Assuming those angles are true for DX paths, note that if the NEC far-field elevation pattern for a 1/4-wave monopole was the only radiation leaving the antenna, the field at 3 degrees elevation woul
Those who believe so might want to review the conversion from the e.m.u. units used for earth conductivity in the BL&E publication to the mS/m units more commonly used today. factor of ten. <-- Other
As an observation... The link below shows how the r-f ground connection loss and system radiation efficiency of a 10m monopole using a set of 32 x 10m radials vary with the conductivity of the earth
A common belief seen on the web is that if buried radials are not installed over some azimuth sector around a monopole, then the azimuth radiation pattern of that monopole will become distinctly dire
The number and length of equally-spaced buried radials needed for a monopole depends rather heavily on the conductivity of the earth in which they are buried, and how close the operator needs/wants t
Earlier... I hope we all caution people models are models and can vary from life, and that empirical reports should be taken with a grain of salt. ____________ Good advice, but probably anecdotal rep
Just to note that Edmund Laport (once the Chief Engineer of RCA International) did not support the use of ground screens in his textbook RADIO ANTENNA ENGINEERING (page 121), citing eddy current loss
The measured data linked below shows how the number of buried radials affects the performance of monopoles of various height to 90 degrees, for an applied power of 1 kW. Earth conductivity at the tes
Can you pass along your source of information that BL&E was done over 4 mS/m soil, ... Or are you using the FCC map for typical soil conductivities and presuming a common New Jersey value and no vari
Conclusion: The less ground conductivity the higher is the antenna elevation radiation angle. This is a negative impact for DX! Cris, Tom, Paul et al This belief is common when looking at the far-fie
On your referenced fields graph you caption "Measured vs. Calculated" intensity, but the traces are not differentiated. Which traces on the graph are measured and which are calculated? ______________
Guy Olinger wrote (about measuring earth conductivity): Figure out how to do that for a small lot backyard in an old European village with 900 year old homes. Here is one method: http://www.technik.d
From Terman (as Richard Fry mentioned): http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h85/rfry-100/TermanFig55.jpg First hop distance on E layer reflection for given angles is: 20 degrees = 300miles, 30 degrees
The elevation patterns of vertical monopoles over real earth has been discussed in recent threads here (http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00140.html). The common belief ba
I have not been able to locate these FCC curves (and it appears that they may have been withdrawn). Here is the link... http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/m3-map-effective-ground-conductivity-united-sta
I have not been able to locate these FCC curves (and it appears that they may have been withdrawn). The FCC groundwave MW propagation curves are available here... http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/am-b
Guy Olinger wrote: But to prove it we can't use standing-man-with-meter. He may just be sensing the current in the ground just below his feet that will never be airborne. We need sitting-man-with-met
We need sitting-man-with-meter-in-helicopter to go up there and prove that what you get from the ground up to twenty thousand feet out (at) 20 miles is a blend, and not a notch. Below is a link to th
I get that at any point in the far field there is RF current in the ground due to the space wave from the transmitter reflecting obliquely off ground. If the earth had perfect conductivity then an EM
Guy Olinger wrote: I find it curious that some of those that so insist on standing-man-with-meter in affairs regarding performance of antennas are willing to accept a considerable logical reach on "u