Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88413 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2004 14:05:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore02.plus.net) (192.168.71.3) by ptb-mailstore01.plus.net with SMTP; 17 Nov 2004 14:05:45 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore02.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CUQQY-000D5L-UM for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:04:56 +0000 Received: from [192.168.67.1] (helo=ptb-mxcore01.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CUQQY-000D5I-Rb for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:04:54 +0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1CUQRL-00008w-Fb for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:05:43 +0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1CUQQu-0007E0-EF for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:05:16 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1CUQQu-0007Dr-2S for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:05:16 +0000 Received: from smarthost1.mail.uk.easynet.net ([212.135.6.11]) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CUQQq-0008GN-8B for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:05:16 +0000 Received: from tnt-15-226.easynet.co.uk ([212.134.26.226] helo=erica) by smarthost1.mail.uk.easynet.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 1CUQQi-0008mD-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:05:04 +0000 Message-ID: <000001c4ccaf$17505420$e21a86d4@erica> From: "g3ldo" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <5.1.0.14.0.20041117111955.020e7d70@u0019445.kuleuven.be> Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:52:26 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: 212.135.6.11 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ukonline.co.uk X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no,CELL_PHONE_BOOST=1.584,DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.68,RCVD_IN_SORBS=0.1 Subject: Re: LF: Loading Coils Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.3 required=5.0 tests=CELL_PHONE_BOOST, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet SpamCORE (v3.00) Hi Chris, > > >With this new arrangement I obtained my personal best Q of about 250.. > > > >Placing the new coil in the aerial circuit made a slight improvement > >to the aerial current - from about 1.2 A to 1.5 A > >I would have thought that as most of the losses were in the coil a > >bigger current improvement would have been achieved. > The loss in the loading coil rarely exceeds 10 .. 20 Ohm, unless Q is very low. > Other losses (ground, greenery, buildings) are typical 50 .. 100 Ohm, > unless you live close to the sea > So once you have the coil losses below 10 Ohm don't expect too much from > further coil improvement. > About your "slight improvement" : increasing the current from 1.2 to 1.5 A > increases the ERP by 56 % (2 dB), that's not so "slight" > > >Unfortunately two neighbours' telephone wires pass over my garden > >where the mast was to be situated. > >Any suggestions - should I go over the wires or keep well clear of > >them and cut a length off the aerial ? > I wouldn't be too keen to get the antenna wire over the phone lines. > In the event that the wire breaks and drops on the phone line during > transmission (can happen if you burn some ropes or isolators due to > arcing) you might put several kV on the phone line and cause a lot of damage. > > 73, Rik ON7YD I have an inverted L cum Inverted V with the centre about 16m high and the end just under 10m high. The 10m high end passes over a telephone line that crosses the garden. The concerns mentioned by Rik did occur to me. I did have the antenna wire fall down due to a failure of an insulator (before replaced by those excellent PA0SE insulators) during some early TA tests. In the event the detuning of the antenna system shut down the power so no damage (that I know of) occured. Peter, G3LDO