I intend to do that.  I probably will also test the resistor with and without a whip ... i.e., four combinations.

I don't expect a resistor to do as well as the AX1 because the AX1 is a partly reactive load that doesn't absorb energy like a resistor would, but we don't really know how lossy the AX1 is, do we.  I just think that it might be an interesting comparison, and an actual measurement for the AX1 with and without a counterpoise most certainly would be interesting.

73,
Dave   AB7E


On 9/25/2022 2:00 PM, [email protected] wrote:
If the signal in your AX1 test is significantly stronger with the
counterpoise it would be interesting to also compare using a resistor
vertical with counterpoise post as you previously posted.

John KK9A


David Gilbert ab7e wrote:

To be a proper comparison, the AX1 needs to be out it the clear away
from anything else, preferable at a height that allows the counterpoise
to be hanging straight down with the end maybe a foot or two off the
ground.  Measurements should be with the AX1 at the same height above
the ground without and without the counterpoise. Ideally a KX2 or
similar rig should used, be battery powered (with very short leads if
external), no coax, and no body contact to the source of RF.  Signal
reports should be in microvolts ... the number of contacts isn't really
useful and neither is SNR if the readings are taken over a lengthy
period of time.

If I can get my hands on an AX1, I plan to either climb a tree or set up
a tall fiberglass step ladder for the AX1 as far away line of sight from
my home as practical.  I'd use my KX2 for the signal source, using the
Tune function to put out RF without touching the KX2.  Near my home I'd
set up the portable vertical antenna I described in an earlier post, and
feed that to my K3 set to read microvolts.  I'd operate the AX1 (with
and without counterpoise wire) and any other antenna for comparison, and
have a friend record the microvolts from the K3 as a blind test.

I would use the tuner in the KX2 to simulate actual use, but that would
of course introduce a variable for possibly different amounts of loss in
the tuner depending upon the load.  I don't see a good way to avoid that.

73,
Dave   AB7E

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [email protected]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [email protected] 

Reply via email to