Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19652 invoked from network); 5 May 2001 15:51:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 5 May 2001 15:51:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 3347 invoked from network); 5 May 2001 15:51:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 5 May 2001 15:51:09 -0000 X-Priority: 3 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14w4CN-0000ta-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 05 May 2001 16:42:23 +0100 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14w4CM-0000tV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 05 May 2001 16:42:22 +0100 Received: from alg.demon.co.uk ([194.222.171.80]) by anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 14w4Br-000B7G-0W for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 5 May 2001 16:41:51 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3AF41F62.BCD86ADD@alg.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:42:26 +0100 From: "Steve Rawlings" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Coupling between two antennas References: <001c01c0cee7$3843ab60$ba62883e@g3aqc> <000601c0cf47$124ae620$a7ce28c3@ericadodd> <001f01c0cfca$3bb5fda0$f4eb7ad5@dave> <3AEB2DBE.194E5A9C@alg.demon.co.uk> <003701c0d083$29305360$c16674d5@w8k3f0> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi All, from GW4ALG. You may recall that, regarding my two LF antennas (a single-turn balanced loop of 65 m perimeter; and my 12 m vertical _in very close proximity_ to the loop), I wrote: > . . . when monitoring the TX SWR into the resonant vertical . . ., > I found no change in SWR when: > - tuning the loop antenna either side of resonance (with the > coax-side of the tuner terminated in 50 ohms); > - disconnecting the shack end of the balanced feeder from the > tuner; > - applying a short circuit to the shack end of the balanced > feeder; or, > - grounding the shorted balanced feeder. > . . . I'm very surprised that there appears to be no significant > interaction between the two antennas. Dick PA0SE commented: > Even when the coupling between vertical and loop is so weak that > the SWR of the vertical does not change when tuning the loop the > coupling can still be strong enough for signals from the vertical > getting into the loop when receiving. To try and quantify the degree of coupling between my two antennas, I carried out the following procedure: 1) The loop antenna & tuner system was tuned to 135.9 kHz and terminated in a 50 ohm carbon resistor. 2) My 400 watt transmitter was operated at 135.9 kHz into the resonant 12 m vertical. 3) The voltage across the 50 ohm resistor was measured using a Tektronix 465 oscilloscope. The measured voltage was 8 volts peak-to-peak, corresponding to a power of about 60 mW. I then did the test again, this time feeding power into the loop, and measuring the voltage developed across the 50 ohm resistor (which was now used to terminate the coax feeder from the 12 m vertical antenna). Again, I measured 8 volts peak-to-peak across the resistor. I had expected greater coupling between my two antennas. In practice, there appears to be an isolation of something approaching 40 dB between the balanced magnetic loop and the 12 m vertical. Regards to all, Steve GW4ALG