

John Ferrell wrote:
> 
> Is a resistor used in matching a bad thing? My intuition is that it
> is, but I have no math to back up the position.
> 
> One of my current projects is to understand the matching problem for
> an electrically short vertical. 
> 
> Using EZNEC+, when I run the SWR function with the radiator (simulated
> real ground) I get an indication of Z = R + j. If I add an inductive
> load at the bottom of the radiator equal to the j value it brings the
> match into a reasonable range. At this point I have not grasped the
> relationship  of the "R" in the equation. If I use the figure for R
> equal to 10% of the XL, the match gets even better, but not 1:1. 10%
> comes from the suggested estimate in the help file. 
> 
> Question 1: What is this "R" thing? I started out thinking it was
> series DC resistance and lower is better. My interpretation of the
> EZNEC results contradict this position. More "R" seems better.

Let's suppose that your antenna was a black box instead of an antenna. 
You connect a source to it and look at the impedance looking into the 
black box. If the resistive part of the impedance (the R) was zero, the 
box would contain the equivalent of only an inductor (if the X was 
positive) or a capacitor (if the X was negative). Although you would 
measure voltage and current at the box's terminals, you'd find that they 
were 90 degrees out of phase with each other, and no power would be 
delivered from the source or consumed by the box. Not the situation you 
want with an antenna -- you need to deliver power to it so that power 
can be radiated.

If, on the other hand, you see some R when you look into the box, you 
can calculate that the power being delivered by the source and consumed 
by the box is I^2 * R, where I is the RMS current at the box terminals.

So R is always present at an antenna feedpoint at any time the antenna 
is radiating power, since part of the power "consumed" by the antenna 
goes toward radiation. This R is called the "radiation resistance". Some 
part of the power supplied by the source is also actually consumed by 
heating the wire and ground. This increases the R seen at the feedpoint. 
That part of the total R is called the "loss resistance".

What you want to do is to maximize the fraction of the power that's 
radiated, and minimize the fraction that's wasted as heat. So you want 
to make the ratio of radiation to loss resistance as large as possible. 
If you have a short antenna, you'll find you can raise the radiation 
resistance by lengthening it or adding a top hat. Center loading with a 
coil also raises the radiation resistance, but you can end up increasing 
the loss just as much due to coil resistance.

With EZNEC, you can set all losses to zero by setting wire loss and the 
loss of all loads to zero and, if using a grounded vertical, using 
MININEC type ground. Then the R you see is only the radiation 
resistance, and the field strength is that of a 100% efficient antenna. 
Reintroduce the losses and you'll see the loss resistance added to the 
radiation resistance at the feedpoint. The field strength will drop 
according to the reduction in efficiency.
> 
> Question 2: Is this an effective method of matching a 50 ohm line to
> the vertical radiator?

Any resistance you intentionally add will increase the loss resistance 
without changing the radiation resistance. More of your rig's power will 
be spent heating the resistor and less will be radiated. In some 
instances, such as military frequency-hopping applications, the trade of 
greater bandwidth for less efficiency might be worthwhile. You'll have 
to decide for yourself whether it is for you. There are certainly a host 
of other matching methods which are less lossy, but few which can 
achieve the extreme broadbanded match of a resistor. But don't be fooled 
into thinking that because the match is broadbanded that you're 
radiating the same amount of power over the band. The wider the 
bandwidth, the larger the fraction of your power you'll dissipate in the 
resistor.

> I do understand this is a math model and it ignores radiation from the
> inductor.

"Loads" don't radiate. Inductors modeled as wires using the helix 
creation feature do.

> Question 3: Looking ahead, I think the next matching technique should
> be an inductor in series with the ground end of the radiator and the
> ground. The 50 ohm line would feed a tap on the coil 50 ohms up from
> ground. 

That's not likely to work.

> Do I compute XL from the bottom to equal 50 or is this strictly a cut
> & try thing?

You don't want an XL of 50, you want the feedline to see an R of 50 with 
no X, that is, 50 + j0.

> I have yet to physically model anything with these tests but I am
> getting close to it.
>  
> I know there are better matching methods than what I am attempting,
> this is an academic exercise for me!

Look into making an L network. It would be a good opportunity to learn 
how to use the Smith chart, and you'd end up with a low loss matching 
solution.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


Article: 221208 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Frank" <ve6cb@nospam.telus.net>
References: <BbWdnVM-DdblME_enZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcast.com> <6NDAf.97704$AP5.43927@edtnps84> <43D3106E.4020100@comcast.net> <zcMAf.98030$AP5.67414@edtnps84> <43D3C102.1030805@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 8405a working and measuring resonance?
Message-ID: <aKUAf.110025$6K2.82925@edtnps90>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:40:54 GMT


"dansawyeror" <dansawyeror@comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:43D3C102.1030805@comcast.net...
> Frank,
>
> Your comment about my post is correct upon analysis it is not relevant.
>
> I am trying to identify the resonance frequency of an antenna. When that 
> point is found I am trying to measure the input impedance (should be R + 
> 0j).
>
> Assuming 50 Ohm source and cable, the smith chart shows for lengths of 
> cable terminated in values other the 50 Ohms, say 25R 0j, those points 
> will plot of a constant SWR = 2 circle. I am using that circle below:
>
> I am assuming that for a frequency where the antenna is resonant that the 
> phase read from the antenna and the phase read from non 50 Ohm 0j load 
> will be the same. If that is true then 'zeroing' the meter by adjusting 
> the phase offset will not effect the frequency of resonance. It is simply 
> a convenience.
>
> This method should yield a direct resonant frequency reading.
>
> Dan

Dan, The reflection coefficient of 25 ohms is 0.333 <180, so if you do trim 
the line stretcher for 180 degrees, then attaching the antenna will 
determine how close you are to nominal R + j0.  You need to reset your line 
stretcher at each frequency until you obtain a 180 degree phase shift on the 
return loss from the antenna.  It is reasonable to assume that your antenna 
has an impedance in the region of 37 ohms, so the 180 phase shift is 
probably correct.   For the reflection coefficient at 0.333 < 0 the input 
impedance is 100 ohms.  For such an antenna it is probably easer to just 
tune the antenna for minimum reflection coefficient and forget the phase 
angle.

Frank 




Article: 221209 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: <pledgeasmoke@otmale.com>
References: <1137700291.373977.273720@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <vvd7a3-30d.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net>
Subject: Re: what are Microwave Antennas?
Message-ID: <7_UAf.107837$7p5.32879@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:57:55 GMT

what are Microwave Antennas?

its wire or steel rod antenna, with a nice sharp point that is long and thin 
enough, that you can thread your sausages on, you then power up the 
radio/antenna, and the bangers will cook nicely. Discovered by 'wireless ops 
using the VHF section of the WW2 WS number 19 Mk 3. 




Article: 221210 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   <U%PAf.21174$PL5.11922@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> <1137964921.758569.111220@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <F_UAf.1821$2O6.1044@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:58:29 GMT

nm5k@wt.net wrote:
> If you listened to long haul dx
> paths, and the vertical never beat the dipole, you didn't have
> a very good vertical.

The vertical was 2 S-units noiser than the dipole. There's no
evidence that, with the same height limits, a monopole vertical
could ever beat a dipole's broadside performance by 12 dB at
any angle.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221211 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Ralph Mowery" <rmowery28146@earthlink.net>
References: <HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com> <tqydneekV8fpOE7eRVn-uA@comcast.com> <sXNAf.3715$rH5.3152@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> <X6WdnZrqmsgPck7eRVn-qg@comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Pulling Cable in Conduit
Message-ID: <U6VAf.4864$vU2.4666@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:07:16 GMT


"gb" <onw9mapsgb@no.arrl.spam.net> wrote in message
news:X6WdnZrqmsgPck7eRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> "Ralph Mowery" <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:sXNAf.3715$rH5.3152@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "gb" <onw9mapsgb@no.arrl.spam.net> wrote in message
> > news:tqydneekV8fpOE7eRVn-uA@comcast.com...
> >> "jimbo" <jimbo62@spamex.com> wrote in message
> >> news:HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> >I am getting close to pulling some cable through a 1 1/4 inch PVC
> >> >conduit
> >> >that runs about 20 feet from the third floor attic to the basement.
The
> >> >contractor claims the conduit is a "straight shot" with no bends. I
have
> >> >three LMR240 cables with PL259 connectors on each end. And I would
also
> >> >like to pull a 450 ohm length of ladder line. (Measures about 1 inch.)
> > And
> >> >I would like to pull at least two 16 gage insulated control wires.
> >> >
> >> > Any advice would be appreciated.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks, jimbo
> >> >
> >>
> >> A Google search should get you the electrical handbooks and codes (e.g.
> >> NEC ) for the maximum fill for each conduit size.  As a rough rule
NEVER
> >> fill a conduit more than 70% to 75%.
> >>
> >
> > The NEC is mostly for wires for the AC lines.  It will not apply for the
> > antenna wires.
> >
> > The ladder line is not going to work too well in the conduit with the
> > other
> > wire.  There is a minimum distance that it should be placed from other
> > conductors.
> >
> Ralph -
>
> I am not referring to the AC portion of the NEC, RATHER I am trying to
> highlight the maximum fill (diameter of each cable and maximum pull).
> ever try to "pull conductors" through conduit when this rule is NOT
followed
> ??
>
> I have, it's pain .. in the xxxx.
> Easy read and math calculations are minimal with tables supplied --- 
number
> of conductors and O.D. versus the I.D. on conduit.
>

Yes, I have.  I work at a large industral plant.  Some of the wire I have
pulled has been in 1 inch conduit that was probably 90% full of # 12 wire
already.  Still needed to get another pair of wires through that.  I have
cut a couple of wires in the conduit and used them to pull in wire to
replace them and two new wires.  No room in the conduit to push a snake
through and pull the new wire in.  Use lots of the wire pulling grease.
Most of the wires are control wires and only have about an amp or less on
them.  We are not worried about overheating the wires in the conduit, but
need to add new control circuits to a 40 year old plant.  As you said it is
a pain.




Article: 221212 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   <xn0ehj6363ufl4001@cnews.newsguy.com> <1137966057.832837.275240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <KbVAf.1825$2O6.510@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:12:26 GMT

nm5k@wt.net wrote:
> I *never* wanted to receive on my dipole
> if I was working long haul off the vertical.  Would be like shooting
> myself in the foot. 

Sounds like your dipole was not a very good dipole. With
the same height limitation, EZNEC says the vertical will
NEVER be 4 S-units (24 dB) better than the dipole's broadside
performance at any angle.

At http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/dipvsver.htm is a comparison
of my 130 ft. dipole at 40 ft. with my 33 ft. vertical
with the feedpoint at 20 ft, both on 40m. There's only a
tiny sliver where the vertical beats the dipole broadside
and isn't even close to 24 dB.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221213 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Help with J antenna design
References: <1137969714.322563.106490@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <zkVAf.1829$2O6.1695@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:21:51 GMT

JIMMIE wrote:
> Plan is to build a J antenna for 20 meters using 1 inch EMT conduit.
> Antenna will be supported at the bottom by a 4x4 post in the ground and
> at the 30+ foot level with a fiberglass bracket bolted to the eve of
> the house. The upper most section will be a fiberglass 1/2 wl antenna
> thta used to be used for CB. I am looking for a program that will allow
> me to calculate deminsions for a project like this. Feedline will be 50
> ohm coax.

You don't need a program. The long element is 3/4 wavelength long. The
shorter parallel element is 1/4 wavelength long. You can short the
two elements together at the bottom and attach your feedline at the
50 ohm point on the two parallel elements. Or you can feed the long
element with the center conductor and the short element with the
braid of the coax. 3/4 wavelength on 20m is about 50 ft.

The free demo version of EZNEC from www.eznec.com will probably model
that antenna.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221214 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile installation question
Date: 23 Jan 2006 00:36:57 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehjgrf2rdbu001@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <HMudneUWRbBGn0nenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@comcast.com>

Joe S. wrote:

> I plan to ground the hell out of this installation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You ought to think the hell out of your grounding plans first.

Remember, "grounding" simply provides a current path that did not exist
before. This can be good or it can be bad. Know what current is flowing
and where and why. "Grounding" stuff willy-nilly is not good
engineering. Make the current go where *you* want it to go or not go.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221215 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
Date: 23 Jan 2006 00:30:59 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehjgm42jp0g000@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehj6363ufl4001@cnews.newsguy.com> <1137966057.832837.275240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>

nm5k@wt.net wrote:

> Dunno..I think all
> this "noisy on a vertical" talk is greatly overstated.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Suit yourself, but any serious DXer will tell you there are times when
one dB of S/N ratio would make the difference between QSO and no QSO.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221216 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mobile installation question
From: Ed <Huckleberry_REMOVE_@newsguy.com>
References: <HMudneUWRbBGn0nenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <Xns9753ACBC6F0E2spectrumhogstarbandn@198.186.192.196>
Date: 23 Jan 2006 00:57:16 GMT



  It sounds to me like the only issue you might have is the coax running 
near that seatbelt retractor.   The thing that puzzles me is this guy 
telling you there is a small explosive charge in the seatbelt retractor.  I 
never heard of such thing in my 30+ years of doing radio installations.  I 
would like to hear from anyone else here who has!   I sure have no idea 
what the purpose of this charge would be.
 

   Ed


Article: 221217 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Jim - NN7K <nn7kexk7zfg@NOSPAMsbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Pulling Cable in Conduit
References: <HvKdnUnMwK5OOU7enZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com> <vip7t1tm9kgsmdcq909vdm86vubfb2fge6@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <iHWAf.23193$PL5.5769@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 01:54:22 GMT

Run the Ladder line to near the entrance of the PVC, and then use a 
BALUN, to COAX, for the run down your PVC, BUT remember: PVC stands
for: PIPE VERY CROWDED!  Jim NN7K

Dan Richardson wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 08:29:29 -0700, jimbo <jimbo62@spamex.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>I am getting close to pulling some cable through a 1 1/4 inch PVC 
>>conduit that runs about 20 feet from the third floor attic to the 
>>basement. The contractor claims the conduit is a "straight shot" with 
>>no bends. I have three LMR240 cables with PL259 connectors on each 
>>end. And I would also like to pull a 450 ohm length of ladder line. 
>>(Measures about 1 inch.) And I would like to pull at least two 16 gage 
>>insulated control wires.
>>
>>Any advice would be appreciated.
> 
> 
> Forget the ladder line! It will be a disaster.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> email: k6mhe<at>arrl<dot>net
> http://www.k6mhe.com/


Article: 221218 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: **THE-RFI-EMI-GUY** <rhyolite@nettally.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile installation question
References: <HMudneUWRbBGn0nenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@comcast.com> <Xns9753ACBC6F0E2spectrumhogstarbandn@198.186.192.196>
Message-ID: <ywWAf.13204$Zj7.5741@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 01:42:54 GMT

They are the latest things, called "pre-tensioners" they fire along with 
the airbags. I would think that routing the coax as far away as possible 
and making sure the radio and the antenna base (and antenna end of coax 
shield)  are securely grounded would be sufficient.

He should carefully check all options to see if their is a way to avoid 
most of the wiring loom in the vehicle.

The use of the stake mounts, concerns me because they might not ensure 
mettalic grounding of the antenna. I would make sure the antenna is 
grounded to the truck bed and the truck bed to the vehicle frame by 
short <1/8 wavelength wires.

Ed wrote:

>  It sounds to me like the only issue you might have is the coax running 
>near that seatbelt retractor.   The thing that puzzles me is this guy 
>telling you there is a small explosive charge in the seatbelt retractor.  I 
>never heard of such thing in my 30+ years of doing radio installations.  I 
>would like to hear from anyone else here who has!   I sure have no idea 
>what the purpose of this charge would be.
> 
>
>   Ed
>  
>

-- 
Joe Leikhim K4SAT
"The RFI-EMI-GUY"©

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

"Follow The Money"  ;-P



Article: 221219 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: 8405a working and measuring resonance?
References: <BbWdnVM-DdblME_enZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcast.com> <6NDAf.97704$AP5.43927@edtnps84> <43D3106E.4020100@comcast.net> <zcMAf.98030$AP5.67414@edtnps84> <43D3C102.1030805@comcast.net> <aKUAf.110025$6K2.82925@edtnps90> <43D45526.3030903@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <dVYAf.13777$H71.3930@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:25:45 GMT

dansawyeror wrote:
> I am assuming the reflection angle of 0j terminations would all be the 
> same (you said <180), this includes both resistive loads and an antenna 
> at resonance. The method I am using relies on that.
> 
> I am confused about one thing in the smith chart program. Cables 
> identified as stubs create a circle that goes through infinity and do 
> not exhibit a constant SWR, while simple cables create a constant SWR 
> circle with the center and 50 Ohm 0j.
> 
> I believe the setup I am testing exhibits the constant SWR characteristic.

No real-world transmission line exhibits a constant SWR since
no real-world transmission line is lossless. Constant SWR
circles are approximations. The actual SWR curve is a spiral
>from a point on that constant SWR circle that, in the limit,
spirals down to the Z0 of the line.

For instance, using Owen's feedline calculator, the SWR at a
500 ohm antenna fed with 100 feet of RG-58A is 10:1 and the
SWR at the other (source) end is 1.42:1 for 146 MHz.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221220 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: looking for antenna recommendation
References: <1137691091.471022.293300@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <GKCdnbgut-TawUneRVn-vA@adelphia.com>
Message-ID: <zaZAf.13780$H71.4973@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:44:15 GMT

TimPerry wrote:
> if it was tall enough i guess you could put an orange flag on it :)

I used a Pico-J taped to a fiberglas flag pole
on my bicycle - worked great.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221221 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Frank" <ve6cb@nospam.telus.net>
References: <BbWdnVM-DdblME_enZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcast.com> <6NDAf.97704$AP5.43927@edtnps84> <43D3106E.4020100@comcast.net> <zcMAf.98030$AP5.67414@edtnps84> <43D3C102.1030805@comcast.net> <aKUAf.110025$6K2.82925@edtnps90> <43D45526.3030903@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 8405a working and measuring resonance?
Message-ID: <QmZAf.103796$AP5.33287@edtnps84>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:57:20 GMT

>I am assuming the reflection angle of 0j terminations would all be the same 
>(you said <180), this includes both resistive loads and an antenna at 
>resonance. The method I am using relies on that.
>
> I am confused about one thing in the smith chart program. Cables 
> identified as stubs create a circle that goes through infinity and do not 
> exhibit a constant SWR, while simple cables create a constant SWR circle 
> with the center and 50 Ohm 0j.
>
> I believe the setup I am testing exhibits the constant SWR characteristic.
>
> Dan

Dan, if the load is resistive, and less than 50 ohms (assuming the center of 
the Smith Chart is considered to be 50 ohms), then the angle of the 
reflection coefficient is 180 degrees.  If  the load is resistive, and 
greater than 50 ohms, then the reflection coefficient angle is 0 degrees. 
As you approach the center of the Smith Chart the angle becomes less and 
less relevant.

Shunt stubs - either open or shorted - always pass through "zero" (And 
infinity - which you will not see since it is in parallel with the load 
impedance)  and the selected impedance on the Smith Chart.  This is based on 
the effect that an open stub, at quarter wave multiples, will exhibit 
successive open and short circuits; as will a shorted stub.

Your method will exhibit a constant reflection coefficient circle (and 
VSWR), with the angle varying from 180 degrees through zero degrees and then 
back, through negative angles, to 180 degrees.

Frank 




Article: 221222 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <bl09t1927ufrlrj6b72em6fkpvt496mek4@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <vb11t150tt2t2gcagf5ojo5jjf5snhu5ma@4ax.com> <pq91t19glqpefhejh73c9h2m24b96f7q4a@4ax.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:18:07 GMT

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:14:18 -0800, Richard Clark <kb7qhc@comcast.net>
wrote:


>such illusions.  The association with the necessity of being a quarter
>wave long comes by the field data obtained by Brown, Lewis, and
>Epstein.  This was simply an arbitrary selection born more of the
>available wire being portioned out in binary increasing counts
>(2,4,8,16....) such that 119 radials depleted their stock (short of
>that magic 128).  Their work has been offered on the web through the
>interests of our discussions here, and by one or several
>correspondent's scanning and posting their report.  Google this
>newsgroup for that link using the authors as a keyword search.  This
>was offered last summer.

Thanks, yes I have read the BLE paper.

Owen
--


Article: 221223 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <3o09t1966bj52hmrh781d1fbaq9cd3upem@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <dqqq6c$h20$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <3mi2t15vgba1h1ctc421tk6olunkuigtvk@4ax.com> <dqs0ph$grb$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:21:21 GMT

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 00:55:13 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
<g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com> wrote:


>Very sorry Owen.  My mistake.
>
>The name of the program is RADIALS2.
>
>It deals only with buried radials.

Ok, I have had a play with it (again).

>
>I am at present trying to write a program about coil-loaded
>counterpoises and artificial grounds at low heights. But it's a beast
>to model mathematically.

I wish you would explain the models a bit more in these tools, so that
the user can have a better understanding of the approach and its
applicability to the problem.

Owen
--


Article: 221224 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <ut09t11cj888818n057rnj0o1j9g44up7d@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:29:11 GMT

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:19:04 -0800, Richard Clark <kb7qhc@comcast.net>
wrote:


>I found a much more compelling report in:
>UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
>Rural Electrification Administration
>REA BULLETIN 1751F-802
>SUBJECT: Electrical Protection Grounding Fundamentals
>Which is vastly more comprehensive and directly answers these
>questions when viewed in the terms of the resistivity of the earth
>connection.

Thanks Richard, I have read the document quickly overall, and a bit
more detailed in some key areas.

It covers similar material to documents I collected when studying
power earthing and lighting protections in years past, but it is a bit
more comprehensive... so a good read and a good reference document.

One good pickup was the functions for predicting the low frequency
resistance of shallow buried radials (which is relevant when radial
wires are required to provide a level of power / lightning protection.
I created a graph to add to an existing web page from the functions
for 3mm (bare) wires buried 0.1m, the graph is at
http://www.vk1od.net/post/earth02a.gif . (For avoidance of doubt, this
graph does not predicting the RF characteristics of the radials.)

Tks...

Owen

PS apologies for the delay in responding, I have been up to the big
smoke (the city... Sydney) over the weekend... reminds me of why I
left there thirty something years ago.
--


Article: 221225 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: <JackKetch@otmale.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <482Bf.49180$W4.45654@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 10:22:56 GMT

Your mind is already made up. Do as you like.

I note that you decline to substantiate the reasons underlying your advice.
Hello sir, maybe YOU should nip in the yard with a shovel and some wire 
(don't forget your strippers) and do some tests yourself! old man 




Article: 221226 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <ut09t11cj888818n057rnj0o1j9g44up7d@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 06:06:35 -0600
Message-ID: <43d4c60f_4@newsfeed.slurp.net>

"Owen Duffy"  wrote
> One good pickup was the functions for predicting the low frequency
> resistance of shallow buried radials (which is relevant when radial
> wires are required to provide a level of power / lightning protection.
__________________

For those using buried radials as one terminal of a vertical monopole...

The only path consisting of physical conductors that can exist between a 
series-fed vertical monopole and buried, uninsulated radials is through the 
PA output, and the antenna matching network at the tower base.  This is not 
adequate to control/prevent system damage from lightning.

Three added techniques are used in most MW broadcast applications:

1.  A "static drain choke" is installed between the tower base and the 
junction of the radials.

2.  An arc gap is installed across the base insulator and set to flash over 
at some margin above normal peak voltage

3.  The tx contains r-f phase sensors that kill tx output for a few 
milliseconds after an arc is sensed, so as not to sustain it.

RF 



Article: 221227 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: John Ferrell <johnferrell@sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: comet vert?no radals
Message-ID: <3rh9t1hgb7g59qpou6kgqraaaji06j56bn@4ax.com>
References: <m-F0D3B3.14114521012006@news.verizon.net> <m-32A8E0.16332621012006@news.verizon.net> <1137880377.666765.324890@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <n467t1lckmnl6lc2c28q1e0t1mke67rghk@4ax.com> <11t806t8v6m6mdc@corp.supernews.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:18:01 GMT

Thank you!
I believe you have pointed the way to get me back on track.
I have only studied Smith Charts enough to pass tests. I think I best
start there and with the L-Network.

I also better revisit the antenna material in the ARRL antenna course.
I missed some  things very basic there. 


On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 14:02:03 -0800, Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
wrote:

>John Ferrell wrote:
>> 
>> Is a resistor used in matching a bad thing? My intuition is that it
>> is, but I have no math to back up the position.
>> 
>> One of my current projects is to understand the matching problem for
>> an electrically short vertical. 
>> 
>> Using EZNEC+, when I run the SWR function with the radiator (simulated
>> real ground) I get an indication of Z = R + j. If I add an inductive
>> load at the bottom of the radiator equal to the j value it brings the
>> match into a reasonable range. At this point I have not grasped the
>> relationship  of the "R" in the equation. If I use the figure for R
>> equal to 10% of the XL, the match gets even better, but not 1:1. 10%
>> comes from the suggested estimate in the help file. 
>> 
>> Question 1: What is this "R" thing? I started out thinking it was
>> series DC resistance and lower is better. My interpretation of the
>> EZNEC results contradict this position. More "R" seems better.
>
>Let's suppose that your antenna was a black box instead of an antenna. 
>You connect a source to it and look at the impedance looking into the 
>black box. If the resistive part of the impedance (the R) was zero, the 
>box would contain the equivalent of only an inductor (if the X was 
>positive) or a capacitor (if the X was negative). Although you would 
>measure voltage and current at the box's terminals, you'd find that they 
>were 90 degrees out of phase with each other, and no power would be 
>delivered from the source or consumed by the box. Not the situation you 
>want with an antenna -- you need to deliver power to it so that power 
>can be radiated.
>
>If, on the other hand, you see some R when you look into the box, you 
>can calculate that the power being delivered by the source and consumed 
>by the box is I^2 * R, where I is the RMS current at the box terminals.
>
>So R is always present at an antenna feedpoint at any time the antenna 
>is radiating power, since part of the power "consumed" by the antenna 
>goes toward radiation. This R is called the "radiation resistance". Some 
>part of the power supplied by the source is also actually consumed by 
>heating the wire and ground. This increases the R seen at the feedpoint. 
>That part of the total R is called the "loss resistance".
>
>What you want to do is to maximize the fraction of the power that's 
>radiated, and minimize the fraction that's wasted as heat. So you want 
>to make the ratio of radiation to loss resistance as large as possible. 
>If you have a short antenna, you'll find you can raise the radiation 
>resistance by lengthening it or adding a top hat. Center loading with a 
>coil also raises the radiation resistance, but you can end up increasing 
>the loss just as much due to coil resistance.
>
>With EZNEC, you can set all losses to zero by setting wire loss and the 
>loss of all loads to zero and, if using a grounded vertical, using 
>MININEC type ground. Then the R you see is only the radiation 
>resistance, and the field strength is that of a 100% efficient antenna. 
>Reintroduce the losses and you'll see the loss resistance added to the 
>radiation resistance at the feedpoint. The field strength will drop 
>according to the reduction in efficiency.
>> 
>> Question 2: Is this an effective method of matching a 50 ohm line to
>> the vertical radiator?
>
>Any resistance you intentionally add will increase the loss resistance 
>without changing the radiation resistance. More of your rig's power will 
>be spent heating the resistor and less will be radiated. In some 
>instances, such as military frequency-hopping applications, the trade of 
>greater bandwidth for less efficiency might be worthwhile. You'll have 
>to decide for yourself whether it is for you. There are certainly a host 
>of other matching methods which are less lossy, but few which can 
>achieve the extreme broadbanded match of a resistor. But don't be fooled 
>into thinking that because the match is broadbanded that you're 
>radiating the same amount of power over the band. The wider the 
>bandwidth, the larger the fraction of your power you'll dissipate in the 
>resistor.
>
>> I do understand this is a math model and it ignores radiation from the
>> inductor.
>
>"Loads" don't radiate. Inductors modeled as wires using the helix 
>creation feature do.
>
>> Question 3: Looking ahead, I think the next matching technique should
>> be an inductor in series with the ground end of the radiator and the
>> ground. The 50 ohm line would feed a tap on the coil 50 ohms up from
>> ground. 
>
>That's not likely to work.
>
>> Do I compute XL from the bottom to equal 50 or is this strictly a cut
>> & try thing?
>
>You don't want an XL of 50, you want the feedline to see an R of 50 with 
>no X, that is, 50 + j0.
>
>> I have yet to physically model anything with these tests but I am
>> getting close to it.
>>  
>> I know there are better matching methods than what I am attempting,
>> this is an academic exercise for me!
>
>Look into making an L network. It would be a good opportunity to learn 
>how to use the Smith chart, and you'd end up with a low loss matching 
>solution.
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL
John Ferrell W8CCW


Article: 221228 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net>
Subject: Radial Grounds
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:12:19 -0600
Message-ID: <43d4e387_5@newsfeed.slurp.net>

The link below leads to a very good paper on this topic
written by LB Cebik, and illustrated with many plots and
graphs.

http://www.cebik.com/gp/gr.html


Article: 221229 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "John Passaneau" <jxp16@psu.edu>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 09:13:08 -0500
Message-ID: <dr2o9k$140u$1@f04n12.cac.psu.edu>
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com>


"Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com> wrote in message
news:udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Hello:
>
> Don't have a good feeling for the significance of this:
>
> For a receive only application, using coax from the Balun of a simple
> outside antenna to the receiver,
> is a loss of, e.g., 2.5 db "meaningful"  ?
>
> Specifics would be 100 feet of RG 58 at 30 MHz
>
> Or is it worth the extra $ to go to a less lossy coax (application would
> always be for receive only)
>
> BTW:  R/S Coax a decent quality ?
>
> Thanks,
> B.
>
>

The answer is, maybe. If the signal level of the stations you wish to hear
are strong, then -2.5db will not mean anything as receivers have a lot of
gain, but if the signals are weak then -2.5db can mean the difference
between hearing or not hearing a signal. Be aware that the loss figures for
coax are for a matched system, that is 50 ohms in/out. If the load is not 50
ohms, then the loss of the cable will be higher and the worse the miss match
the higher the excess loss will be. It can be allot. I've seen for severe
miss match excess loss of up to 20db.
As for R/S coax is not known for being of high quality nor is it consistent
in its quality.


-- 
John Passaneau, W3JXP
Penn State University
w3jxp@arrl.net




Article: 221230 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Dale Parfitt" <par@parelectronics.com>
References: <1137969714.322563.106490@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Help with J antenna design
Message-ID: <7S5Bf.2441$zh2.1910@trnddc01>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:36:51 GMT


"JIMMIE" <JIMMIEDEE123@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message 
news:1137969714.322563.106490@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Plan is to build a J antenna for 20 meters using 1 inch EMT conduit.
> Antenna will be supported at the bottom by a 4x4 post in the ground and
> at the 30+ foot level with a fiberglass bracket bolted to the eve of
> the house. The upper most section will be a fiberglass 1/2 wl antenna
> thta used to be used for CB. I am looking for a program that will allow
> me to calculate deminsions for a project like this. Feedline will be 50
> ohm coax.
>
Why not build an end fed 1/2 wave antenna and forget about the mechanics of 
the 1/4 wave matching section and the problems of its height? IMHO, a simple 
L or Pi network in a WX proof box with a 33' vertical would be a lot easier 
to construct and adjust  than a 50' tall antenna.

Dale 




Article: 221231 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Miller <NOSPAM@neosoft.com>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
Message-ID: <jsq9t1ds764n188hv79118i4un6pvfomhd@4ax.com>
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:50:39 GMT

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:32:40 -0500, "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
wrote:

>Hello:
>
>Don't have a good feeling for the significance of this:
>
>For a receive only application, using coax from the Balun of a simple 
>outside antenna to the receiver,
>is a loss of, e.g., 2.5 db "meaningful"  ?
>
>Specifics would be 100 feet of RG 58 at 30 MHz
>
>Or is it worth the extra $ to go to a less lossy coax (application would 
>always be for receive only)
>
>BTW:  R/S Coax a decent quality ?

The last time I bought Radio Shack coax cable, the shield was so
thinly populated with wire, it was almost nonexistant.

You might try some of your local computer stores that deal with
networking installations. They frequently carry good quality coax with
brand names like Beldon. (One of my local computer stores has Beldon
RG-58U at 22 cents a foot.) 

Good mail order places for coax would include Davis RF, The Wireman,
RadioWorks, Amateur Electronic Supply, HRO, etc...

bob
k5qwg
>
>Thanks,
>B. 
>



Article: 221232 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Bob <bob3bob3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <jc6fa3-6jk.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:38:42 -0600

Robert/Bob

In a receive application it is only important that the signal you want 
to hear exceeds the level of total system noise by a desired amount. In 
your case atmospheric noise is likely to be far above that of whatever 
the receiver front end contributes.

Having said that my HF/6m TXCVR has a preamp that can be used on 10M 
with a slight useful effect. I'd suspect that this is a design problem 
as the same model w/out 6m doesnt have it.

My answer is no, the 2.5dB can be ignored. You may want to consider 
though how you should site/feed the antenna to obtain a good s/n ratio 
>from the desired signals.

I personally wouldnt touch RS coax but I have no evidence to back up my 
thought that it is technically inferior. Just that they tend to buy 
things cheap and there is a lot of rubbishy coax around. I might go to 
the "Wireman" or direct to a well known manufacturers (Belden S&H etc) 
retailer.

Cheers Bob VK2YQA

Robert11 wrote:

> For a receive only application, using coax from the Balun of a simple 
> outside antenna to the receiver,
> is a loss of, e.g., 2.5 db "meaningful"  ?

> BTW:  R/S Coax a decent quality ?


Article: 221233 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Help with J antenna design
References: <1137969714.322563.106490@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <zkVAf.1829$2O6.1695@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <1137998729.302357.288870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <JR6Bf.24125$PL5.5923@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:44:41 GMT

JIMMIE wrote:
> Thanks Cecil, I was concerned about spacing of the stub more than
> anything else. I guesstimated this should be about a foot.

The bottom 1/4WL is a quarter-wave matching stub, either open
or shorted. If it is open, you have a Zepp antenna, and they
used to use open-wire transmission line for that. One foot
spacing may be a little much. Rule of thumb - 1% of a wavelength
would be about eight inches on 20m.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221234 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Eric" <eric.ritchie@verizon.net>
Subject: Need AM antenna advice
Message-ID: <dD6Bf.4214$qG3.2011@trndny04>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:29:13 GMT

This is a series of questions about  AM broadcast antenna and lead-in
problems I have, it is not a strictly "amateur radio" question, so I hope
you forgive the intrusion but I thought this group to be the best for the
question.
I have purchased a Russound ST2 dual tuner for medium wave (AM broadcast)
and FM for my whole house audio system. I have hooked up a Radio Shack FM
Stereo Antenna in the attic and it works well for FM. The AM antenna input
is 300 ohm.  Two loop antennas (about 5" diameter) are supplied but do not
work well in the room I have the tuner as there is lots of noise and weak
signal.  I would like to mount the supplied loop antenna(s) in the attic. I
am 18 miles from New York and only want to recieve local broadcasts (no DX).
It is not practical for me to put up a 200 foot longwire. I have to make
some decisions:
1. Can one antenna feed both tuners by being hooked up in parallell? Is
there a signal loss?
2. Am I better off using 300 ohm flat TV type cable or should I use two
300/75 transformers (one at the reciever and one at the loop antenna) with
RG-6 quad shield?  I am wondering if the transformer loss is worth the
possible noise reduction from the coax.
3. Should I be able to use 1 loop for the two tuners and the coax, is it
best to split the 75 ohm coax and use independent 300 ohm transformers or to
split the 300 ohm feed from one tuner to the other?
4. Is it possible to use the FM antenna for the AM and how would it be best
to split that up? (I would have to feed two FM and two AM tuners but only
two could be used at once).

Thanks,
Eric




Article: 221235 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <NZ6Bf.24127$PL5.9816@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:53:17 GMT

Robert11 wrote:
> For a receive only application, using coax from the Balun of a simple 
> outside antenna to the receiver, is a loss of, e.g., 2.5 db "meaningful"  ?

Modern receivers have such a wide dynamic range that 2.5 dB
of loss on a received signal is usually of no consequence
at HF frequencies. Some hams don't even worry about that
amount of signal loss on transmit, ~ half an S-unit.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221236 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:55:52 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <dr2ua8$fi4$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <ut09t11cj888818n057rnj0o1j9g44up7d@4ax.com>


"Owen Duffy" wrote
> One good pickup was the functions for predicting the low frequency
> resistance of shallow buried radials (which is relevant when radial
> wires are required to provide a level of power / lightning
protection.
> I created a graph to add to an existing web page from the functions
> for 3mm (bare) wires buried 0.1m, the graph is at
> http://www.vk1od.net/post/earth02a.gif . (For avoidance of doubt,
this
> graph does not predict the RF characteristics of the radials.)
=========================================

Owen, I assume the curves in your graphs have been obtained by
treating the conductors as transmission lines. As far as I am aware
there's no other way of doing it.  Except perhaps EZNEC
number-crunching mathematical modelling methods.

At VLF the inductance of the conductors and the capacitance due to
relatively high permittivity of the dielectic material (soil) can be
neglected.

This leaves only conductor resistance and conductance (or resistivity)
of the soil.  It is then quite simple for single wires.

To predict performance at RF it is necessary to take inductance and
capacitance into account. What is unknown is the way in which soil
permittivity and resistivity change with frequency.  But this hardly
matters as the uncertainty at 60 Hz is sufficient to swamp it.

I won't ask you what you did about calculating the effects of multiple
radial wires, and the interaction between individual wires, which
causes "The Law of Diminishing Returns" to be followed.

There is sufficient information in your graph to demonstrate that
Magician Marzipan's magic high number of 120 is never necessary for
amateur purposes.
----
Reg.




Article: 221237 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:59:18 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <dr2ugm$g2f$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <OkcAf.12300$F_3.4931@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <dqsab0$heu$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <11t7u80f9s1gi0a@corp.supernews.com>


"Roy Lewallen"  wrote -
> I disagree. Transmission lines have two conductors. Radials don't.
=======================================

Roy, try using your imagination!
----
Reg.




Article: 221238 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile installation question
Date: 23 Jan 2006 16:07:50 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehkhyv3wp07005@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <HMudneUWRbBGn0nenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@comcast.com> <66idnRrSFeXkbUneRVn-rQ@comcast.com>

Amos Keag wrote:

> Coax should have no rf current on the outside of the cable assuming a
> good ground at the antenna.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nonsense. 

Current on the outside of the coax is caused by imbalance in the
antenna. A good ground will not get rid of it, in fact it may well be
the cause if the ground has a different impedance than the antenna.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221239 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
Date: 23 Jan 2006 16:12:22 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehki2y42jnz006@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com> <jsq9t1ds764n188hv79118i4un6pvfomhd@4ax.com>

Bob Miller wrote:

> (One of my local computer stores has Beldon
> RG-58U at 22 cents a foot.) 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you're going to search the internet, you have to spell it right:

Belden.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221240 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
Date: 23 Jan 2006 16:15:51 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehki60470k7007@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com>

Robert11 wrote:

> For a receive only application, using coax from the Balun of a simple
> outside antenna to the receiver, is a loss of, e.g., 2.5 db
> "meaningful"  ?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The answer depends on the noise figure of your receiver. Most modern
receivers have very low internal noise and will work fine under the
conditions you describe. Older receivers, especially tube sets,
generate so much internal noise that it may be stronger than the signal
you are trying to receive and the 2.5 dB loss will render the signal
inaudible.

In other words, it depends. :-)

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221241 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   <U%PAf.21174$PL5.11922@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> <1137964921.758569.111220@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <A%8Bf.13839$H71.13663@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:11:44 GMT

nm5k@wt.net wrote:
> Conductive mast? 
> 
> Sure. Grounded at the base too. 

I am somewhat surprised at the effect of a grounded
conductive mast upon the feedpoint impedance predicted
by EZNEC. On 40m, with the radials attached to the mast,
the feedpoint impedance is 7.8 - j255. With the radials
not attached to the mast the feedpoint impedance is
81 - j219. With no radials and using the mast as a
counterpoise, the feedpoint impedance is 2044 + j1461.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221242 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Eric" <eric.ritchie@verizon.net>
References: <dD6Bf.4214$qG3.2011@trndny04> <26Kdnftxv6kXvEjenZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Need AM antenna advice
Message-ID: <ev9Bf.1021$0n4.381@trndny05>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:45:30 GMT

Chuck,
Thank you for your detailed reply.
I have to use this tuner as it is part of a whole house audio system that is
remote controlled. As such, I can't simply swap it out with another set.
All of the stations I need are in the same place, New York City, so I won't
need to reorient the loop once it is set. All I am looking to do is place
the same antenna in the attic, and I need some advice on the connections.
Thanks,
Eric

"Chuck Olson" <chuckolson01@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:26Kdnftxv6kXvEjenZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Eric" <eric.ritchie@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:dD6Bf.4214$qG3.2011@trndny04...
> > This is a series of questions about  AM broadcast antenna and lead-in
> > problems I have, it is not a strictly "amateur radio" question, so I
hope
> > you forgive the intrusion but I thought this group to be the best for
the
> > question.
> > I have purchased a Russound ST2 dual tuner for medium wave (AM
broadcast)
> > and FM for my whole house audio system. I have hooked up a Radio Shack
FM
> > Stereo Antenna in the attic and it works well for FM. The AM antenna
input
> > is 300 ohm.  Two loop antennas (about 5" diameter) are supplied but do
not
> > work well in the room I have the tuner as there is lots of noise and
weak
> > signal.  I would like to mount the supplied loop antenna(s) in the
attic.
> I
> > am 18 miles from New York and only want to recieve local broadcasts (no
> DX).
> > It is not practical for me to put up a 200 foot longwire. I have to make
> > some decisions:
> > 1. Can one antenna feed both tuners by being hooked up in parallell? Is
> > there a signal loss?
> > 2. Am I better off using 300 ohm flat TV type cable or should I use two
> > 300/75 transformers (one at the reciever and one at the loop antenna)
with
> > RG-6 quad shield?  I am wondering if the transformer loss is worth the
> > possible noise reduction from the coax.
> > 3. Should I be able to use 1 loop for the two tuners and the coax, is it
> > best to split the 75 ohm coax and use independent 300 ohm transformers
or
> to
> > split the 300 ohm feed from one tuner to the other?
> > 4. Is it possible to use the FM antenna for the AM and how would it be
> best
> > to split that up? (I would have to feed two FM and two AM tuners but
only
> > two could be used at once).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Eric
> >
> >
> Most AM radios use a ferrite loopstick antenna. But that is part of the
> input high-Q tuned circuit. Just connecting a loopstick to the 300 ohm
input
> of your receiver would probably not work well, but if you could put a
> "source-follower" (a special transistor circuit that has a very high input
> impedance and low output impedance) between a remote loopstick tuned
circuit
> and your set, and somehow using a voltage-variable capacitor to remotely
> tune it, the result could be quite good.
>
> A loopstick is very directional, and if pointed the wrong way, will
> partially null out the signal you want. However the null is directionally
> fairly sharp, so most loopstick antennas turn out to be adequate. In any
> event, AM broadcast in any but a high signal strength area with the
> equipment you describe is going to be "iffy", and at worst, a bother
having
> to re-tune a remote antenna each time you change stations.
>
> What's your experience with regular AM transistor radios around the house?
> Do they work okay? If they do, it suggests the signal strengths on the
> stations you like are probably high enough, but your choice of a radio
that
> doesn't have a tuned loopstick antenna is somewhat ill advised. If you can
> take it back or sell it - - and get a better radio that has enough front
end
> gain to use the 5" diameter loops or that has a large ferrite rod antenna
on
> the outside that you can see - - that might be best.
>
> Always listen to a radio before buying it, and make sure you can take it
> back if it doesn't work out in your system.
>
> Good luck,
>
> Chuck
>
>




Article: 221243 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Mike Kulyk" <mkulyk@optonline.net>
Subject: FS  Microwave antennas.. Video gear..
Message-ID: <cX9Bf.78$sj7.20@fe08.lga>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:15:15 -0500

I have 2 units of Satellite TV Antennas

Both were used and removed from service.

One is a 22 inch Dish 500 antenna with 2 LNB's on it. LNB's look good..
cover around them is cracked. Antenna has MAST mount. Complete antenna is in
good looking shape, $50

Second is 19 or 20 inch Direct TV antenna,, NO LNB.. mount is there and a
mount for a mast.. $25

I have (2) 9 inch Panasonic WV 5370A monitors, These are 9 inch professional
grade (so I am being told.) Video monitors. THEY are in good looking shape.
WITH very very heavy brackets to hang these monitors up. I did plug them in.
AND I get NO power lite. I don't know if I have to feed them video to have
them come on. SO I am selling them AS is. THEY could be perfect. I am not
sure. If not this is good equipment so its worth repairing. $50 ea

Scientific Atlanta Cable channel 18 video Modulator.. Works well.

$100.. (I have a picture of this)

NO pictures of the other stuff.

SHIPPING not included ,,





Article: 221244 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "amdx" <amdx@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Rotor suggestions
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:31:00 -0600
Message-ID: <dceba$43d52eef$18d6b488$15401@KNOLOGY.NET>

  I'm going to buy a rotor for my flag antenna. I have a rotor now but it is
one of the old TV antenna rotors with a control unit that goes klunk, klunk,
klunk,
as the antenna turns. I'm hope newer rotors have quiet control units.
It doesn't have to be heavy duty the TV antenna rotor has worked fine.
 What are some rotor suggestions?

P.S. Has anyone built a quiet control unit for the old Alliance U-110 rotor?
My rotor works fine, but the klunking at midnight bothers my wife!


Mike




Article: 221245 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Eric" <eric.ritchie@verizon.net>
References: <dD6Bf.4214$qG3.2011@trndny04> <nu9at1ppjl6dgh02bbjpr9di3hmip1cefl@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: Need AM antenna advice
Message-ID: <2gaBf.1024$0n4.600@trndny05>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:37:34 GMT

Richard,
Thanks for your detailed answer.
I am not really set upon combining. I am glad to run another wire. I gather
>from your response I am better off with the coax and two transformer setup
than with using 300 ohm twin wire for the strictly AM radio purpose.
Thanks,
Eric

"Richard Clark" <kb7qhc@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:nu9at1ppjl6dgh02bbjpr9di3hmip1cefl@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:29:13 GMT, "Eric" <eric.ritchie@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >1. Can one antenna feed both tuners by being hooked up in parallell? Is
> >there a signal loss?
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> Yes/Yes.  Does the loss matter at a distance of 18 miles?  Probably
> not.  However, this question is rather hazy given the ones that follow
> seem to ask the same thing again.
>
> >2. Am I better off using 300 ohm flat TV type cable or should I use two
> >300/75 transformers (one at the reciever and one at the loop antenna)
with
> >RG-6 quad shield?  I am wondering if the transformer loss is worth the
> >possible noise reduction from the coax.
>
> Again, the presumption of loss is exaggerated.  Your problem, as you
> describe it, is noise.  However, the transformers are probably more
> suited for FM than AM.  On further consideration, that may not matter
> either as it is the shielding action of the coax that may in fact
> offer more payback in noise reduction for the AM operation than any
> issue over the expected transformer loss.
>
> To take this one step further, at the AM antenna end of the coax,
> simply coil the coax around an empty liter coke bottle with a dozen or
> so turns.  This is more to help isolate from noise than anything else.
>
> >3. Should I be able to use 1 loop for the two tuners and the coax, is it
> >best to split the 75 ohm coax and use independent 300 ohm transformers or
to
> >split the 300 ohm feed from one tuner to the other?
>
> Another hazy question.  Run separate lines for AM and FM.  You can
> combine them, and split them out at each end so that there is only one
> long run of coax (which is commendable).  However, as you are
> approaching this with a known problem, it is in your best interest to
> keep the bands/antennas/lines separate.
>
> >4. Is it possible to use the FM antenna for the AM and how would it be
best
> >to split that up? (I would have to feed two FM and two AM tuners but only
> >two could be used at once).
>
> Another hazy question.  Through all this haze, it seems you are quite
> set upon combining things.  With such a wide separation in frequency,
> you would tend to end up with a single solution that poorly serves two
> purposes.  It raises the complexity factor, and any problem compounds
> that further.
>
> This simply means that, yes, you can; but it would not seem likely you
> are actually doing yourself a favor.
>
> 73's
> Richard Clark, KB7QHC




Article: 221246 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:52:49 -0800
Message-ID: <11tad0kamemosfa@corp.supernews.com>
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com>

At 30 MHz, you're right at the border between HF and VHF. Below about 30 
MHz, atmospheric noise dominates, and reducing the coax loss will make 
no difference at all in your ability to hear signals. Above about 30 
MHz, receiver noise dominates, and reducing the coax loss 2.5 dB will 
make an improvement, the amount depending on the relationship between 
the receiver noise figure and the atmospheric noise. But the boundary is 
fuzzy, so right at 30 MHz it's probably a toss.

But here's a very simple test you can do which will give you a 
definitive answer: Tune the receiver to a frequency where there's no 
signal, and disable the squelch if it has one so you can hear the noise. 
Then disconnect the antenna from the receiver. (With some receivers you 
might have to replace the antenna with a dummy load rather than just 
disconnecting it, but that isn't usually necessary.) If the noise level 
drops when you disconnect the antenna, reducing coax loss or otherwise 
improving antenna efficiency won't make any difference in your ability 
to hear signals. If the noise doesn't drop, then efficiency improvements 
will improve your ability to hear signals.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Robert11 wrote:
> Hello:
> 
> Don't have a good feeling for the significance of this:
> 
> For a receive only application, using coax from the Balun of a simple 
> outside antenna to the receiver,
> is a loss of, e.g., 2.5 db "meaningful"  ?
> 
> Specifics would be 100 feet of RG 58 at 30 MHz
> 
> Or is it worth the extra $ to go to a less lossy coax (application would 
> always be for receive only)
> 
> BTW:  R/S Coax a decent quality ?
> 
> Thanks,
> B. 
> 
> 


Article: 221247 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bob Bob <bob3bob3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Need AM antenna advice
References: <dD6Bf.4214$qG3.2011@trndny04>
Message-ID: <3rofa3-ucl.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:53:38 -0600

Hi Eric

I certainly welcome your question, amateur radio related or not!

Most effort in amateur radio circles on MF is associated with matching a 
transmitter and antenna. The next most important step is to increase the 
desired signal to noise ratio into the receiver (by using antenna 
directivity, type and orientation etc) Since atmospheric noise is far 
stronger than that contributed by the receiver device, actual signal 
loss over the feedline length isnt normally an issue. The actual signal 
level isnt important provided it is greater than the noise.

1. Under perfect conditions assuming known source, load and feedline 
impedences, yes the power going to each receiver will be cut by half 
(3dB). Purist may argue that a simple "in parallel" configuration is a 
bad thing. For AM MF I dont think you'll even notice it...

2. I doubt the balun to RG6 would be useful. I'd also suspect they will 
be hard to find given the operating frequency. (Cheapo TV baluns 
probably wont work well much below 40MHz) One of the problems you will 
encounter coax or ribbon is that if the antenna isnt symmetrical you 
will receive noise from along the length of the feedline itself. Not a 
good thing if it runs past a fluro or light dimmer (or wiring).

I also doubt that the input Z at the antenna input terminal truly is 300 
ohms. I mean it works over a 3:1 frequency range as well..

One of the downsides of using ribbon is possible interactions with 
nearby metalwork. I'd suggest in your case that it wont be an issue. In 
fact using the supplied loop antenna may be no better than using a 
random length of wire (dipole arrangement) attached to the ends of the 
ribbon in the attic. The line loss is not so much an issue than the 
signal received at the antenna itself.

I'd suggest you use the random wire approach with the ribbon in parallel 
to both tuners and see what the signal is like. If it is still noisy 
play with the antenna polarity (vert vs horiz or at least diagonal) I 
suggest that trying to match impedence and getting the same signal power 
in each line/RX isnt important at all. If one wanted a perfect 
configuration (ie for transmitting) the difficulty is major given the 
frequency range the thing has to work over.

Tell us how you fair

Cheers Bob W5/VK2YQA East Texas


Eric wrote:
> This is a series of questions about  AM broadcast antenna and lead-in
> problems I have, it is not a strictly "amateur radio" question, so I hope
> you forgive the intrusion but I thought this group to be the best for the
> question.


Article: 221248 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <jreat1l8vpodhlftr3rfso0o04cbv50rs4@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <ut09t11cj888818n057rnj0o1j9g44up7d@4ax.com> <dr2ua8$fi4$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:43:06 GMT

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:55:52 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
<g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com> wrote:

>
>"Owen Duffy" wrote
>> One good pickup was the functions for predicting the low frequency
>> resistance of shallow buried radials (which is relevant when radial
>> wires are required to provide a level of power / lightning
>protection.
>> I created a graph to add to an existing web page from the functions
>> for 3mm (bare) wires buried 0.1m, the graph is at
>> http://www.vk1od.net/post/earth02a.gif . (For avoidance of doubt,
>this
>> graph does not predict the RF characteristics of the radials.)
>=========================================
>
>Owen, I assume the curves in your graphs have been obtained by
>treating the conductors as transmission lines. As far as I am aware
>there's no other way of doing it.  Except perhaps EZNEC
>number-crunching mathematical modelling methods.

Let me quote again:
< (For avoidance of doubt, this
> graph does not predict the RF characteristics of the radials.)

The graph uses the functions in the paper identified by Richard (
http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/publications/pdf_files/1751f802.pdf
 ). Looking at the functions, I think they just calculates the DC /
low frequency resistance of the electrodes immersed in the soil which
is a high resistivity medium, by modelling the geometry of the
equipotential "layers" around the electrode as is done with a single
straight earth electrode. The functions for 6+ radials (or all of
them) may just be a fit to experimental data.

>
>At VLF the inductance of the conductors and the capacitance due to
>relatively high permittivity of the dielectic material (soil) can be
>neglected.

I think these functions are for the resistance at power frequencies
(ELF?) and are not applicable to RF. Nevertheless, most lightning
protection texts seem to deal with the earth system as a DC resistance
with some lumped series inductance to model the above ground
connection, though clearly, lightning spikes are a double exponential
with components up to VHF depending on the way in which the network
modifies the waveshape.

>
>This leaves only conductor resistance and conductance (or resistivity)
>of the soil.  It is then quite simple for single wires.
>
>To predict performance at RF it is necessary to take inductance and
>capacitance into account. What is unknown is the way in which soil
>permittivity and resistivity change with frequency.  But this hardly
>matters as the uncertainty at 60 Hz is sufficient to swamp it.
>
>I won't ask you what you did about calculating the effects of multiple
>radial wires, and the interaction between individual wires, which
>causes "The Law of Diminishing Returns" to be followed.

See above.

>
>There is sufficient information in your graph to demonstrate that
>Magician Marzipan's magic high number of 120 is never necessary for
>amateur purposes.

I am guessing that the magic 120 was from BLE's paper, and it was
talking about performance at 1MHz or so, so it is RF performance that
is being considered.

The graphs I produced certainly suggest that at DC / 50Hz / 60Hz, that
there is insignificant benefit in installing more than 6 or 8 radial
wires. The reasons will be the same as why installing two vertical
electrodes close together achieves almost no improvement.

Owen
--


Article: 221249 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   <xn0ehj6363ufl4001@cnews.newsguy.com>   <1137966057.832837.275240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <KbVAf.1825$2O6.510@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <1138042555.290651.187890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <9hbBf.2050$2O6.971@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:47:01 GMT

nm5k@wt.net wrote:
> The dipole was at 36 ft. The base of the GP was at 36 ft.

Well, there's the problem. You stopped your dipole where
your vertical started so any comparisons are bogus. Your
dipole was an NVIS antenna. :-) It's not a fair comparison
since the vertical was given a 2x height advantage. (That's
like putting my three foot six inch grandson up against
Shaquelle O'Neal in basketball. :-) Put the dipole at 70
feet, like the vertical was, and see what happens.

The top of my vertical was at 53 ft. and my dipole was
one of its upper guy wires at about 50 feet so the two
heights were essentially opposite yours.

Which brings up another question. If the top of a vertical
is at a certain height, what height of dipole would be a fair
comparison? It is certainly unfair to compare feedpoints
at the same height, like you did. It may also be slightly
unfair to compare them at the same maximum heights, like I did.
It seems a fair comparison might be made when half the vertical
is lower than the dipole and half is higher than the dipole,
i.e. the height of the dipole is at the midpoint of the
monopole?
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221250 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Rotor suggestions
References: <dceba$43d52eef$18d6b488$15401@KNOLOGY.NET>
Message-ID: <AjbBf.2051$2O6.2007@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:49:36 GMT

amdx wrote:
> P.S. Has anyone built a quiet control unit for the old Alliance U-110 rotor?
> My rotor works fine, but the klunking at midnight bothers my wife!

I've been looking for a new wife not bothered by ham radio
for about 20 years now. :-)
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221251 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <msfat1hppn8h46sbusvs9b18fmnu67qa5n@4ax.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <ut09t11cj888818n057rnj0o1j9g44up7d@4ax.com> <7o7at11v0giqof4nauenk0pcml921m3jqt@4ax.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:54:19 GMT

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 10:25:26 -0800, Richard Clark <kb7qhc@comcast.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:29:11 GMT, Owen Duffy <owen@no.where> wrote:
>
>>I created a graph to add to an existing web page from the functions
>>for 3mm (bare) wires buried 0.1m
>
>Hi Owen,
>
>Does this discount the proximity of the radials nearest the center?
>That is, the graph is not simply a summation of the individual
>lengths, is it?

Richard,

See my response to Reg.

The functions are from the reference paper you identified. I don't
recall that they explained the derivation of the functions, and they
may even be fits to experimental data. They do not appear to do
something as crude as summing the individual lengths.

>
>What would nominal be (in other words, actual) for this specific
>description above?

Did you mean "normalised"? You need to multiply the %/m value from the
Y axis by the actual soil resistivity in ohm-metres to get the
resistance of the electrode. For example, if you look the chart up for
3 radials of 5m length, you get 15%, which is multiplied by soil
resistivity (say 50 ohm-metres at a location) to get expected
electrode system "DC/AC" resistance of 7.5 ohms. (The graph is part of
a larger article which explains my "normalisation".)

Interestingly, I note the ref doc recommends galvanised electrodes. I
have been conducting an experiment here where I have recorded the
resistance of several driven earth electrodes over some years, and a
galvanised electrode of 25mm OD performs much worse than a copper clad
electrode of 13mm OD driven just 300mm away from it (both 2.4m long).
(The galvanised electrode is not electrically bonded to the earth
system for reasons of galvanic corrosion).

Owen
--


Article: 221252 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: mcalhoun@ksu.edu
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: 23 Jan 2006 15:51:18 -0600
Message-ID: <dr3j4m$8nf@unix1.cc.ksu.edu>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <OkcAf.12300$F_3.4931@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <dqsab0$heu$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <11t7u80f9s1gi0a@corp.supernews.com> <dr2ugm$g2f$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <hG7Bf.18778$dW3.11892@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>

>>>I disagree. Transmission lines have two conductors. Radials don't.
>> Roy, try using your imagination!
>My "Electronics Equations Handbook" gives the specifications
>for a "SINCLE-WIRE ABOVE-GROUND TRANSMISSION LINE" including
>Z0, C, L, and resistivity adjusted for frequency.

Don't forget the single-conductor transmission line invented by Goubau
and named "G-Line" in his honor.  Quoting from page 164 of my 1972 copy
of "The Radio Amateur's VHF Manual":

   "The basic idea is that a single conductor can be an almost loseless
    transmisison line at untra-high frequencies, if a suitable launching
    device is used.  A similar launcher is placed at the other end.
    Basically the launcher is a cone-shaped device which is a flared
    extension of the coaxial feedline...."

-- 
--Myron A. Calhoun.
Five boxes preserve our freedoms:  soap, ballot, witness, jury, and cartridge
PhD EE (retired).   "Barbershop" tenor.   CDL(PTXS).  W0PBV.   (785) 539-4448
NRA Life Member and Certified Instructor (Home Firearm Safety, Rifle, Pistol)


Article: 221253 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Message-ID: <dcoat1ttqpeebk3ml91olalbivgl6btf5j@4ax.com>
References: <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <xn0ehfbiz13345000@cnews.newsguy.com> <hmi0t15ioqqnf9h9dd9uv9lao8i690mj5o@4ax.com> <11t0ltpe78fkj5e@corp.supernews.com> <0an0t15bj93jvgh510cfcbe1ikadplvk8p@4ax.com> <j7v0t1dq235oom7e5o7b3jtjqv89k6puve@4ax.com> <ut09t11cj888818n057rnj0o1j9g44up7d@4ax.com> <7o7at11v0giqof4nauenk0pcml921m3jqt@4ax.com> <msfat1hppn8h46sbusvs9b18fmnu67qa5n@4ax.com> <sbjat15kahu2270pldbqolgjop8rkdpt2e@4ax.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:09:21 GMT

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:42:41 -0800, Richard Clark <kb7qhc@comcast.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:54:19 GMT, Owen Duffy <owen@no.where> wrote:
>
>>Interestingly, I note the ref doc recommends galvanised electrodes. I
>>have been conducting an experiment here where I have recorded the
>>resistance of several driven earth electrodes over some years, and a
>>galvanised electrode of 25mm OD performs much worse than a copper clad
>>electrode of 13mm OD driven just 300mm away from it (both 2.4m long).
>>(The galvanised electrode is not electrically bonded to the earth
>>system for reasons of galvanic corrosion).
>
>
>Hi Owen,
>
>What method did you use to measure the resistance?

I used a Kyoritsu instrument designed for the purpose. It uses the
three wire fall of potential method, and makes its measurements using
an AC waveform of about 800Hz.

Owen
--


Article: 221254 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Ralph Mowery" <rmowery28146@earthlink.net>
References: <udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Coax Quest. ?
Message-ID: <O%eBf.4494$rH5.1107@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:01:34 GMT


"Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com> wrote in message
news:udCdnVAFZploR0nenZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Hello:
>
> Don't have a good feeling for the significance of this:
>
> For a receive only application, using coax from the Balun of a simple
> outside antenna to the receiver,
> is a loss of, e.g., 2.5 db "meaningful"  ?
>
> Specifics would be 100 feet of RG 58 at 30 MHz
>
> Or is it worth the extra $ to go to a less lossy coax (application would
> always be for receive only)
>
> BTW:  R/S Coax a decent quality ?
>
> Thanks,
> B.

Don't get the R/S coax.  If you can handle the aluminum wire shielding of
the cable TV RG-6 coax , use that.  Less loss and the 70 ohm vrs the 50 ohm
is nothing to worry about.   I usually use the RG-8X coax for frequencies
below 30 mhz instead of the rg-58.  Not that more expensive.





Article: 221255 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Steve Nosko" <suteuve.nosukowicuz@moutouroula.com>
Subject: Re: Help with J antenna design
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:31:27 -0600
Message-ID: <dr3sgv$6o9$1@engnntp2.cig.mot.com>
References: <1137969714.322563.106490@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <zkVAf.1829$2O6.1695@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <1137998729.302357.288870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>


   While the lumped element match is a viable solution.  Here's some info (I
don't see Cecil's response)

   The spacing of the ~1/4 wave matching section is not critical - here's
why.  First, it can be viewed as nothing more than a section of transmission
line, obviously shorted at the bottom (though this section does not have to
be vertical, it's just convenient in many cases).
  The spacing and thickness of the conductors will determine the
characteristic impedance (Z0).  Normally the Z0 of T-Line is critical, but
this is a bit of a different situation.  You are trying to get a match
between the 50 ohms side and something around 2000-3000 ohms (I'll use 2500)
which is at the bottom end of the (vertical) 1/2 wave antenna.  Now, on this
design, we have the "liberty" of connecting the 50 ohm line anywhere we want
on the matching section.
    And, second, if you view the resulting impedance along the line as
varying from zero at the bottom (shorted end) to 2500 at the top (antenna
feed point), there certainly will be some location (nearer the short) which
is at or close to 50 ohms.
 The higher the Z0 of the matching section, the higher up you'll have to go
to get the best match.  I'm pretty sure in is my 1947 handbook (non ARRL)
that has one, but it is wires and a wood frame.

There will be, however, discussion regarding the balanced connection on the
matching section and the unbalanced coax, but I won't go into there.  I'm
sure others will...as well as the fact that it doesn't matter which side the
coax center conductor should be connected to (doesn't matter).

You can also do a search on "Arrow Antenna" and see an interesting (and oft
argued) variation that does not use a short at the bottom.

73, Steve, K9DCI


"JIMMIE" <JIMMIEDEE123@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
news:1137998729.302357.288870@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks Cecil, I was concerned about spacing of the stub more than
> anything else. I guesstimated this should be about a foot. I also know
> I could be totally wrong. By looking at some plans the distance between
> the short and long tubes seems to vary with the frequency and size of
> the tube. Doubt if it is too critical. I downloaded EZNEC a few years
> ago and could never figure out how to use it.
>




Article: 221256 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Steve Nosko" <suteuve.nosukowicuz@moutouroula.com>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:45:38 -0600
Message-ID: <dr3tbi$7a5$1@engnntp2.cig.mot.com>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com>   <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <d51a1$43d01476$471d24c1$14966@ALLTEL.NET>   <XP-dnbRl__AZiE3enZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@gwi.net>   <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET>   <QsYzf.10821$H71.4431@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>


<hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Same here Cecil.
>
> ...
> The problem is not for us elders, but for the younger people who will
> hopefully someday reach 65.

    If someone is too young to worry about this, it won't be 65, but higher.
If your retirement age is within 5 years, it's already 66.



> Today, most of these kids don't realize is
> that the fault with the Social Security system is not in its basic
> design,

  I don't know the ratio of SS to SSI, but it's all the original ponzi
scheme.

Just as Curmudgeonly yours,  Steve, K,9.D;C'I




Article: 221257 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Steve Nosko" <suteuve.nosukowicuz@moutouroula.com>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:59:41 -0600
Message-ID: <dr3u5t$800$1@engnntp2.cig.mot.com>
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>


<hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Tom, realize that many newsgroup readers are so young that they are not
> familiar with the Ponzi scam.  ...
>
> http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/ponzi/
> Harry C.


Digressing even further...telemarketers...

One evening when Wife was out doing schooling, a telemarkerter called.  I
knew by the blank beginning while the computer connected the next operator.


Tele:  "Is Mrs N. Home?"

Me:   (somewhat grufly) "She's not here."

Tele: "Is Mr. N home?"

Me:  (More Grufly) "Haven't seen him in three weeks!"

Tele: "Oh, then I'll call back at a more convenient time."

C R A C K E D  me up.

How do I think of this stuff??

So far, 3/4 times I got the septic additive salesman to hang up on me...
"Now, After dumping $175 of your powder down the pot, how will I know if the
stuff is really working like you say...."  The 4th time, I couldn't shake
him...even though I finally told him I was only going on to keep him on as
long as I could to keep him from bothering as many others.  I had to hang
up...shucks!

73, Steve, K,9.D;C'I




Article: 221258 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Frank" <frank599@nospamtelus.net>
References: <43d4e387_5@newsfeed.slurp.net>
Subject: Re: Radial Grounds
Message-ID: <oFfBf.108586$AP5.38242@edtnps84>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:45:56 GMT

"Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net> wrote in message 
news:43d4e387_5@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> The link below leads to a very good paper on this topic
> written by LB Cebik, and illustrated with many plots and
> graphs.
>
> http://www.cebik.com/gp/gr.html

Very interesting, thanks.  Both of Cebik's books 
(www.nittany-scientific.com) also make very good reading. 




Article: 221259 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: John McGaw <nobody@nowh.ere>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <xjgBf.6171$vp6.5823@bignews6.bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:33:45 -0500

bruno.lerer@gmail.com wrote:
> Yet another strange question from yours truly: on the roof of my house,
> anchored to the chimney, is a large outdoor antenna. No idea which
> antenna - it was installed before my time, probably 15 years ago (or
> more) and, for various reasons, I can't climb on the roof to find
> out.  From that antenna and into the house runs a brown cable (or is it
> wire?) labeled "Belden Celluline 9275 300 ohm UHF transmission" and
> a bunch of patent numbers.
> 
> For some strange reason (it may have been done by the cable company
> when cable was first installed in the house - also before my time),
> that Belden cable was cleanly cut mid-way through its run across the
> basement.  While it doesn't look like any twin-lead cable I've seen
> before (and, admittedly, I haven't seen that many), it has a white
> core which looks like frozen foam and what appear to be two very thin
> metal lines, one on each side of the core.
> 
> And the question: I want to find out if that antenna+cable setup still
> delivers a signal.  I would like to do it by connecting the Belden
> cable to a standard RG6 coax and then to a regular or HD tuner.  I
> understand that this connection would require a gizmo called a balun
> but that's as far as my understanding goes.  So what type of balun is
> it (if there is more than one)? How difficult is it to find? I imagine
> I need to strip the Belden cable on one hand and the RG6 on the other
> in order to connect them to the balun. Is it possible and, if so, how
> is it done?
> 
> Thanks.
> 

Typically a 300 to 75 ohm balun will have a pair of screw terminals for 
the twin lead connection and an F connector for the coax connection. 
Thus the twin lead simply needs stripping and screwing (yes, I know how 
it sounds) but the other side will require that you install the 
appropriate connector on the coax to match to the connector on the 
balun. Sadly the most common sort of balun to be found has a male F 
connector and the most common F connector for coax is also a male so you 
will probably have to come up with a female-female F adapter to match 
them up.

-- 
John McGaw
[Knoxville, TN, USA]
http://johnmcgaw.com


From razrbruce AT gmail.com Wed Jan 25 03:55:05 EST 2006
Article: 221260 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Reply-To: "BruceR" <razrbruce AT gmail.com>
From: "BruceR" <br@NOhawaiiSPAM.com>
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair,comp.home.automation,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <BpidnaBh6JbeD0jeRVn-rw@comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Lines: 42
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
Message-ID: <QqgBf.1443$Z3.1310@tornado.socal.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 02:38:40 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.161.149.73
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com
X-Trace: tornado.socal.rr.com 1138070320 24.161.149.73 (Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:38:40 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:38:40 PST
Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com
Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!elk.ncren.net!news2.wam.umd.edu!nntp.abs.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news-feed-01.socal.rr.com!news.rr.com!cyclone2.kc.rr.com!news2.kc.rr.com!tornado.socal.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.home.repair:512516 comp.home.automation:162033 sci.electronics.repair:360701 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:221260

Here's a picture of one w/female f connector:
http://store.eenid.us/ph61009.html

From:Art
arthurgernberg@comcast.net

> 300 Ohm foam Filled Transmission Line, Matching Balum 300 ohm to 75
> Ohm with the appropiate terminals will work just fine with minimual
> loss. The Matching Devices can be probably bought at the local Radio
> Shack or any Radio TV Supply.
> <bruno.lerer@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Yet another strange question from yours truly: on the roof of my
>> house, anchored to the chimney, is a large outdoor antenna. No idea
>> which antenna - it was installed before my time, probably 15 years
>> ago (or more) and, for various reasons, I can't climb on the roof to
>> find out.  From that antenna and into the house runs a brown cable 
>> (or is
>> it wire?) labeled "Belden Celluline 9275 300 ohm UHF transmission"
>> and a bunch of patent numbers.
>>
>> For some strange reason (it may have been done by the cable company
>> when cable was first installed in the house - also before my time),
>> that Belden cable was cleanly cut mid-way through its run across the
>> basement.  While it doesn't look like any twin-lead cable I've seen
>> before (and, admittedly, I haven't seen that many), it has a white
>> core which looks like frozen foam and what appear to be two very thin
>> metal lines, one on each side of the core.
>>
>> And the question: I want to find out if that antenna+cable setup
>> still delivers a signal.  I would like to do it by connecting the
>> Belden cable to a standard RG6 coax and then to a regular or HD
>> tuner.  I understand that this connection would require a gizmo
>> called a balun but that's as far as my understanding goes.  So what
>> type of balun is it (if there is more than one)? How difficult is it
>> to find? I imagine I need to strip the Belden cable on one hand and
>> the RG6 on the other in order to connect them to the balun. Is it
>> possible and, if so, how is it done?
>>
>> Thanks. 




Article: 221261 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: LoL <lol@lol.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Message-ID: <vl5bt191i102837vpqk3rqpmkpt1udl84b@4ax.com>
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 02:54:59 GMT

And they had 16th century antenna wire?????????????????????????????


On 23 Jan 2006 18:09:50 -0800, bruno.lerer@gmail.com wrote:

>Yet another strange question from yours truly: on the roof of my house,
>anchored to the chimney, is a large outdoor antenna. No idea which
>antenna - it was installed before my time, probably 15 years ago (or
>more) and, for various reasons, I can't climb on the roof to find
>out.  From that antenna and into the house runs a brown cable (or is it
>wire?) labeled "Belden Celluline 9275 300 ohm UHF transmission" and
>a bunch of patent numbers.
>
>For some strange reason (it may have been done by the cable company
>when cable was first installed in the house - also before my time),
>that Belden cable was cleanly cut mid-way through its run across the
>basement.  While it doesn't look like any twin-lead cable I've seen
>before (and, admittedly, I haven't seen that many), it has a white
>core which looks like frozen foam and what appear to be two very thin
>metal lines, one on each side of the core.
>
>And the question: I want to find out if that antenna+cable setup still
>delivers a signal.  I would like to do it by connecting the Belden
>cable to a standard RG6 coax and then to a regular or HD tuner.  I
>understand that this connection would require a gizmo called a balun
>but that's as far as my understanding goes.  So what type of balun is
>it (if there is more than one)? How difficult is it to find? I imagine
>I need to strip the Belden cable on one hand and the RG6 on the other
>in order to connect them to the balun. Is it possible and, if so, how
>is it done?
>
>Thanks.


Article: 221262 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Ken Weitzel <kweitzel@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <vl5bt191i102837vpqk3rqpmkpt1udl84b@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <s1hBf.436754$ki.23798@pd7tw2no>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 03:19:52 GMT



LoL wrote:
> And they had 16th century antenna wire?????????????????????????????

Yes.  It was made of kite string.  My friend Benjamin told me. :)

Ken



Article: 221263 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <43D5AC4F.C941345E@earthlink.net>
From: "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37
References: <dqoe9l$2ig$1@news.uni-paderborn.de>   <qJRzf.8223$924.201431@news20.bellglobal.com> <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <dr3u5t$800$1@engnntp2.cig.mot.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 04:26:26 GMT

Steve Nosko wrote:
> 
> Digressing even further...telemarketers...
> 
> One evening when Wife was out doing schooling, a telemarkerter called.  I
> knew by the blank beginning while the computer connected the next operator.
> 
> Tele:  "Is Mrs N. Home?"
> 
> Me:   (somewhat grufly) "She's not here."
> 
> Tele: "Is Mr. N home?"
> 
> Me:  (More Grufly) "Haven't seen him in three weeks!"
> 
> Tele: "Oh, then I'll call back at a more convenient time."
> 
> C R A C K E D  me up.
> 
> How do I think of this stuff??
> 
> So far, 3/4 times I got the septic additive salesman to hang up on me...
> "Now, After dumping $175 of your powder down the pot, how will I know if the
> stuff is really working like you say...."  The 4th time, I couldn't shake
> him...even though I finally told him I was only going on to keep him on as
> long as I could to keep him from bothering as many others.  I had to hang
> up...shucks!
> 
> 73, Steve, K,9.D;C'I


   Years ago (Before Caller ID) I had the same heating and air
conditioning company call me over 30 times in one week.  Nothing worked
with this woman.  She was insistent that I just HAD to have my central
air conditioning "Tuned up", even after I told her repeatedly I didn't
have central air, or even a window air conditioner.  Finally, I asked
her how many incoming phone lines they had, then I told them that if I
got one more call from them that I would contact everyone I knew to have
them call and pretend to be interested in their repair services or to
buy a new system, then give them fake addresses, or just keep the phone
lines tied up to prevent real customers from being able to reach them. 
I was informed by her that it was harassment, but I just laughed and
asked how they would know which calls were real, from the others.  I
asked why I should return the harassment I had received from her all
week long.  She never called me again.


-- 
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida


Article: 221264 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:39:34 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <dr4p46$aok$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <OkcAf.12300$F_3.4931@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <dqsab0$heu$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <11t7u80f9s1gi0a@corp.supernews.com> <dr2ugm$g2f$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <hG7Bf.18778$dW3.11892@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>


"Cecil Moore" wrote
> My "Electronics Equations Handbook" gives the specifications
> for a "SINCLE-WIRE ABOVE-GROUND TRANSMISSION LINE" including
> Z0, C, L, and resistivity adjusted for frequency.
=======================================
Single-wire lines -

Primary Constants :
The single conductor has resistance and inductance.
Resistance includes radiation resistance.
Space and its contents has permittivity, permeability and conductance.
The 'return path' is space and whatever it contains.

Secondary Constants :
Phase shift and propagation velocity.
Attenuation (loss).

All parameters obey the classical mathematical rules of Maxwell and
Heaviside.

There are also, very common, 2 and 3-wire (3-phase) transmission lines
which have smaller radiation resistances, but radiation resistances
they DO have depending on conductor spacing.
----
Reg.




Article: 221265 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: HF-Ground
References: <1137679046.849697.239010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xn0ehew7u3qjhj000@cnews.newsguy.com> <bbvvs1dlamok1gj4pdnlncdh0cfi84q0ee@4ax.com> <PgcAf.12299$F_3.1580@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <OkcAf.12300$F_3.4931@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <dqsab0$heu$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <11t7u80f9s1gi0a@corp.supernews.com> <dr2ugm$g2f$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com> <hG7Bf.18778$dW3.11892@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com> <dr4p46$aok$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
Message-ID: <Z%qBf.16220$Yu.9580@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:40:57 GMT

Reg Edwards wrote:
> There are also, very common, 2 and 3-wire (3-phase) transmission lines
> which have smaller radiation resistances, but radiation resistances
> they DO have depending on conductor spacing.

One of the ARRL Antenna Compendiums describes a 4-wire transmission
line whose Z0 is selectable depending on how the wires are connected.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221266 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Ken Weitzel <kweitzel@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138115657.063432.84870@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <fRrBf.323928$2k.21562@pd7tw1no>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:37:47 GMT



bruno.lerer@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the info.  One piece is still missing (at least for
> me) - how do you actually strip a clean cut twin-lead wire?
> Beachcomber's retelling of his father's method - burn everything around
> the wires - sounds good, except that if I do that in the basement
> (where the wire terminates and air circulation is minimal) - the
> resulting smell will probably be grounds for divorce and a major
> violation of zoning regulations :)
> 
> Nevertheless, I'm willing to use that method as a last resort. Question
> - is it actually the last resort?


Hi...

Not only smell, but lots of smoke :)

Back in the good old days (around the time sunshine was
invented) I would have done it in your house by putting
the lead flat on top of something hard and not important...
the top of my caddy, perhaps).  Then with a knife I'd cut
a slit clean through it alongside each of the wires for an
inch or so.  Next fold back the resulting center piece and
cut it off.  Now you're left with what for all practical
purposes is just two separate wires, easily strippable with
side cutters or your knife.

I hope that's well enough explained. :)

Take care.

Ken



Article: 221267 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
References: <1137539656.712611.283320@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <vcvqs15g0p53msesltkhliqq1nre2hfss3@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <MDfzf.5783$_S7.2446@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:06:04 GMT

Owen Duffy wrote:
> Don't forget that guyed structures consume space for the back guys.

A friend of mine in AZ solved that problem like this.

    +---------------Antenna wire-----
  G |\
  U | \
  Y |  \
    |   \ Pole
  W |    \
  I |     \
  R |      \
  E |       \
    +--------+--------Ground---------
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221268 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt)
Subject: Re: Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:33:01 -0000
Message-ID: <11st5vd8qeie574@corp.supernews.com>
References: <Pt6dnVUTrbcKTVbeRVn-ig@comcast.com> <a5SdnR54pJtCjVHeRVn-sw@comcast.com> <m-B6DD09.20590617012006@news.verizon.net> <feqdnaCk27gJ3FPeRVn-qw@comcast.com>

In article <feqdnaCk27gJ3FPeRVn-qw@comcast.com>,
Amos Keag  <A.K01@comcast.net> wrote:

>Ground Loop.  Took time to find it though.
>
>The Astron RS-35 power supply connects utility power neutral to the 
>case. It also connects the 13.8 volt return to the case. [This is 
>commercial common practice but is prohibited in Military Systems 
>design.] 

*yoicks*!

The latter, I can believe is common practice.

The former - tying the powerline neutral directly to the case -
strikes me as being *extremely* contrary to electrical code and common
sense.  It'd turn the supply into a deathtrap-waiting-to-happen if it
were plugged into an outlet having the hot and neutral reversed... and
these are (alas) not at all uncommon.

Now, having the utility power safety ground wired directly to the
case, I can very well believe... this is quite common.

-- 
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org>                                   AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
  I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
     boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!


Article: 221269 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138115657.063432.84870@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <kTsBf.13979$_S7.283@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:48:16 GMT

bruno.lerer@gmail.com wrote:
> - how do you actually strip a clean cut twin-lead wire?

Use an Exacto knife to trim away the center insulation
and then use conventional wire strippers.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221270 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   <xn0ehj6363ufl4001@cnews.newsguy.com>   <1137966057.832837.275240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <KbVAf.1825$2O6.510@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>   <1138042555.290651.187890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <9hbBf.2050$2O6.971@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <1138121127.777572.38850@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <2ZsBf.13981$_S7.1117@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:54:22 GMT

nm5k@wt.net wrote:
> I'm not trying to be fair.

Nuff said. I'll keep that in mind next time you
say a vertical is 24 dB better than a dipole. :-)
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221271 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Asimov" <Asimov@-removethis-bbs.juxtaposition.dynip.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Message-ID: <MSGID_1=3a167=2f133.0_43d64c4e@fidonet.org>
References: <xjgBf.6171$vp6.5823@bignews6.bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:11:07 GMT

"John McGaw" bravely wrote to "All" (23 Jan 06  21:33:45)
 --- on the heady topic of "Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st =
century coax"

 JM> From: John McGaw <nobody@nowh.ere>
 JM> Xref: core-easynews alt.home.repair:704999 comp.home.automation:156663
 JM> sci.electronics.repair:356301 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:223073
 JM> found has a male F  connector and the most common F connector for coax
 JM> is also a male so you  will probably have to come up with a
 JM> female-female F adapter to match  them up.


In a pinch a little tube type adaptor with 300 ohm pig tails could be
directly soldered to the twinlead. Also a combiner with a 300 ohm port
will typically have a male F.

 A*s*i*m*o*v

... My other vehicle is a Galaxy Class golfball washer...



Article: 221272 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Asimov" <Asimov@-removethis-bbs.juxtaposition.dynip.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Message-ID: <MSGID_1=3a167=2f133.0_43d64c4f@fidonet.org>
References: <vl5bt191i102837vpqk3rqpmkpt1udl84b@4ax.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:11:13 GMT

"LoL" bravely wrote to "All" (24 Jan 06  02:54:59)
 --- on the heady topic of "Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st =
century coax"

 Lo> From: LoL <lol@lol.com>
 Lo> Xref: core-easynews alt.home.repair:705009 comp.home.automation:156667
 Lo> sci.electronics.repair:356308 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:223077


 Lo> And they had 16th century antenna wire?????????????????????????????

Guess not!

On 18 Feb. 1908, Lee DeForest was granted U.S. Patent No. 879,532
titled 'space telegraphy,'

 A*s*i*m*o*v




Article: 221273 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile installation question
Date: 24 Jan 2006 16:57:04 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehlxr5238s2005@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <HMudneUWRbBGn0nenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@comcast.com> <66idnRrSFeXkbUneRVn-rQ@comcast.com> <xn0ehkhyv3wp07005@cnews.newsguy.com> <yqmdnXirm_a1lEveRVn-rw@comcast.com>

Amos Keag wrote:

> Bill, the discussion is about a MOBILE installation. The antenna is
> end fed against ground, not a balanced dipole type.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm well aware of that. A 1:1 choke type balun at the antenna feed
point will make it a balanced system and the RF on the coax problem
will vanish.

Bill, W6WRT


Article: 221274 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:22:18 -0800
Message-ID: <11sr2hvf93pt27f@corp.supernews.com>
References: <1137539656.712611.283320@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

What exactly do you mean by an antenna that "takes advantage" of your 
lot size? The main advantage of a larger antenna over a simple one is 
higher gain. But you only get gain in one or a few directions, at the 
expense of gain in other directions. So unless you can rotate the large 
antenna, you'll have an antenna that works great in a very few 
directions but typically much worse than a dipole in most others. Is 
that what you want?

One of the few ways to get both gain and some control over pattern 
direction is with a phased array of verticals, symmetrically constructed 
so you can switch directions. Among the sources for information are 
ON4UN's _Low-Band DXing_ and Chapter 8 of the _ARRL Antenna Book_.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Maarten wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I seek some help, advise or suggestions on HF antenna's. I've bought a
> house with a plot of approx 330 x 80 ft / 100 x 23 mtr available for HF
> antenna's.
> But when I research HAM HF antenna's, home build or commercially
> available, I only find a lot of small, smaller and smallest HF
> antenna's (eg. wire antenna's, inverted V, T2DF) that don't take full
> advantage of the size of my land available. On the other end of the
> spectrum there are plans for very, VERY large antenna's like Rhombic
> and Beverage. For this size of antenna's my plot is to small.
> 
> Do you have suggestions for HF antenna's I should check out? Let me
> know in this forum or pm me. Thanx in advance. 73
> 
> Maarten
> maartenkoning2002 (at) yahoo.com
> 


Article: 221275 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Owen Duffy <owen@no.where>
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
Message-ID: <vcvqs15g0p53msesltkhliqq1nre2hfss3@4ax.com>
References: <1137539656.712611.283320@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:37:29 GMT

On 17 Jan 2006 15:14:16 -0800, "Maarten" <maartenkoning2002@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I seek some help, advise or suggestions on HF antenna's. I've bought a
>house with a plot of approx 330 x 80 ft / 100 x 23 mtr available for HF
>antenna's.
>But when I research HAM HF antenna's, home build or commercially
>available, I only find a lot of small, smaller and smallest HF
>antenna's (eg. wire antenna's, inverted V, T2DF) that don't take full
>advantage of the size of my land available. On the other end of the
>spectrum there are plans for very, VERY large antenna's like Rhombic
>and Beverage. For this size of antenna's my plot is to small.
>
>Do you have suggestions for HF antenna's I should check out? Let me
>know in this forum or pm me. Thanx in advance. 73

Marteen, the reason for the gap from small to very large antennas is
mainly that the longer ones are developments of long wires and need to
be several wavelengths long at the lowest operating frequency.

However, it sounds like you block is large enough to accomodate a half
wave dipole on 160m... it all depends on the bands that are of
interest to you. Similarly, you migh be able to accomodate an Extended
Double Zepp for 80m, depending on orientation requirements, or an
array of verticals. Don't forget that guyed structures consume space
for the back guys. The space might allow you to erect several towers /
antennas without them all being tightly coupled as is the case with
smaller blocks. Whilst you are working at how to fill the space now, I
am guessing that it won't be too long before the space won't seem
large enough!

Owen>
>Maarten
>maartenkoning2002 (at) yahoo.com
--


Article: 221276 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:23:01 -0600
Message-ID: <5543-43CE7975-1637@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net>
References: <1137539656.712611.283320@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

Maarten wrote:
"Do you have suggestions for antennas I should check out?"

I am listening to Radio Marti and too jammers on the same frequency.
Cuba is the target. Who knows where the transmitters are? Marti is said
to be in Miami but that is not necessarily its transmitter location.
Likewise the jammers may be in Cuba or elsewhere. LocaL Jammers must be
much more numerous to cover the same territory for a large area, but
they are more effective. The band is 25 meters, about 12 MHz, a
year-round performer.

Monitoring Radio Marti in Houston with a small battery portable complete
with its telescopic antenna convinces me that a listener is better
served using horizonta polarization due to the nulls off the antenna
tips which reject interference. The antenna should also be rotatable for
maximum signal and, or, minimum interference.

A large antenna is usually impractical to rotate. Curtains and rhombics
can have high gain and directionality. You can erect enough of these to
cover all azimuths desired, then you don`t need to rotate any antennas.
So many antennas are usually not possible for the amateur.

For the radio amateur, an assortment of Yagis mounted on rotators can
cover all desired frequency bands and directions effectively and
efficiently.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI



Article: 221277 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
Subject: Re:Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:17:51 -0600
Message-ID: <19272-43CE864F-1277@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net>
References: <MSGID_1=3a167=2f133.0_43cdc027@fidonet.org>

Asimov wrote:
"An acquaintance had a direct hit on his tower and even his tv`s remote
control head."

Did he hear a voice boom from the clouds saying: "Dammit! Missed
again!"?

A good tower ground should mitigate lightning`s fiversion through a TV
remote control. But, I`ve seen stories of "ball lightning" chasing about
inside a house.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI



Article: 221278 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bruce  in Alaska <bruceg@btpost.net>
Subject: Re: Antenna Seperation
References: <dKGdnQkqGaWJ1VDenZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@comcast.com>
Message-ID: <bruceg-C85E32.09431318012006@netnews.worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:41:44 GMT

In article <dKGdnQkqGaWJ1VDenZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@comcast.com>,
 Ted <notthisway@lostinthewoods.org> wrote:

> I've been working with some fishing boats and these guys want to have 
> redundent VHF setups - two radios, two antennas.  Only one would be used 
> and turned on.  My concern is that the unused antenna could couple as a 
> parasitic element and effect SWR of the operating antenna.  Do I really 
> need to worry about it?  If so haw far apart do the two antennas have to be?

These must be very small fishing boats, as ALL vessels over 65 Ft MUST
have two Vhf receivers operational while navigating. Marine ch16, and 
marine ch13.  this is required by The Bridge to Bridge Radiotelephone 
Act.
It really isn't a big deal as long as the two antennas have some 
seperation either vertical or horozontal. I have installed multiple
MORAD 156HD antennas on a Masthead Tree, using 24inch Standoffs, 
and not had any problems with simulataious operations as long as the 
radio's frequencies were seperated by 50Khz or more.  Of course I
was working with good commercial type Vhf's like Modar55/75 or 
SEA156's, and not the RayJeff consumer crap that one would usually find
on noncommercial vessels.

Bruce in alaska
-- 
add a <2> before @


Article: 221279 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison)
Subject: Re: Lightning Arrestor Questions
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:30:42 -0600
Message-ID: <12633-43CE9762-1365@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net>
References: <Pt6dnVUTrbcKTVbeRVn-ig@comcast.com>

Robert 11 wrote:
"For either unit is the arrester placed between the Balun and the
antenna, or between the Balun and the radio? Why?

It likely is superflous.

Coax connectors make lightning arrestors of sorts. They clamp voltage to
the arc sustaining voltage (less than 100 volts), once they fire. If you
are transmitting, r-f may keep the arc alive. Broadcast transmitters
sense the arc and shut the transmitter down for an instant to quench the
arc. Communications radios usually don`t bother as their transmissions
are sporadic and usuallly short.

Remember, coax shield is impenetrable to r-f. D-C conducts right
through. R-F does not due to skin effect.

In countless VHF antenna installations atop tall towers around rhe world
we never used a Polyphaser or similar arrestor on the coax, yet never
had damage to radio antenna circuits, even to transistorized radios.

We always used folded driven antenna elements. We grounded the coax at
the top and bottom of the antenna tower. The tower due to its size has
lower surge impedance and carries the bulk of the lightning current to
ground. The tower is well grounded.

We found it necessary to use brute-force pi-filters on every power wire
feeding the radio including the neutral wire. We used tower lighting
chokes in the pi-filters to cary the current required to power the
radios. We shunted the filter inputs and outputs to ground with MOV`s
(across the a-c capacitors).This limited surge voltage on the radio and
on the powerline. It eliminated all damage to the power supplies in the
radios. These filters were found necessary only when transistor radios
were introduced. Before that, the grounded antenna system sufficed for
tube-type radios.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI



Article: 221280 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Larger size HF antenna's
References: <1137539656.712611.283320@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <52fzf.2827$Yu.423@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:25:53 GMT

Maarten wrote:
> Do you have suggestions for HF antenna's I should check out? Let me
> know in this forum or pm me. Thanx in advance. 73

Here's information on a 130 ft. dipole, good for 80m-10m.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/notuner.htm


Article: 221281 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Cecil Moore <mycall@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: EzNEC Antenna Voltages
References: <s8hrs1hfc3omif942vken1roerrkhpovs7@4ax.com> <11srjamv81gr17@corp.supernews.com>
Message-ID: <BIkzf.389$2O6.54@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:52:33 GMT

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>> The antenna has
>> radiation, inductive, and electric fields (well, the radiation field
>> is actually the transverse electric field component), so how does one
>> go about getting the voltage as a function of antenna position (EZNEC
>> current).
> 
> You don't. It's not possible. Which is why EZNEC doesn't do it.

The current reported by EZNEC is the net standing-wave current
(for standing-wave antennas). That current is associated with
the standing-wave's H-field which can be measured. The standing-
wave also has an E-field. Is there any way to measure the magnitude
and phase of the E-field? I vaguely remember a florescent light
bulb being turned on by the E-field, glowing brightest at the
tip of a mobile antenna.
-- 
73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Article: 221282 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: EzNEC Antenna Voltages
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:08:32 -0800
Message-ID: <11srjamv81gr17@corp.supernews.com>
References: <s8hrs1hfc3omif942vken1roerrkhpovs7@4ax.com>

jimg wrote:
> EZNEC4 computes the antenna currents. Knowing the voltages would be 
> interesting. Unlike the feeder line where the voltage or current are
> easily determined from the characteristic impedance, the line
> parameters, and the terminating impedance, how do you
> determine the antenna voltages?

You don't. Voltage is a measure of the potential between two points. 
When those points are separated in space and in the presence of a 
changing magnetic field, which is the situation near an antenna, the 
voltage you would measure depends on the path you take between the two 
points. Crudely and not completely accurately put, it depends on how you 
orient your meter leads.

  First blush says, uh, 377ohms relates
> the voltages and current, but that's in free space.

No. 377 ohms is the ratio of E to H field of a plane wave in free space. 
It isn't the ratio of any voltage to any current anywhere. There is no 
current in free space, and voltage depends on the path you take, as I 
said above.

> The antenna has
> radiation, inductive, and electric fields (well, the radiation field
> is actually the transverse electric field component), so how does one
> go about getting the voltage as a function of antenna position (EZNEC
> current).

You don't. It's not possible. Which is why EZNEC doesn't do it.

> I'm sure the answer is obvious but I'd appreciate
> confirmation (of an answer and my clouded intellect).
> Thanks.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


Article: 221283 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Asimov" <Asimov@-removethis-bbs.juxtaposition.dynip.com>
Subject: Re:Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions
Message-ID: <MSGID_1=3a167=2f133.0_43cdc027@fidonet.org>
References: <m-B6DD09.20590617012006@news.verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:11:04 GMT

"ml" bravely wrote to "All" (18 Jan 06  01:59:16)
 --- on the heady topic of "Re:Amoskeag Lightning Arrestor Questions"

 ml> From: ml <m@di.net>
 ml> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:222810

 ml> Hi

 ml> FYI, seems your email addr here dosn't work, if it's a real one

 ml> Dear Amos

 ml> i saw your post and hope you wouldn't mind if i asked you a quick
 ml> quesiton


 ml> Your Icom that was damaged, was unplugged from everything  so how did
 ml> lightning 'get to it'??

 ml> I was kinda distrubed trying to figure it out


I'm guessing his radio was most likely damaged from EMP. An
acquaintance had a direct hit on his tower and even his tv's remote
control fried.

 A*s*i*m*o*v




Article: 221284 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood)
Subject: Re: Speaking of A.M. reception
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 07:35:12 -0500
Message-ID: <wood-1801060735280001@jbw-mac.itd.nrl.navy.mil>
References: <a9d60$4379e54e$18d64e2f$22584@KNOLOGY.NET> <11nk0sb9lh2jq82@corp.supernews.com> <dld0qk02fmo@enews1.newsguy.com> <Vb0zf.3901$w72.1438@bignews4.bellsouth.net>

In article <Vb0zf.3901$w72.1438@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "hossdaddy"
<reply@newsgroup.net> wrote:

> Hi Bill,
> 
> You might actually be right.  I think that's what they are trying to do to
> hams with the possibility of BPL.
> 
> I think that AM (as it is) should stay that way FOREVER.  I am not opposed
> to these stations using a parallel form of digital broadcasting (IBOC?)  but
> to turn the AM-DSB transmitters off I think would be a tragedy.  It is the
> only form or radio that can be easily demodulated.  A grandfather can sit
> down with his grandson, a bunch of wire,  an oatmeal box, and a few other
> cheap components and in a few hours have a working (and demonstratable)
> radio -  FREE RADIO - and discounting lightning it is 100% safe too!  It's
> that kind of thing that got me into the hobby - and with the numbers of
> licensees dwindling  and our RF bandwidth at stake it is high time that we
> get the next generation interested.
> 
> 73!
> Paul
> KD4GNU

Hello, and I share your sentiments but technology moves on.  You either
keep up with it or be left behind.  I get nostalgic over old vacuum tube
radios like the Collins KWM types or some Drake models but I wouldn't want
to be stuck in that period.  Lots of wonderful things to discover in the
here-and-now, even pour moi (who passed forty about 16 years ago).

There's plenty of electronics out there to interest young minds if you
look for it.  Ramsey offers some electronic lab kits I wished I'd had as a
kid.  And speaking of AM-DSB wasn't a spark-gap transmitter using morse
code even simpler (well maybe not if you were using a Branly coherer on
the receive end and those transmitting antennas sure seemed to require a
lot of wire and towers)?  I built crystal and one-tube radios as cub/boy
scout projects but what I really wanted to construct was a superhet (or
maybe a TRF type) since I knew they could pull in lots of stations without
requiring an outdoors antenna.  For simplicity and ease of construction
the majority of those DIY home radio projects excluded the RF and/or IF
amplification required to provide a requisite level of receiver
sensitivity with an internal antenna.  Never built a superhet but I
constructed an FM broadcast receiver using a tunnel diode (a componont one
of my later Va Tech EE profs would refer to as an "electronic Edsel") as a
junior high science fair project.  Just a few thoughts.  Sincerely, and
73s from N4GGO,

John Wood (Code 5550)        e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil                     
Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337


From razrbruce AT gmail.com Wed Jan 25 03:55:10 EST 2006
Article: 221285 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Reply-To: "BruceR" <razrbruce AT gmail.com>
From: "BruceR" <br@NOhawaiiSPAM.com>
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair,comp.home.automation,sci.electronics.repair,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138115657.063432.84870@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Lines: 21
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Message-ID: <6_vBf.2009$Ou1.769@tornado.socal.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:20:18 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.161.149.73
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com
X-Trace: tornado.socal.rr.com 1138134018 24.161.149.73 (Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:20:18 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:20:18 PST
Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com
Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!elk.ncren.net!news2.wam.umd.edu!nntp.abs.net!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!news.glorb.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!statler.nntpserver.com!news-west.rr.com!news-wrt-01.rdc-kc.rr.com!news-feed-01.rdc-kc.rr.com!news.rr.com!cyclone2.kc.rr.com!news2.kc.rr.com!tornado.socal.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.home.repair:512670 comp.home.automation:162061 sci.electronics.repair:360778 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:221285

Since you have the foam filled stuff it's a little more difficult to 
trim away the center so I'd use a utility knife to make a slit along 
each side and pull the wires out. Then just cut away the remaining 
center carcass. Finally, attach the leads to the wire leads or screw 
terminals of the matching transformer.

From:bruno.lerer@gmail.com
bruno.lerer@gmail.com

> Thanks everyone for the info.  One piece is still missing (at least
> for me) - how do you actually strip a clean cut twin-lead wire?
> Beachcomber's retelling of his father's method - burn everything
> around the wires - sounds good, except that if I do that in the
> basement (where the wire terminates and air circulation is minimal) -
> the resulting smell will probably be grounds for divorce and a major
> violation of zoning regulations :)
>
> Nevertheless, I'm willing to use that method as a last resort.
> Question - is it actually the last resort? 




Article: 221286 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@eznec.com>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:52:47 -0800
Message-ID: <11td4t3pb0gbs53@corp.supernews.com>
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   <xn0ehj6363ufl4001@cnews.newsguy.com>   <1137966057.832837.275240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <KbVAf.1825$2O6.510@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>   <1138042555.290651.187890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <9hbBf.2050$2O6.971@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <1138121127.777572.38850@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

nm5k@wt.net wrote:
> 
>  It's not a fair comparison
> since the vertical was given a 2x height advantage. (That's
> like putting my three foot six inch grandson up against
> Shaquelle O'Neal in basketball. :-) Put the dipole at 70
> feet, like the vertical was, and see what happens.
> 
> I mounted both as high as they would go.  I don't consider
> the GP as having quite twice the height advantage due to
> the current distribution.
> 
> The top of my vertical was at 53 ft. and my dipole was
> one of its upper guy wires at about 50 feet so the two
> heights were essentially opposite yours.
> 
> No , just different..
> 
> Which brings up another question. If the top of a vertical
> is at a certain height, what height of dipole would be a fair
> comparison?
> Dunno...But max current on the GP as at the base..

There's no "fair" comparison between two such different antennas, if 
your goal is some sort of generalized conclusion about which kind of 
antenna is "better". The only valid comparison would be a vertical at 
whatever height you can put it at vs a dipole at whatever height you can 
put it at. Then, with your particular ground conditions and azimuth and 
elevation angles of interest, you can decide which is better. Any 
general binary conclusion about whether a vertical or dipole is "better" 
is nonsense, so there's no point in making rules for comparing them.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


Article: 221287 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Mike Coslo <mjc5remove@psu.edu>
Subject: Re: Vertical on a tower
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:07:01 -0500
Message-ID: <43D696F5.3080108@psu.edu>
References: <HpyAf.13426$H71.9215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>   <1137915322.724857.201990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   <xn0ehj6363ufl4001@cnews.newsguy.com>   <1137966057.832837.275240@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   <KbVAf.1825$2O6.510@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>   <1138042555.290651.187890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   <9hbBf.2050$2O6.971@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <1138121127.777572.38850@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <2ZsBf.13981$_S7.1117@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>

Cecil Moore wrote:
> nm5k@wt.net wrote:
> 
>> I'm not trying to be fair.
> 
> 
> Nuff said. I'll keep that in mind next time you
> say a vertical is 24 dB better than a dipole. :-)

	24 db *when* for all that matter. I would note that my vertical *is* 
indeed about 2 S units noisier than my dipole. And some signals come in 
stronger, and some come in weaker. My guess is that it depends on where 
the signals originated from, smarter people may know the real reason.

	- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -



Article: 221288 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Ron McConnell <rcmcc@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Help with J antenna design
Message-ID: <q5bdt1d243tmafn222s4dpk4r3805lrqku@4ax.com>
References: <1137969714.322563.106490@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:56:05 GMT


Tim, k7itm, writes
> ... the total length of the stub and series part will be longer than 1/4 wave

The J-Pole and End-Fed Zepp design program in George VE3ERP Murphy's
freeware HAMCALC package of over 300 radio programs yields results
consistent with this litte known fact about the so-called "1/4 wave"
matching section for J-Poles.  The program  is a version of Gary N3GO
O'Neill's  program from his Communications Quarterly article on the
subject.

The latest version 80 of HAMCALC is available at CQ magazine's web
site.

  <http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com>

By the way,  the matching section for the proposed vertical antenna
doesn't have to vertical, does it?  Can't it be run horizontally 
and the overall height reduced from about 50 ft to about 33 ft?
As mentioned a L network with an inductor and capacitor  would also
work instead.

Cheers, 73,

Ron McC.
w2iol@arrl.net

Ronald C. McConnell, PhD

 WGS-84: N 40º 46' 57.9"  +/-0.1"
         W 74º 41' 21.3"  +/-0.1"
         FN20ps.77GU96 +/-
         V +5058  H +1504

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~rcmcc> 


Don't argue about facts.
 - G. Robert Leopold 


Article: 221289 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "B Fuhrmann" <b-fuhrmann-usenet@mplsfridayDELETEskate.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:16:26 -0600
Message-ID: <11tddacbnbdi397@corp.supernews.com>
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138115657.063432.84870@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <fRrBf.323928$2k.21562@pd7tw1no>

> bruno.lerer@gmail.com wrote:
>> Thanks everyone for the info.  One piece is still missing (at least for
>> me) - how do you actually strip a clean cut twin-lead wire?


"Ken Weitzel"  wrote ...
> Back in the good old days (around the time sunshine was
> invented) I would have done it in your house by putting
> the lead flat on top of something hard and not important...
> the top of my caddy, perhaps).  Then with a knife I'd cut
> a slit clean through it alongside each of the wires for an
> inch or so.  Next fold back the resulting center piece and
> cut it off.  Now you're left with what for all practical
> purposes is just two separate wires, easily strippable with
> side cutters or your knife.

BINGO

Other than dedicated strippers (they used to make them), that is the easiest 
method. 




Article: 221290 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: anoldfart2@unlisted.com
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:20:50 -0600
Message-ID: <nujdt1psmir8vvusfj6dcsb3t84mrrkgbn@4ax.com>
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138072573.772686.116470@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43d5b1b3.1352921@newsgroups.comcast.net>

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:01:30 GMT, not_real@xxx.yyy (Beachcomber)
wrote:

>On 23 Jan 2006 19:16:13 -0800, "buffalobill" <wjohnston@adelphia.net>
>wrote:
>
>>TN climate may have rusted out your 300 ohm rooftop antenna, making
>>your old system low quality or possibly useful to a radio.
>>see hdtv antenna compass directions from entering just your zipcode at:
>>http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx
>>
>
>That old twin-lead cable reminds me of the setup in our city apartment
>building back in 1961.   The twin-lead was connected directly to the
>back of the TV with screw terminals.   Occasionally a wire would break
>and it would be necessary to re-attach it.   The problem was how to
>strip it...  The plastic dielectric was the most awful, stiff material
>around.
>
>Thankfully my father showed me the way.  He lit it with a match and
>burned away the plastic from the bare copper wires.   I still remember
>the drip drip of hot plastic and the nasty smell it produced.
>
>There weren't many stations, just the ABC, CBS, NBC and a struggling
>PBS affiliate that ran shows about "math lessons" for educational TV.
>There was also one big-city independent station that ran Laurel &
>Hardy, Abbott & Costello, the 3 stooges and some fine local children's
>programs.
>
>Every few months a tube on the set would go bad.   Then we called the
>Zenith Repairman who brought no less than 3 giant tube caddies and
>filled up the living room with spare replacement tubes when the cases
>were open.   Later, every drugstore had a tube-tester available and we
>could test and sometimes even replace our own tubes.
>
>Beachcomber
>

It really pisses me off that you cant find tube testers in drug stores
any longer.  Whatever happened to "SERVICE".  I finally had to buy my
own tube tester and now I have to test them alone in my own home.  The
drugstore tube tester used to be a great place to pick up women,
particularly those who had broken tvs.  It's no wonder there is so
much violence in today's society.  People no longer have a place to
gather and test tubes.  It was always a big thrill to watch them light
up, and slowly watch that meter climb into the "GOOD" (green) 
zone.  That was so much more exciting than all these boring computer
games these kids play these days.

By the way, 300 ohm tv cable will still work if it's still properly
attached to the antenna and the antenna is still intact.  To splice
it, strip it back about an inch on each piece.  Twist the two wires
and bend them down along side the cable.  Wrap with tape.  Connect to
tv and see what happens.  On newer tvs you will need an adaptor.  A
couple bucks at Radio Shack.



Article: 221291 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "AZ Woody" <Reply@here.not.email>
References: <1138068590.062816.77730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138115657.063432.84870@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <fRrBf.323928$2k.21562@pd7tw1no> <11tddacbnbdi397@corp.supernews.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting 16th century antenna wire to 21st century coax
Message-ID: <WbBBf.51$OO.2161@news.uswest.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:16:21 -0700

Some matching transformers don't require the 300 ohm wire to be stripped at
all.  I don't know if they're still available, but basically, the flat cable
went between two screws. The screws had a "star washer that was shaped like
an inverted bowl.  When the screws are tightened, the sharp part of the star
washer would pierce the insulation on the cable and provide a connection to
the inner wires.


-----0-------------------------------------------------------

cable
-----0-------------------------------------------------------


0=screw




Article: 221292 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Charles P.L. Stokes" <wb4pvt@verizon.net>
Subject: RF Ammeter
Message-ID: <gyCBf.8315$zh2.3545@trnddc01>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 03:48:28 GMT

I'm looking for a RF Ammeter, are the MFJ's MFJ-834, MFJ-835, MFJ-854, and
MFJ-853 meters any good? Two of the meters are in-line and two are clamp-on.

WB4PVT
Charlie 




Article: 221293 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Bill Turner" <noway@nohow.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile installation question
Date: 25 Jan 2006 04:56:12 GMT
Message-ID: <xn0ehmgp04fwdc008@cnews.newsguy.com>
References: <HMudneUWRbBGn0nenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@comcast.com> <66idnRrSFeXkbUneRVn-rQ@comcast.com> <xn0ehkhyv3wp07005@cnews.newsguy.com> <yqmdnXirm_a1lEveRVn-rw@comcast.com> <xn0ehlxr5238s2005@cnews.newsguy.com> <3MmdnUjzf8oHV0veRVn-hQ@comcast.com>

Amos Keag wrote:

> I give up!!  Obviously my 52 years of mobile installations were all
> wrong!
> 
> A vertical fed against ground is by definition a perfect match for
> coax. There is no need to make it a 'balanced system'. If rf exists
> on the coax there is a poor ground in the system that should be
> addressed and solved.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More likely you have had one year of experience 52 times. 

Consider an eight foot center loaded whip on 80 meters. The feedpoint
impedance of the whip is going to be very small - an ohm or two. Worked
against an automobile chassis which, capacity coupled to the earth,
will have an impedance of somewhere between 10-36 ohms, you will have
major imbalance. No amount of "grounding" will improve the imbalance.
In fact, just the opposite. The closer you come to the theoretical
perfect 36 ohm ground, the worse the imbalance gets.

Now whether this is a problem in a particular installation is a
different question, but the imbalance is there. The coax will have a
large differential current flowing on the outside as a direct result of
that imbalance. Some authors will tell you how important it is to
ground the chassis of your transceiver to get rid of this current. Do
that if you want, but I think it's better to keep that current away
>from your transceiver in the first place. A current-type choke at the
whip's base will prevent that current from flowing and will keep it in
the antenna and in the car's body where it belongs instead of on the
outside of the coax. Done properly, your transceiver's chassis should
have no RF on it  to need grounding in the first place.

Bill, W6WRT