Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12558 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2002 17:44:56 -0000 Received: from warrior.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.227) by mailstore with SMTP; 4 Nov 2002 17:44:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 16070 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2002 17:43:56 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by warrior.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 4 Nov 2002 17:43:56 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.10) id 188lCI-0005UF-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:39:34 +0000 Received: from [194.73.73.176] (helo=protactinium.btinternet.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 188lCH-0005U6-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:39:33 +0000 Received: from host213-122-84-100.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.84.100] helo=main) by protactinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id 188lCF-0007bx-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:39:32 +0000 Message-ID: <000101c28429$13203a80$64547ad5@main> From: "Alan Melia" To: "LF-Group" Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 14:22:13 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 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 Subject: LF: Feed inv Ls...... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 required=5.0tests=DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,SPAM_PHRASE_03_05,USER_AGENT_OEversion=2.42 X-Spam-Level: * Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Hi all, whoops sorry I am becoming a bore...that's two messages to the reflector at once!! Well never mind....this query by Jan-Martin is interesting.....my answer is that you must NOT believe all the figures that the computer programs tell you!! Go and measure it ! Even the much vaunted NEC does not model short amateur type LF aerials properly. It can only calculate the parameters that are built in to it. Its dealing with things like elevated inductive loading and ground loss are adequate for HF, or for commercial type LF station configurations but are way out on an amateur scale. I do not know of anyone, even Finbar who lives on the sea shore, who would get a 18 ohm real part impedance for a 30m high L with 50m top. The measured figure is more likey to be of the order of 80 to 100 ohms even with extensive "radials" and ground spikes. This is not just a result of my measurement but the reported results of others with real aerials. Reg's equations are an interesting guide but should not be regarded as completely accurate at LF. I found his Topload program to be greatly different to measured examples. Extra components for matching can give extra loss, and its difficult to calculate or even measure this. The single coil works in most cases, it does not however give a dc path to ground, which can be a problem on reception, and where high induced voltages are present (nearby thunder clouds). From the simplicity point of view it wins for most stations. Variable capacitors to withstand the kind of voltages generated at 400w to 1kW are not cheap. It looks like a practical solution to a problem but I am interested to hear other opinions. The dc path and the matching has been solved to some extent by some stations grounding the coil and tapping the feed up from the earthy end. This can still avoid expensive capacitors, but require a lot of experimenting and a more complex coil build. Cheers de Alan G3NYK alan.melia@btinternet.com