2
$\begingroup$

Their performance differences may be less than sometimes expected.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I posted the information in this thread as an edit to the thread at the URL provided above by rclocher3. $\endgroup$ – Richard Fry Mar 4 at 13:14
1
$\begingroup$

Below is a graphic comparing some of the operational parameters of ground-mounted and elevated vertical radiators for the 40-meter band.

Their performance when installed at sites with relatively poor Earth conductivity is fairly similar.

enter image description here

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Interesting! I had always thought that the performance of a vertical with elevated radials was better than that of a vertical with radials buried in earth of poor conductivity. $\endgroup$ – rclocher3 Mar 3 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ @rclocher3 Not better, but from the publications of N6LF (Dr. Rudy Severns) and others, I thought they could be the same. Please scroll past the table and graphs down to the "Relevant links" section here and you can read them. Rich, this is new to me, and if this wasn't your answer I may have downvoted it instead of upvoting it. :-) $\endgroup$ – Mike Waters Mar 3 at 16:35
  • $\begingroup$ rclocher3 commented: I had always thought that the performance of a vertical with elevated radials was better than that of a vertical with radials buried in earth of poor conductivity. –- Even for the 1 mS/m conductivity curves in my graphic, the red trace would be nearly identical to the green trace IF the vertical with buried radials was using 120 of them instead of 32. $\endgroup$ – Richard Fry Mar 5 at 8:38

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.