X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:53:49 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from proxy1.addr.com ([38.113.244.28] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8) with ESMTPS id 992826 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:33:52 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=38.113.244.28; envelope-from=timothy.ong@leadingedgeaircraft.com Received: from COMPUTER2 (bc11810.bendcable.com [66.220.118.10]) by proxy1.addr.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with SMTP id k1LFX1Xh012320 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:33:02 -0800 (PST) X-Original-Message-ID: <004101c636fb$5b9991c0$6401a8c0@COMPUTER2> From: "Timothy Ong" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: My solution to Comm Antenna ground plane-ACTUAL TESTING X-Original-Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:27:40 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 X-ADDRSpamFilter: Passed, probability (0%) X-ADDRSignature: 18035E22 But for a proper test, you need to put a coat of primer and paint over it. Again, I don't see how it will breakdown with a protective coating. I could see it breaking down if it was a bare coat of material exposed. Tim > > And in a former life, I used to develop systems to shield composites > from EMI. One technique used was and still is conductice treatments > including zinc arc spray and silver or nickel based conductive paint. > The surface treatments usually showed better performance initially with > 40 dB possible. After simulating aging of a couple years under indoor > conditions the results were quite scattered, and usually quite a bit