Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8372 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2001 13:12:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by extortion.plus.net with SMTP; 22 Feb 2001 13:12:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 1620 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2001 13:12:52 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 22 Feb 2001 13:12:52 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14VvQO-0004Vq-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:04:48 +0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14VvQL-0004Vl-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:04:45 +0000 Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id OAA60566 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:04:27 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20010222140420.083fc5f4@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:04:20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: ANTS: Higher L - higher ERP In-reply-to: <3A9502FA.9191.AA9F0E@localhost> References: <004e01c09b79$b6ece360$5bb21bca@xtr743187> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: At 12:15 22/02/01 -0000, G3XDV wrote: >Others have tried elevated coils with some success, notably Rik, >ON7YD, who has a similar problem to me - small top section and >local obstructions. He was originally very critical of my claims, but >has become a convert. I can confirm the results that Mike got. Last year I added a 2mH loading coil at the top of my inverted L (at that time 11m high with a topload consisting of 3 parallel wires spaced 75cm and 25m long). The base loading coil xwas reduced from 3.5mH to 2mH. Based on improved current distribution the benefit should have been few tenths of a dB (confirmed by simulation) but in practice it seemed to be about 4dB. Measurements made by PA0SE and DK8KW (over distances of abt. 150 and 400km) confirmed this. My 'guess' to explain this unexpected improvement is that the coupling between the antenna and the many surrounding trees was mainly via the vertical section (as trees tend to be mainly vertical objects), so by adding the elevated coil I could reduce the voltage on the vertical section by abt. 50%, reducing also the unwanted current flow from the antenna to the trees. After I reported the good results with the elevated coil to the reflector I got some mail from other hams who tried the same and it looks as if only those whose antennas are surrounded by trees or other obstacles seem to benefit from an elevated voil. Stimulated by Mikes results (once more) I will try to get almost 100% of the loading elevated, leaving a small coil at ground level for tuning purposes. 73, Rik ON7YD