[600MRG] NDB Antenna Calculator

[Warren K2ORS]

Hi Ed,

    No. My point is that NDB antennas are nothing like most ham 
installations. When an NDB antenna (as well as a broadcast and military 
installation) is constructed the first thing they do is clear the land, 
the antenna is not strung between trees next to a house. Coupling to 
trees etc can introduce large losses. I tried to use an NDB antenna 
tuner on my 160m 3/8 wavelength inverted-L, the tuner had plenty of 
inductance to resonate the antenna, but the antenna impedance was well 
outside the matching range of the tuner. This is despite the fact that I 
have more radials than a typical NDB. This is not a small effect, it 
would be analogous to calculating ERP for a UHF station and neglecting 
to include 10dB of coax loss.
   If you use a measured impedance and know the radiation resistance you 
will be ok for calculating ERP, but if you get your impedance from a 
chart, table or model you are likely going to be way off.
   The FCC doesn't require NDB or commercial stations to include this 
effect as it typically doesn't apply.

73 Warren



On 10/6/2015 3:27 AM, Edward R Cole wrote:
> Warren,
>
> I guess if what you are analyzing is potential coverage of a BC or NDB
> system then you factor in all these effects, but my understanding was
> use of the NDB calculator for our purposes was to satisfy the
> calculation of simple ERP for FCC compliance.
>
> Even seasonal change in soil conductivity is not asked by the FCC
> requirement.  Of course knowing more about the effects to transmission
> may help improve performance but most of those factors are just what you
> are handed with the environment that exists for your location (assuming
> you do not own a texas ranch covering thousands of square miles).
>
> Most of us will have little choice in where the antenna is set up.
> Choice of antenna type may exist if you have enough room and I suppose
> the field strength tests would be useful for deciding what to use.  My
> property is 252x300 feet (1.735 ac.) which is probably more than many
> have but much less that Rudy and others.  e.g. its too small for a
> Beverage.  My Inverted-L takes a linear area of 130-feet and ground
> plane area of about 100x100 foot.  About one third of my land is
> forested covering a 60-foot deep damp hollow which will never be
> cleared.  Also a private north-south airstrip borders me on the west
> property line so this limits safe antenna heights to be about ten foot
> over tree top (50-foot).
>
> I live inside the Boreal Forest of the sub-arctic so not much I can do
> about that.  I am in a rural area so houses are spaced at least 300-feet
> or more.  Fortunately utilities are buried so no interaction with
> utility wires.  I have two 50-foot towers at the ends of my inverted-L
> (the supports) which probably interact but may also radiate
> parasitically.  Actual RF measurements are not far off of those
> predicted with sw.
>
> I do not have time to get into all the theoretical's of 600m as I am
> also very involved in other ham radio pursuits and running a small
> business at home.  Once I have my antenna tuned for best efficiency then
> its time to transmit.  I'll add a shielded loop to that for optional Rx
> and might I consider a flag type Rx antenna in the future?  Maybe.  WSPR
> tests may prompt future experiments; we'll see.
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
>
> At 05:54 PM 10/5/2015, Warren K2ORS wrote:
>> Coupling to trees, buildings etc will also introduce a lossy
>> resistance to the antenna impedance.
>>
>> See Bill Ashlock's article:
>> http://www.geocities.ws/mike_staines/bill/loop1.doc
>>
>>   I can vouch for his conclusions from personal experience.
>> 73 Warren K2ORS
>>
>>
>> On 10/5/2015 9:17 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:
>>> Rudy,
>>>
>>> I assumed when you write ground resistance you mean for the ground,
>>> only.
>>>
>>> When I originally calculated my ERP in 2012, I used EZNEC to provide the
>>> radiation resistance which was about 0.83 ohms and I measured ground
>>> resistance with my modified MFJ analyzer by tuning the loading coil
>>> until I got R +j0; R read 20-ohms.
>>>
>>> Rr/Rg is used in the calculation of EIRP.
>>>
>>> So if the variable given in the "NDB calculator" is Rg+Rr that should be
>>> made clear instead of saying "ground resistance".    It seems this
>>> imprecision in specifying variables is what keeps the analysis from
>>> being accurate.
>>>
>>> 73, Ed
>>>
>>> At 03:22 PM 10/5/2015, Rudy Severns wrote:
>>>> Steve, he's going to have a real problem.  Rg depends not only on soil
>>>> electrical characteristics and details of the radial system but also
>>>> on the
>>>> antenna over the radial system.  If you have NEC4 determining Rg from
>>>> modeling is easy.  Direct calculation is also possible, I've done
>>>> it, but
>>>> it's complex because you have to start by deriving the E and H field
>>>> intensities associated with the antenna in the near-field.  From
>>>> that you
>>>> can calculate the soil losses which determine Rg for a given Io.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Too many people believe that a given radial system, at a given
>>>> frequency,
>>>> with given soil characteristics, has a fixed Rg.  This is false.  Rg
>>>> will
>>>> depend on all those things plus the details of the vertical.  This is
>>>> carefully explained in section 3.2.3 of the 22nd edition of ARRL
>>>> Antenna
>>>> Book which shows among other things the dependence of Rg on the
>>>> vertical
>>>> height for a given ground system.
>>

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus