Return-Path: Received: from mtain-me08.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-me08.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.96.144]) by air-me02.mail.aol.com (v128.1) with ESMTP id MAILINME023-8ba64bb1a031110; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:54:41 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-me08.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 6BE5738000087; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:54:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1NwVJz-0005vW-Ot for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:53:07 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1NwVJz-0005vN-7Y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:53:07 +0100 Received: from cavuit02.kulnet.kuleuven.be ([134.58.240.44]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NwVJx-000520-28 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:53:07 +0100 Received: from smtps01.kuleuven.be (smtpshost01.kulnet.kuleuven.be [134.58.240.74]) by cavuit02.kulnet.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8411751C010 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:52:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from PC_van_Rik.fys.kuleuven.be (dhcp-10-33-85-106.fys.kuleuven.be [10.33.85.106]) by smtps01.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC15A31E703 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:52:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:52:53 +0200 To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" X-Kuleuven: This mail passed the K.U.Leuven mailcluster From: Rik Strobbe In-Reply-To: References: <0F2B77385FC04A07A080811EE2E61079@JimPC> Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100330065247.BC15A31E703@smtps01.kuleuven.be> X-KULeuven-Information: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven X-KULeuven-Scanned: Found to be clean X-KULeuven-Envelope-From: rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: RE: Re: PF per Meter dependant on wire size? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed 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=TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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 x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d60904bb1a02f67fc X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 Hello Paul, multiple (parallel) topload wires have been used by various stations. Depending on the number of parallel wires and their distance values up to 15pF/m have been reached, 55m thus could be good for up to 825pF. You can find some information on my website: http://www.strobbe.eu/on7yd/136ant/#CapTop 73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T At 00:36 30/03/2010, you wrote: >Hi Jim > >Thank you for the formula for calculating "C" of a wire. >Also the information about adding additional wires is valuable. > >There are 2 methods I could try with my 55 meters of wire. >With the use of fiberglass spreaders, multiple wires could be spread apart >at the top of the tower forming a fan of the wires. >With a single point on the shack end where the wires would all would >combine. > >Probably better would be to support 4 wires equally spaced on a fiber glass >poles 9 meters long on both the tower end and the shack end. > >This seems too easy Jim, there must be a point of diminishing returns. > >Knowing that the wire is 55 meters long, and 1 wire measures at 340 pf would >you hazard a guess as to 4 wires 1 meter apart each the value of "C" > >Do you think 700 pf is achievable? > >Thank you for reading > >PaulC >W1VLF > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >[mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]On Behalf Of James Moritz >Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 4:09 PM >To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >Subject: LF: Re: PF per Meter dependant on wire size? > > >Dear Paul, LF Group, > >One formula for C per unit length: > >C = 24/Log(4H/d) picofarads/m , H= height, m, d = diameter, m > >So the capacitance depends on the logarithm of the ratio of height over wire >diameter, which only varies a little for a large change in diameter, e.g for >1mm wire at 10m high = 5.2pF/m, 10mm diameter wire at 10m high 6.7pF/m. >Actually this formula only applies to an infinitely long, uniform, >horizontal, straight wire. In practice, the presence of ends, downleads, >things on the ground, insulation on the wire, etc. etc. will all have an >effect, and are difficult to calculate, so 6pF/m is usually as good an >estimate as you are likely to get. > >Adding multiple wires will increase capacitance. If the wires are many >metres apart (spacing large compared to height), you can multiply the >capacitance by the number of wires. But usually, the wires are more closely >spaced, and there is less increase in capacitance. The figures I have to >hand are for two 1mm wires 100mm apart, C is higher by 39% compared to a >single wire, 1m apart and C is 68% higher. > >Cheers, Jim Moritz >73 de M0BMU > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Paul A. Cianciolo" >To: >Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 8:24 PM >Subject: LF: PF per Meter dependant on wire size? > > > > Hello, > > > > I see from previous posts that a number of aprox 6 PF what size wire is > > this for? > > > > Increasing wire size should in "C" as should several conductors in > > parallel > > spaced a few feet apart. > > > > PauLC > > > > W1VLF > > > > > > > >