Thread: Eric Dollard
View Single Post
Old 09-15-2015, 08:05 PM
Nhopa Nhopa is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 134
CRI update II

Hi to all:
I did some more experimenting with the two 100 feet wire arrangement. First I ran each 100 feet segment by folding into two 50 feet length, parallel to each other, about 2 feet apart. The result was that the reception decreased by the amount the ground connection provided before. In other words I could disconnect the ground connection without any change in reception. Next I ran one of the 100 feet wire back and forth 10 feet lengths about 1 foot apart. Again I did not notice any different in reception but as before the ground had no contribution to the reception strength. Next I took one 100 feet wire and coiled it up to 22" diameter. The reception got much worst. Next I ran one of the 100 feet wires perpendicular to the other 100 feet and it seemed to work as the straight run does.
In conclusion the two equal length insulated wires laying on the ground in a straight run with one end connected to a grounding bar and in the middle they are connected to a small 2-3 turn coil of about 3" diameter work well similar to Eric's experiment. It also seems that the perpendicular wire orientation also works well.
Now the next step is to burry the wires and see the result. It seems to me that the increase in signal strength does come from the ground below the wires. I think the reason for the folded wires not performing as well as the straight run is the way the telluric waves intercept the wires. When folded the same wave front meets the wire multiple times and since the wire goes back and forth parallel to itself, the effect on each run cancels out the effect on the adjacent run. On the other hand, the straight wire runs meet a much larger telluric wave front thus the result is a strong increase in reception strength.
Comments and suggestions are welcome.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSCN0836.jpg (417.0 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN0835.jpg (653.2 KB, 6 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN0838.jpg (633.4 KB, 7 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN0839.jpg (489.7 KB, 7 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN0840.jpg (442.4 KB, 7 views)
Reply With Quote