Soil conductivity plays a much bigger role than most of us realize and
the "over salt water" is the gold standard`. As noted by a few other
respondents radials are certainly helpful but for those of who live on
quartz plains (sand) far from the ocean the far field losses can not be
totally overcome by copper plating your yard in a 130ft circle
Dave
NR1DX
On 12/19/2022 5:50 PM, Ignacy Misztal wrote:
Do more radials on a 160m vertical bring more improvements than shown
by simulation?
Most simulations, e.g. by EZNEC, show that going above 32 radials on 160m
brings minimal improvement, say 1 db to 2 max. Even for low angle signals.
On the other hand, some really loud stations on 160m, that are 5-10 db
above
the crowd, use a massive amount of radials. This is for inland stations,
far away from salt water.
Is there any discrepancy between modeling by EZNEC and real life
performance with the number of radials? Does adding radials beyond 32 help
much for low angles?
Any real story?
I have a shunt-fed 100 ft tower with 36 100ft radials. It is vastly
inferior to a 40 ft high inv L with 1 radial by salt water that hears DX
loud 2 hrs before the sunset. I am wondering whether by expanding to 50
200ft radials would narrow the difference.
Ignacy NO9E
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
Reflector
--
Dave [email protected] www.ArtekManuals.com
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
