At 05:17 AM 7/26/2005, Mark . wrote:
>Thank you all for your thoughtful and informative replies. Having a large
>spool of light wire with which I can easily lay down a screen is the easiest
>way to go, much like the pattern of cooling coils in AC heat exchangers.
>This avoids the tedious placement of individual wires.
>
>I remember the 0.05 wave max spacing rule from past discussions of
>conventional ground radials. On 80m, our local Virginia Phone net and
>emergency net meets on 3947. During the day, there's also a 40m freq...
>hmmm. I would have to size the spacing for the smallest wavelength (40m
>band).
>
>lessee.... (11811/7.2)*.05 = 82 inches. A nominal 6 foot spacing ought to
>do it for both 40 and 80m. I'm not quite sure how much overlap (lengthwise)
>to use. A halfwave on 80m is about 135 ft in wire.
Approach it geometrically as a start (even though it's probably not valid
electromagnetically).. if you have your antenna up 10 ft, and you're
looking at a 45 degree takeoff angle, go out by 45 degrees (i.e. 10 ft out
on the ends).. "resonant length" is actually going to be MUCH shorter than
the wire in the air.
Realistically, you're looking at "shielding" the earth from the antenna,
and so, you want to shield where it's doing the most good. This is probably
a magnetic field situation, so the shielding would be best deployed where
the current is highest (i.e. the middle). Just guessing, though. An
interesting analysis problem: With a limited number of feet (or pounds) of
wire, are you better off "shielding" the middle real well with lots of back
and forth, or longer runs with bigger gaps between the wires. Or, the
miles of cheap aluminum (higher resistivity, but more strands in parallel,
effectively) better or worse than fewer miles of copper.
This is sort of like optimizing radials for a vertical antenna, where the
true optimum is something other than N identical radials laid out
symmetrically. (i.e. some sort of branching scheme that keeps the "radial
to radial distance" the same as you go out is probably optimum, but a pain
to install and/or analyze).
There's probably some literature out there from the 30's or 40's talking
about designing coax shields that would be applicable.
As for arrangement, probably either would work, and it might be hard to
tell the difference in a practical sense (a 6 foot wiggle in a 130 ft span
is not very big). Go with what makes it possible to put the most wire out
quickly.
The other idea that comes to me is that if you have a place where you often
operate NVIS (like a standard field location for emcomm), you could get
some inexpensive wire, lay it out, and just leave it there.
Ahem.. apropos of recent discussions about the ham literature, this would
be an excellent thing to write up for QST, especially if you do some tests
of the various configurations. You would need to find a suitable set of
beacons (or some moderate distance hams willing to transmit a carrier at
constant power for long enough to make measurements). Got an pre-Eagle
Scout around looking for a project? Let them round up a crew oftrusty
assistants, a few miles of wire, hie thee to a park, and spend a few days
making coiling and uncoiling wire in various patterns and making
comparative measurements. It's at least as useful to society as building
fire rings at a campground. Might even get some of them interested in
licensing, too.
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|