> Did you catch the series of messages
> on insulated antenna elements during
> Jan. 24-30 or so? You were asking
> if 12% shortening was reasonable.
> According to Bob Haviland's note
> (copied below), the answer is, "Yes."
Strange. I did get a personal note from Bob, but never saw his posting to
the reflector (which, in accordance with Murphy's law, had the "meaty" data).
Thanks very much for the feedback. A whole series of messages? Never saw
them. I guess I have a feed problem.
Bob did cite the article in his direct email and it is on my list for the
next visit to the school library near here.
But since the insulation of #10 THHN is around a half to a third of the
conductor radius, the 2.7% shortening I measured still seems sane, while the
12% figure I came up with via bogus math no longer does (thank goodness!).
One quick note from the school of hard knocks (sorry, not modeling related):
Before using #10 THHN, consider the weight and resulting catenary and stress
to the end supports before you run out and build a big antenna with this stuff.
Regards,
Pete
KS4XG
Received on Mon Feb 05 1996 - 20:57:00 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat Oct 02 2010 - 00:10:37 EDT