All
As far as I can understand, wires / radials just under the surface of the
ground are simply conductors embedded in a lossy dielectric (with an interface
to air near it), similar to carbon filled plastic or other such material. If
the loss and the dielectric constant is low, the wire acts more like free space
antenna conductor with standing waves made possible by actually having energy
that can be reflected back from the open end. If the loss is high, nothing
remains to form a standing wave as the energy in the wire dissipates such that
only (mostly) a forward wave is present and no standing wave can be observed.
The reason why this might be difficult to understand is that there are some
three factors can be different: The dielectric constant, the conductivity and
the spatial variations of these both in depth and along the surface of the
ground and then the geometry of the multiple wires in this medium and the
corresponding coupling(s) between the wires.
The detailed predictions for current profile would seem most beneficial if a
symmetric field very large number of very long radials is not possible for
space or cost reasons. As I understand, the primary loss mechanism for ground
mounted vertical systems is EM field penetrating the lossy material below. To
lower this loss, one needs to prevent this ground penetration. Building a
"shield", a large, dense radial field is a way to do this. However, this
doesn't change the fact that loss associated with one radial wire changes with
current and current profile on it! I guess this is at the core of the debate
here.
I find it remarkable that we have now free tools to solve EM-problems that took
computing center size efforts when I got started with this hobby at late 70's.
MarkkuOH2RA/OG2A/WW1C
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|