Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15476 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2001 13:21:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by excalibur-qfe1-smtp-plusnet.harl.plus.net with SMTP; 8 Jun 2001 13:21:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 3566 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2001 13:20:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 8 Jun 2001 13:20:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 158M4e-0001XB-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2001 14:13:12 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [213.2.16.106] (helo=rsgb.org.uk) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 158M4Z-0001Va-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2001 14:13:07 +0100 Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.PRO.v4.0.0.R) for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2001 14:08:28 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 14:08:12 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Wire in the Air etc Message-ID: <3B20DC4C.4954.F308C4@localhost> In-reply-to: <003f01c0eec5$8bbd9780$90b21bca@xtr743187> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) X-Return-Path: miked@mail X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dialogue between G4CNN and ZL2CA: > > If this is so then elevating the loading coil, either by putting it high > up the vertical element or simply by raising it as high above the ground as > possible must contribute to an improved signal. Presumably as usual this will > appear as a reduction in the resistance at resonance. This I think will be my > next experiment. Alternatively a longer coil should raise the high voltage part > of the coil and also reduce losses. Comments? > > Lower system resistance allows more current to circulate, for a given > applied power. So doing things that lowers system resistance is always "a > winner". The height above ground for the loading coil is mainly a matter of > impacting on CURRENT DISTRIBUTION and that is reflected in a moderately higher > value of radiation resistance. The radiation resistance is very difficult to > test, as it is of the order of milliohms versus tens of ohms for other losses. > > Mechanical support of a low loss LF loading coil is challenge, as is > weatherproofing (for high voltage). I thought we had put this one to bed. Practical experiments by several of us, including myself and ON7YD, have shown that in some cases raising the loading coil produces a significant improvement. This is normally when local objects - houses, trees - are causing absorption, and when the length of the top section is small compared to the overall length. I can go into why this works, but this has been done before. It is sufficient to say that under those conditions the case has been shown to be true. What I have not yet seen is an experiment with raising the loading coil of an antenna way out in the open. My gut feeling is that this will still show an improvement. It is not worth bothering with if the top section is large. My antenna has 14m vertical and three 18m parallel top wires spaced 0.5m apart. As for mechanical problem, I have not experienced any, though I have had to be ingenious. Certainly, you can't put a huge coil high up, but the gain to be had in some cases far outweighs any reduction in coil efficiency. In the case of a 'T' antenna supported at the ends, the coil must be made very lightweight. This is not a real problem. In the case of an inverted-L there should be no problem at all as the coil can be mounted on top of the mast. As for weatherproofing, I find black plastic tape quite adequate and long-lasting. My elevated coil uses a coke bottle as the former and is suspended horizontally between the mast and the antenna by some polyprop 'string' running through the inside of the former. In short, if you have a small antenna with close-by trees, it is well worth going to the trouble of designing an elevated coil. If not, it is probably not worth it. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.lf.thersgb.net