Return-Path: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>
Received: (qmail 20768 invoked from network); 6 May 2001 19:52:19 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225)  by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 6 May 2001 19:52:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 26543 invoked from network); 6 May 2001 19:51:48 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70)  by murphys with SMTP; 6 May 2001 19:51:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14wUTt-0004ny-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 06 May 2001 20:46:13 +0100
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from anchor-post-31.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.89]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14wUTr-0004nt-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 06 May 2001 20:46:12 +0100
Received: from alg.demon.co.uk ([194.222.171.80]) by anchor-post-31.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 14wUTM-000Naj-0V for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 6 May 2001 20:45:40 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Message-ID: <3AF58211.1312A631@alg.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 17:55:45 +0100
From: "Steve Rawlings" <steve@alg.demon.co.uk>
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: Re: LF: Re: 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> <3AF41F62.BCD86ADD@alg.demon.co.uk> <002501c0d5a8$ecf253a0$9fb21bca@xtr743187>
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: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

from GW4ALG>

I'm very grateful to Bob ZL2CA for his important observations and
comments.  

Firstly, a couple of points of clarification:
1) My loop is orientated in the vertical plane.  It is a
delta-loop, having a 65 m perimeter, fed at the top with balanced
feeder.  The line of the loop runs east-west, and therefore has
deep nulls to the north and south - very handy for attenuating
the noise sidebands from the Loran TX, located to the south of me
(in France).  Further details can be found at:
http://www.alg.demon.co.uk/radio/136/loop.htm
2) The vertical antenna is located at one end of the loop.

> The absolute gain of your short vertical will be higher than your 
> loop, so whatever figure of mutual coupling is found to apply, on
> receive the loop will be affected more by the tuning situation of the
> vertical than the other way round.  With smaller frame loops for
> receiving the impact of the vertical for reception on the loop is even
> more pronounced (due to the much higher absolute gain of the vertical).
I had not appreciated this important point before now.  I guess
it's one of those 'key facts' that every LFer needs to learn.  

> I find that on receive, unless the LF vertical transmitting antenna is
> detuned, it receives local QRM from a fairly wide area and re-radiates
> it to any LF receiving antenna on my property.
Again, thanks for the tip, Bob.  I'll try and detect that effect
with my own set-up.

Regards to all,
Steve GW4ALG