Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21312 invoked from network); 26 Aug 1999 00:09:12 +0100 Received: from cask.force9.net (195.166.128.29) by guiness.force9.net with SMTP; 26 Aug 1999 00:09:12 +0100 Received: (qmail 31306 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 23:09:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by cask.force9.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 23:09:13 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 11Jm0Z-0002AC-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 23:59:07 +0100 Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au ([203.26.10.9]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 11Jm0X-0002A7-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 23:59:06 +0100 Received: from steve (d179.syd2.zeta.org.au [203.26.9.51]) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16769 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 08:58:58 +1000 Message-ID: <199908252258.IAA16769@godzilla.zeta.org.au> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "Steve Olney" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: SV: Multiple Tuned Vertical Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 08:51:53 +1000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Christer wrote: > If six such antennas are parallelled, the total loss resistance becomes 1/6 while the radiation resistance remains unchanged. The total impedance is now 0,45 ohm due to reduced losses. > The antenna input power is fed by 1/6 of the total current (feed impedance is raised by a factor 36). > By varying the current distribution between the verticals (by changing the tuning coils) a suitable feed impedance can be achieved. 20 ohm in the SAQ case. > > It seems like the ratio of Rrad/Rloss is increased. Corresponding thougths can be found in the ARRL Antenna book edition 17 p4-21. > mmm... interesting that this description disagrees with the ARRL handbook description.. I quote. "If ground losses are also considered, the effective loss resistance (RL) would also be transformed by the same amount." It goes on to say that it is the distribution of the ground currents which will USUALLY improve the ratio Ra/Rl. So the real improvement seems to come from the reduction in losses through better earth current distribution (see Bob Vernall's post). This is unlikely to be anywhere near an improvement of N*N. I am especially pessimistic as for many of us who are LF-challenged, the major part of the losses are trees and buildings which won't be reduced. As I said before, this is all theory and even practical examples from the commercial world can be unattainable in the less than ideal amateur installations, so the final words on this will have to be practical experimentation from different amateur installations. 73s Steve Olney (VK2ZTO/AXSO - QF56IK : Lat -33 34 07, Long +150 44 40) ============================================= LowFer URL: http://www.zeta.org.au/~ollaneg/lowfer.htm AXSO Experimental Station URL: http://www.zeta.org.au/~ollaneg/axsoextx.htm LF Receiving - FRG-100 LF Transmitting - 177.5kHz 8W to 7.6m top-loaded vertical Modes - AM, SSB, PSK31, SSTV, Hellschreiber and QRSS =============================================