X-GM-THRID: 1201092871102915278 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf X-Gmail-Received: 497f937f9d451cd1deb028cc860e81e4e181a011 Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.54.70.6 with SMTP id s6cs29100wra; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 12:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.61.4 with SMTP id o4mr1598940nfk; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 12:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id x1si204275nfb.2006.04.21.12.59.02; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 12:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1FX1jk-00024d-IL for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 20:56:16 +0100 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1FX1jk-00024U-1D for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 20:56:16 +0100 Received: from smtp803.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.12.140]) by relay2.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.51) id 1FX34E-0007Wq-Rd for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 22:21:31 +0100 Received: (qmail 81786 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2006 19:55:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO LAPTOP) (peter.martinez@btinternet.com@81.159.156.253 with login) by smtp803.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Apr 2006 19:55:08 -0000 Message-ID: <004001c6657d$7dff0460$0300a8c0@LAPTOP> From: "Peter Martinez" To: References: <000401c66497$9069f420$e6a4c593@RD40002> <011301c664af$72f94130$0300a8c0@LAPTOP> <444929D1.50803@att.net> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:55:08 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=-0.419 Subject: Re: LF: Top load coil at ground level? Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 6672 >From G3PLX: Dex said.. >I initially used this antenna with a single vertical wire and the coil >grounded to the base of the tower ground system. I think this is what you >described above. There was some discussion about the capacitance between >the vertical wire and tower shunting the antenna current to ground so I >went looking for a way to feed a short grounded tower. So I found the >balanced feed method on Rik's site and give it a try. The antenna current goes to ground one way or the other, it doesn't matter which. The only thing that matters is that you have a nice big current flowing between the top hat and the ground. With the coil at the bottom rather than the top, you will indeed need to pump more current into the bottom of the wire than flows into the top hat, but it's all capacitative current so it's not lost and it doesn't cost anything. What I wondered was that this capacitance, effectively across the coil, might be responsible for increased losses in the coil. Removing the ground wire would reduce this capacitance. You might need a few more turns on the coil but it might run a bit cooler. If the coil was a good one anyway, it might not make any difference. But one thing is certain. Running a 'hot' wire up the side of a grounded tower like this is perfectly valid, whether the coil is at the top or the bottom. At first it looks like the tower will shield the wire and short-circuit the RF, but current flowing down a tower is as good as any other kind so long as the other end of the current flows into the sky. 73 Peter