Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29733 invoked from network); 15 May 2001 10:43:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 15 May 2001 10:43:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 15916 invoked from network); 15 May 2001 10:43:10 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 15 May 2001 10:43:10 -0000 X-Priority: 3 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14zbRr-0004Tp-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 15 May 2001 10:48:59 +0100 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 14zbRn-0004Tg-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 15 May 2001 10:48:55 +0100 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 LAA164260 for ; Tue, 15 May 2001 11:48:22 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20010515104908.13b7c8ce@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 10:49:08 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: Radiation from loading coil causing difference in current at top and bottom? In-reply-to: <002c01c0db96$045db000$fa8274d5@w8k3f0> References: <3.0.1.16.20010510084513.2c6f9b82@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> <004f01c0d9a2$3334c6c0$2cb21bca@rvernall> 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 12:00 13/05/01 +0200, PA0SE wrote: >So my conclusion is that the difference in current must be due to radiation >from the coil. The late Klaas Spaargaren, PA0KSB, once told me that in >an article on mobile antennas it was stated that a coil of L metre length >produced a radiation equal to a straight wire of that same length. >As reported before that would in my case produce a current difference of >only 1.55%, as shown by computer modelling; much less than the measured >difference. >Perhaps the statement in the article is not true, or not applicable for the >sort of coils we >use on LF? >Could that explain the succes of the helical antenna? Hello Dick, as I see it a (short) vertical wire acts mainly as a capacitance distributed over the wire and has to be brought to resonance by an inductance (loading coil). 'Below' the loading coil the antenna voltage is low and the antenna current remains alomost constant, 'above' the coil the antenna voltage is high and the antenna current has a linear decrease (to be 0 at the end of the vertical wire). With a helical antenna both the inductance and capacitance are distributed over the entire antenna. If the helical is the right size no additional inductance is needed, the antenna has a 'natural resonance' on 136kHz. In that case antenna voltage and current will increase (voltage) and decresae (current) sinusoidal. Due to the better current distribution a helical antenna will have a 1.54 times higher radiation resistance that a vertical wire of the same length (with the loading coil at ground level), this equals a gain of 1.9dB. I believe that the main problem with a helical antenna on 136kHz is 'mechanical'. You have to make a 10 to 15m high construction that will withstand wind and rain. The only ham tht used a helical with succes (as far as I know) was Tony, HB9ASB, but even his antenna came down in a gale. 73, Rik ON7YD