Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Received: (qmail 64370 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2005 13:25:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore01.plus.net) (192.168.71.1)
  by ptb-mailstore01.plus.net with SMTP; 1 Mar 2005 13:25:03 -0000
Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD)
	id 1D67OQ-000FeT-7c
	for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:26:32 +0000
Received: from [192.168.67.2] (helo=ptb-mxcore02.plus.net)
	by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD)
	id 1D67OM-000FcP-HG
	for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:26:26 +0000
Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20])
	 by ptb-mxcore02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1D67Mm-000Pk4-CR 
	for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:24:48 +0000
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14)
	id 1D67LI-00019O-Gq
	for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:23:16 +0000
Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net)
	by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14)
	id 1D67LG-000186-Dw
	for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:23:14 +0000
Received: from spoetnik.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.240.46])
	by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D67LD-0002TD-0V
	for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:23:14 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by spoetnik.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B2333F41
	for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; Tue,  1 Mar 2005 14:23:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from lepidus.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (lepidus.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.240.72])
	by spoetnik.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6964233F1F
	for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; Tue,  1 Mar 2005 14:23:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from dell-rik.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (pc-10-33-165-177.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [10.33.165.177])
	by lepidus.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07239380080
	for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; Tue,  1 Mar 2005 14:23:04 +0100 (CET)
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20050301141747.02623b70@u0019445.kuleuven.be>
X-Sender: u0019445@u0019445.kuleuven.be
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:35:48 +0100
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
From: Rik Strobbe <rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.ac.be>
In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.2.20050301115700.03662eb0@mail.casema.nl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Virus-Scanned: by KULeuven Antivirus Cluster
X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: 134.58.240.46 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of fys.kuleuven.ac.be
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: autolearn=failed,none
Subject: Re: LF: Current "lost" in loading coil
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
X-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet SpamCORE (v3.00)
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

Hello Dick,

as you noticed there is always a small "current loss"in the loading coil, 
due to capacitive coupling to the surrounding.
Something in the order of 5..10 % seems normal to me. By the way, this 
current loss is not equal distributed over the coil but is larger in the 
upper part ("hot part") of the coil.
I am a bit fussed by the values of the loading coil and antenna 
capacitance, normally these should result in a resonance at 137 kHz. But 8 
mH and 210 pF give resonance at 123 kHz. Or the other way around : to bring 
a 210 pF antenna to resonance one would need only 6.4 mH. Also the 
capacitance of the coil to the surrounding (150-200 pF) seems very large to 
me.
All this might indicate that the coil is placed directly on the ground or 
very close to a large conducting (metal) object.
If that is the case I would suggest to place the coil at a certain distance 
(1..2 m) from ground / other objects and try again.

73, Rik  ON7YD

At 12:34 1/03/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>To All from PA0SE
>
>Several amateurs have found that the current at the bottom end of the 
>loading coil is higher than at the top (aerial side) of the coil.
>In my station the difference is of the order of 10%.
>
>William, PA0WFO, has a large coil of 8 mH and a 23 m long wire as aerial. 
>He measures 1.5 A at the bottom of the coil en 0.6 A at the top.
>My theory is that the "lost current"  flows via the capacitance of the 
>coil to its surrounding (even a metal object in free space has  capacitance).
>
>The current at the bottom of the bottom of the coil divides between the 
>capacitances of  coil and  aerial.
>
>I suggested to William he  measure the capacitance of the coil and of the 
>aerial. For the coil he found 150 - 200 pF, depending upon the position of 
>the coil and for the aerial 210 pF.
>But these values do not explain the large difference in current at bottom 
>and top of the coil.
>
>In a transmitting aerial the current increases going from the end of the 
>radiator towards the coil.
>
>Now to my question:  does this increase in current also occur in the 
>winding of the coil?  My feeling is that the current at the beginning and 
>end of a coil should be the same; apart from the current that flows via 
>its capacitance to the surrounding.
>
>I also have read that the coil should be considered as an aerial with a 
>length equal to the length of the coil.  But on 2 km
>that would be an extremely  small aerial, reckoned in wavelength.  So 
>radiation by the coil must be negligible.
>
>There are certainly  experts on the reflector who know the answers.  I 
>welcome  their views.
>
>73, Dick, PA0SE
>