Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20129 invoked from network); 21 May 2002 03:06:55 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 21 May 2002 03:06:55 -0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 25189 invoked from network); 21 May 2002 03:06:38 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (193.82.116.70) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 21 May 2002 03:06:38 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.33 #2) id 179ztJ-0004Rt-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 21 May 2002 04:00:49 +0100 Received: from astral.infomsk.ru ([212.164.44.2] helo=astral.omskcity.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 179ztH-0004Ro-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 21 May 2002 04:00:47 +0100 Received: from fitec.omskcity.com (mu07.dialup2.infomsk.ru [212.164.44.119]) by astral.omskcity.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA3ce9b70a136f for ; Tue, 21 May 2002 09:55:06 +0700 (OSS) Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:35:38 +0000 (GMT) From: "Alexander S. Yurkov" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: more acurate formula for ground loss In-reply-to: <20020520125514.34500B6D7@xmxpita.excite.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi John and Group. On Mon, 20 May 2002, john sexton wrote: > Putting in the same antenna details as before, the new formula gives 38 ohms, still too low by a factor of over 2, but much better than with the first formula. May be 93 - 38 = 55 ohms is enviroment loss. And if make conterpoise up from the ground about 1 or 2 meters, ground loss reduces from 38 to about 5omhs. So total loss will be 55+5=60 omhs. But it is the matter of experiment... It seems very interesting and worth to do 'pure' experiment in field far from trees and buildings when no enviroment losses present and when conterpoise is up from the ground and conterpoise length is equal to antenna length. NEC-2 confirms the formula but this is only computer modeling, not real measurement! If it will be no problem to estimate ground loss itself then it will be posible to separate ground and enviroment losses when doing experiments. So experimental study of enviroment losses itself will be possible and ways to reduce enviroment loss will become more obvious. Now we do not know what part of total loss is ground loss and what is enviroment loss itself. > However in order to do this since my earth wires are actually buried I used a value of h = .0005 (1mm diam. wire) the minimum value permitted with your formula. It seems reasonable. My generalised mirror reflection theory can be used for burred conterpoise also I hope. It is only matter of time. Now I want to ensure this theory for simple conditions. Complex conditions is a next step. 73 de RA9MB/Alex http://www.qsl.net/ra9mb