Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dg06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id B5DFF3800008F; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:34:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1RqwEZ-0004Nm-7f for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:33:35 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1RqwEY-0004Nd-Fp for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:33:34 +0000 Received: from smtpout4.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.68] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1RqwEV-000795-Td for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:33:34 +0000 Received: from AGB ([2.26.22.35]) by mwinf5d58 with ME id SoZR1i00g0lREAA03oZR9m; Sat, 28 Jan 2012 01:33:26 +0100 Message-ID: <97BAA418FCA1450F9676442CB224E151@AGB> From: "Graham" To: References: <4F209013.2030803@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <4F219B7E.6090001@m0dts.co.uk> <4F22F36A.6090209@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <4F230085.2060504@m0dts.co.uk> <00ec01ccdd51$41077900$4001a8c0@lark> In-Reply-To: <00ec01ccdd51$41077900$4001a8c0@lark> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:33:25 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120127-1, 27/01/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=0.234 Subject: Re: LF: Conds Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="ISO-8859-15"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:498004544:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d410e4f23429242d3 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Good guide lines Alan I would add , try a top loading coil at the end of the vertical section , that seems to increase the amps in the vertical , I found using a U shaped top wire, one end of the U connected , the other open, gave better gain than a parallel set up. 73 -G.. -------------------------------------------------- From: "Alan Melia" Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 12:05 AM To: Subject: Re: LF: Conds > Hi Rob it sounds like you must have a loss resistance in excess of > 100ohms, > it you can only get an amp with 90W. Unlike Top Band, putting ground rods > under the vertical doesnt help much at LF. Most (55%)of the return current > is collected from under the remote ends of the to wire. > > Think about it....this is where the maximum voltage is, and the current > passes through the top capaxity to ground. The bigger the area of the > top-wire/ground acapaitor the less loss in the ground "plate". If you have > poor conductivity ground try running a wire back from the remote > groundstake > to the TX ground. If it doesnt make any difference you can remove it > easily. The next step is to incease the top load capacitance. More wire in > the air. The paralell wires should ideally be around 70cm apart minimum. > They can be connected anyhow series, parallel, or meander. Dont worry > about > current cancelling, these wires dont radiate anyway. Dont run the top wire > into or close to or over bushes or foliage. I you terminate the top wire > on > a tree make the end insulator as far from the tree and it is above the > ground. Even if this shortens the antenna it will reduce the > "environmental > loss" Dont run the top wire over roofs and keep the vertcal as far as > possible away from walls. If necessary slope it out to the top wire. The > top > wire only needs to be thick enough to support its own weight. Resistance > up > there doesnt matter, this part of the aerial is above the effective Rrad > (in > the vertical section) so doesnt add to "loss" (even though that sounds > counter-intuitive). > > The best way to improve the aerial is to build a simple bridge, not a > noise > bridge that wont work at LF, the aerial has to be a measured at the > frequency of use, because the loss is frequency dependent. You require to > use several volts of bridge source drive (to overcome the received signal > pick up) and a tuned detector like a receiver. A good bridge null will be > of > the order of 50dB deep or your bridge is not working properly. It will > tell > you whether simple quick alterations are improving things before you spend > a > lot of time and money "engineering them" properly. You measure the > untuned, > (unloaded) wire so it saves risking you PA and keeps the qrm down too. It > looks like a capacitance and resistance in series and the resistance is > "ALL > LOSS" the radiation resistance is minimal. So try mods to increase the > capacitance and reduce the resistance emasured. > > This is distilled from 15 years of experiments on the band by many of the > pioneers (G3XDV G3LDO, G3AQC, EI0CF, MOBMU, Bill Ashwell US Lowfer, and > many > other too) using normal domestic enviroments . Dont be diverted by what > the > "professionals do" they dont operate from a domestic premises and use > verticals or umbrellas.......they use earth mats because you need those > under a vertical but they are not really any advantage under an "L" or "T" > unless they are at least 1/8th wavelength in dimensions (300 m square!!). > Bill built an aerial over virgin rock, but he needed a lot of elevated > isolated radials (counterpoise) to get it to work properly. On the very > poor > ground, the radials couple to the lossy ground, increasing the loss over > the > use of elevated wires. > > Some may disagree but what works will depend on your particular location > and > ground conditions, and what works for someone else may not work for you. I > sit on top of heathland, very sandy with the water table about 60 feet > down....not exactly ideal. But I got an aerial loss down to around 40 > ohms, > in approximatly the same size as you have there (60m top "L") > > Good Luck with it > Alan G3NYK > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rob, M0DTS" > To: > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 7:52 PM > Subject: Re: LF: Conds > > > My TX is now working all be it fairly QRP 90W ;-) > > Antenna is 53m horizontal at ~9m high.. a droopy 'T' single strand > copper all the way. > I'm also receiving on this antenna too with much better results than the > loop i have. > > Problem is going to be getting enough routes to earth, my last attempts > were getting ~1A antenna current with the same power but it looks much > worse on G4WGT's grabber than last time so i guess it's less than 1A. > Will do some more improvements over the weekend. > > Rob > M0DTS > > On 27/01/2012 18:56, Stefan Schäfer wrote: >> Hi Rob, >> >> Thanks for the report. >> Oh yes, looking forward to see you on the band (or hear?). >> What will you use as the TX antenna? >> >> 73, Stefan/DK7FC >> PS: Conds (local) are excellent again this evening! Worth to come to >> QSO mode ;-) >> >> >> Am 26.01.2012 19:29, schrieb Rob, M0DTS: >>> On 25/01/2012 23:28, Stefan Schäfer wrote: >>>> LF, >>>> >>>> Excellent conds on 137 in a range of 2500km! Signals show up in RN, >>>> 4X, TF, YO at good strength. Worth to try! >>>> >>>> 73, Stefan/DK7FC >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Stefan.. vy good tonight again too, you're 579 here.. best I've heard >>> you! >>> >>> Still trying to get time to re-assemble the tx and make some >>> transmissions....... >>> >>> Rob >>> M0DTS >>> >> >> > > >