Re: NEC-LIST: Copper oxide.

Perhaps someone who knows the answers to these questions would care to
answer them.

My example of TV antennas may/may-not have been a good one, but there are
many, many commercial antennas made from Al. If there really is a drop off
in antenna performance with oxidation I think it would have been recognized
by now, and widely known. Maybe Doug can expand on why he asked the
question.

Malcolm M Bibby

"Jim Lux" <james.p.lux_at_jpl.nasa.gov> writes:
> Several aspects that are potential differences between Cu and Al:
> Is the oxide layer thin?
> Is the oxide layer truly an insulator?
> Is there a distinct boundary between insulator and underlying conductor?
> Is there a graded zone with partial oxide and partial conductor as tiny
> grains (i.e. a semiconductor)?
>
> As far as consumer TV antennas go.. they could degrade fairly
substantially,
> and the user would be unlikely to notice. TV sets have ever decreasing
> noise figures, and one of the real benefits of a directional TV antenna is
> not the forward gain, but the directivity, to reduce multipath.
>
> "Gullwings" <gullwings_at_comcast.net> writes:
> > From a radiation point of view, why would the oxide layer on copper not
> have
> > the same effect as the oxide layer on aluminum? The latter hasn't
> deterred
> > the use of "billions" of yagis as TV antennas.
> >
> > Malcolm M Bibby
>
> --
> The NEC-List mailing list <nec-list_at_gweep.ca>
> http://www.gweep.ca/mailman/listinfo.cgi/nec-list

-- 
The NEC-List mailing list <nec-list_at_gweep.ca>
http://www.gweep.ca/mailman/listinfo.cgi/nec-list