Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: Re: re Earth losses

To: [email protected]
Subject: LF: Re: Re: re Earth losses
From: "Alan Melia" <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 15:44:42 +0100
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
Hi Bryan re1) You will get this.....ask any patent seeker.
               2) it supplemented the mains earth and a couple of
spikes...NB connecting the mains earth made a lot of difference. However
Finbar has an underground armoured to a pole and transformer, and I guess
there is quite a good earth at the pole to protect the transformer. His
counterpoise had this effect as he already had about 1000pF or top-load wire
out (5 wires) Hence my preference in 3 of topwires before counterpoise. I
also believe from the article that Peter quoted in the Handbook that there
is an advantage to earthing the remote end of the counterpoise if it is
under a top-wire. I have no independent tests to confirm that yet.
               3) difficult it probably depends on a lot of local factors,
but personally I would put two in the air. Top load can be fan or zig-zag,
and can be relatively light gauge wire as it carries less current, and not
really "radiating current" (that may be contentious)

               I hope that helps a bit.

Cheers de Alan G3NYK
[email protected]

----- Original Message -----
From: "captbrian" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: 09 July 2003 15:02
Subject: LF: Re: re Earth losses

1) every time I  have a good idea some other B(oy) thought of it first.

2)  Did Finbar's wire replace or supplement the real earth?

3) If you only had a given amount of wire for the horizontal , would you

One in the sky and one underneath it near ground


Two in the sky. and a ground rod.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>