Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2095 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2000 18:42:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 28 Feb 2000 18:42:18 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12PUt8-0007ub-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 18:27:22 +0000 Received: from mb09.swip.net ([193.12.122.212]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12PUt3-0007uV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 18:27:18 +0000 Received: from win95 (d212-151-38-212.swipnet.se [212.151.38.212]) by mb09.swip.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA20922 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 19:26:14 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <001801bf8219$cc4795e0$d42697d4@win95.swipnet.se> From: "C Andersson" To: "RSGB LF group" Subject: SV: LF: Field strength revised Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 19:29:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: ON7YD wrote: >If you calibrate the loop it is not nessecary to use an untuned loop. If >you use a tuned loop the output voltage will be much higher (factor Q, can >easily be 100 or more). This will allow to measure at larger distances. I think there is a point in using an untuned loop (or at least one with low Q). It should be less affected by nearby objects than a high-Q loop. /Christer sm6pxj