Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20625 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2002 09:06:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur-qfe1-smtp-plusnet.harl.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Mar 2002 09:06:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 28453 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2002 09:06:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Mar 2002 09:06:26 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.33 #2) id 16l6AO-0008Qj-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:39:32 +0000 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.111]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 16l6AJ-0008Qc-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:39:31 +0000 Received: from host213-1-139-120.btinternet.com ([213.1.139.120] helo=dave) by gadolinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id 16l4dQ-0004bs-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:01:25 +0000 Message-ID: <002001c1ca6d$f4a0a7e0$788b01d5@dave> From: "Dave Sergeant" To: "rsgb_lf_group" References: <3C8E3629.6A23AB12@netscapeonline.co.uk> Subject: LF: Re: loop/update Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:55:19 -0000 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 5.50.4522.1200 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: >From Dave G3YMC It is good that there are now several on the reflector taking a re-look at loops. However I feel there is far too much 're-inventing the wheel'. There has been much information about loops for some years on my site (http://www.dsergeant.btinternet.co.uk/loops.htm), GW4ALGs site (http://www.alg.demon.co.uk/radio/136/intro.htm) and elsewhere. My site gives a lot of information including loop calculations, theory and practical advice. It seems there may be some on the reflector who have not looked at it. As Bill Ashlock wrote, the dc resistance of Mal's loop at 1.5 ohms is indeed far too high. Similarly the 1 mohm for radiation resistance mentioned by Rik ON7YD is also way too high if conventional loop theory is to be believed. They should both compare them with the information on my site. I, along with GW4ALG, use a totally capacitive network for matching - Steve's is slightly different in that he uses a balanced configuration but also makes the mistake of having the network in the shack rather than at the feedpoint. Neither of us has tried transformer matching, and it remains to be seen if the losses and potential current handling problems are better or worse than our capacitive network. Steve has used his loop at 400W with no problems. But with the values of capacitor required (in my case 22nF and 200nF) mica caps are out, and Philips 376 polypropylene are used The important things for any successful transmitting loop (which I admit I haven't achieved!) are: Use thick wire to keep the dc (and ac) resistance to as low as value as possible. Fractions of an ohm are a ball park figure. Whatever matching method you use, the network must be at the feedpoint so that feeder losses are not in the loop circuit. Earth losses are immaterial and the loop does NOT need to be kept away from ground or other lossy things. Good luck with your loop Mal. ps. I note G4CNN mentions working Dick G3LCB yesterday. Not in fact a new station, but I haven't heard him for many months - and notice that I have never worked him. Was busy on the other computer sorting out Linux at the time so missed him. 73s Dave G3YMC dsergeant@iee.org dsergeant@btinternet.com http://www.dsergeant.btinternet.co.uk