Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25368 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 12:07:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 25 Apr 2001 12:07:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 3379 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 12:07:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 25 Apr 2001 12:07:23 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14sNy9-00075u-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:00:29 +0100 Received: from hestia.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.9]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14sNy6-00075p-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:00:26 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by hestia.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #4) id 14sNxX-00063F-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 12:59:51 +0100 Message-ID: <16613.200104251159@gemini> From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:00:03 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: Re: Loop preamps X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear Laurie, LF group, When I was working on tuned loops at University of Herts, due to various constraints we used packaged Mini-Circuits preamps with performance similar to the MAR types. We found that the noise performance was more than adequate, and limited by the thermal noise of the loop itself or external atmospheric noise, but as others have noted the IM performance was not great. The biggest problems we had were parasitic oscillations - even the relatively low-frequency MAR devices in the range have substantial gain into the microwave region - and without measures being taken, vigorous oscillation at about 1GHz would occur. This was quite difficult to detect if the receiver attached to the output did not go up to 1GHz, and didn't do a lot for the overall performance. As Andy says, the noise power (from preamp, loop or wherever) is proportional to the bandwidth, so reducing the bandwidth reduces the noise in proportion, which is the main benefit of QRSS. As far as improving the signal to noise ratio with a loop goes, Increasing the area of the loop and increasing the Q are the two possibilities - both these increase the signal power available to the preamp. The inductive reactance of untuned loops behaves as an attenuator in one way or another, so SNR is generally lower. With tuned loops of reasonable size at LF, it usually isn't hard to hear down to the external noise. A high Q loop acts as a preselector, which will help to reduce intermodulation, although it is less convenient in having to be re-tuned within the band. My own current RX antennas are single-turn loops with sides of about 2m or so. These connect to the shack by coax via a balun (which does not seem to make a great difference), where there is series inductance and parallel capacitance to tune the thing, and an OPA604 op-amp as a preamp. This is not a very efficient set-up from the noise point of view, but sensitivity is limited by atmospheric noise, and intermodulation does not seem to be an issue, in spite of being very close to MF broadcast transmitters. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU