Re: NEC-LIST: CFA and the Hately advertisement

Duncan:

I put on a long msg about resolving the matter with a measurement of
E(d), using the methods specified in the IEEE Std. 291 (where I
currently am chairing the committee to do the latest revision) on
measurement of CW field strength. I would use my sri Open Wire Line
(OWL) ground constants kit to sample the soil conductivity and
relative dielectric constant, and then solve the Sommerfeld integral
for the effective radiated power that gives the best match at all
distances for the measured E(d).

As a parity check, I would measure the prime power into the
transmitter driving the antenna to make sure that we were not getting
out (as ERP) more than we were putting in, after allowance for the
NEC-4-computed gain for HF surface wave.

This method has stood me in good stead in past tests (e.g., measuring
the efficiency of an HF balun, as installed, with the real antenna
rather than a dummy antenna as the load on the balun).

We need an installation that is certified by the manufacturers of the
CFA, not someone else' attempt to copy it. Therefore the antenna needs
to be purchased, with seller's help to set it up and certify that it
met its acceptance spec. The one being put up in Italy looked like the
first one to try this approach with.

What do you think, Duncan and Jack, et al.? I had expressed interest
in involvement in such a test, given the opportunity. And Italy seemed
the best possible place for such a test, with the Marconi centennials
(1895 and 1901) just passed and just coming up (in CY 2K).

George Hagn

Prof Duncan Baker wrote:
>
> Are there NO definitive studies to lay this thing to rest once and for
> all?
Received on Fri May 21 1999 - 04:42:03 EDT