Message-ID: <000e01c2f844$dd62cee0$d3e8fc3e@l8p8y6>
From: "hamilton mal" <g3kev.ham@virgin.net>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <LEEGIKOMHIEKBPDOHLOIIENJCFAA.we0h@gentekcom.com> <002b01c2f824$ecb39b60$2602a8c0@WorkGroup>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 12:34:41 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: LF: Re: Re: RE: GAIN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Dennison" <mike.dennison@ntlworld.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 9:01 AM
Subject: LF: Re: RE: GAIN


> > Heck Bill even made a loop that was
> > 25 feet by 25 feet and it still made it several hundred miles on less
than
> a
> > watt. Series resonate it and run the right ferrite cored transformer. No
> > exceptions.
> > Mike>WE0H
>
> I have seen people use 'series' and 'parallel' resonating when talking
about
> loops, but what is the difference - surely if it is a continuous loop they
> are both the same? Can someone clarify, please.

I use parallel resonance techniques ie the capicators to resonate the loop
are parallel across the loop terminals(feed point). Series resonance has the
capacitors in series with one leg of the loop. That is basically the
procedure. Matching the resonated loop to 50 ohms coax requires a matching
transformer. There are other configurations like feeding the loop into a RF
preamp etc.
I thought everyone knew the basics of series and parallel resonating loop
techniques. Under some circumstances one method is to be preferred over the
other but especially for receiving only,  as long as the loop is resonated
at the frequency of interest either works equally well. I have tried both on
my 90 metre loop. I still prefer the vertical approach on LF and not loops
for transmitting.
G3KEV

>
> Mike, G3XDV
> http://www.lf.thersgb.net
> ====================
>
>
>