Dave... would it be a fair extrapolation to take your last sentence, and draw
the conclusion that if adding radials changes feed impedance, then there was
actual ground loss in the near field? Or that if we add more radials and feed
impedance change is not seen, then we are at a minimum for ground loss?
The above statements certainly align with my gut feeling, but my gut feeling is
different than a mathematical proof :-)
Tim N3QE
________________________________________
From: Topband [topband-bounces@contesting.com] on behalf of DAVID CUTHBERT
[telegrapher9@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 5:23 PM
To: ZR
Cc: Donald Chester; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Ground mounted 1/2 and 1/4 wave verticals (was GAP)
Carl,
What we do in the near-field to control ground loss affects the far-field
signal equally at all elevations. Therefore there is no need to measure
far-field field strength at more than one elevation.
We have control of the near-field and anything we do in that region shows
up as a change in input impedance.
_______________________________________________
It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever
for supposing it is true. — Bertrand Russell
|