Message-ID: <008801bf308d$001a2a60$7010063e@default>
From: "Alan Melia" <Alan.Melia@btinternet.com>
To: "rsgb_lf_group" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: LF: counterpoises ??
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 23:45:10 -0000
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
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

Hi all , I have been fascinated by the various ideas and results on using
counterpoises. One thing occurs to me is that I am not sure whether Finbar
reported RESONATING his counterpoise, he did talk about TUNING it with a
spare ATU.  I am not sure whether this means that for the best operation the
counterpoise might not be resonant. I must admit that is at first sight
counter-intuitive, as one would expect reactive currents to increase the
losses. Finbar's was about 15  foot above ground I think, and I suppose his
extensive earth mat (HI HI) would still be effective, even if not connected
to the system.

The upshot of this ramble is to question "does it make any difference if you
tune the counterpoise for maximum AERIAL current rather than resonate IT
like aerial"
My thoughts are that it is a complex system with the interaction with the
real ground and whole thing should be treated as an entity (maybe?) If this
proves to be the case it would be very difficult the model effectively. When
Mike described resonating the counterpoise, I wonder what he did with the
aerial? does it need to be detuned? or removed? A fascinating problem, with
lots of variables and lots of room for loads of frustration, but a germ of
something usefull perhaps.

Cheeers de Alan G3NYK
Alan.Melia@btinternet.com