[Elecraft] Inverted L for 160 meters

[David Gilbert]

Yes, certainly current balance would minimize ground losses.  I hadn't 
thought much about it before, but I guess it's kind of intuitive in that 
it's analogous to lower return resistance losses due to better use of  
parallel ground paths.

73,
Dave  AB7E



On 8/26/2020 10:42 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
> On 8/26/2020 10:07 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
>> Radiation angle for a vertical antenna is much more a function of the 
>> ground conductivity out several wavelengths than it has to do with 
>> the current balance in the radials.
>
> Right, but N6LF has shown that current balance in radials, especially 
> elevated ones, minimizes ground losses.  Yes, elevated radials can be 
> modeled in less capable versions of NEC. All of this is addressed in 
> my slides.
>
> In all cases, the model must use soil conductivity representative of 
> the QTH. This is selected from a menu. Soil conductivity affects us 
> two ways. First, losses underneath the antenna. Better 
> radial/counterpoise systems can reduce this a lot. Second, loss in the 
> far field, over which we have no control, and those losses can vary a 
> lot if soil varies a lot in different directions. For example, a 
> vertical on a beach has much less far field loss, and much more energy 
> at low angles, in the direction of the water and much more far field 
> loss and higher angle energy than in directions over land.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC