Return-Path: Received: (qmail 90549 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2004 03:26:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore01.plus.net) (192.168.71.1) by ptb-mailstore01.plus.net with SMTP; 15 Nov 2004 03:26:42 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CTXmg-000786-Cq for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:44:06 +0000 Received: from [192.168.67.1] (helo=ptb-mxcore01.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CTXmg-00077y-5L for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:44:06 +0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1CTXVp-000NXM-7E for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:26:41 +0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1CTXVM-0002sD-Tk for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:26:12 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1CTXVM-0002s4-H9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:26:12 +0000 Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CTXVI-00071N-TN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:26:12 +0000 Received: from jayterminal (c-67-165-6-48.client.comcast.net[67.165.6.48]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <2004111503255101200cs1jce>; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:25:51 +0000 Message-ID: <001001c4cac1$40e588e0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> From: "Jay Rusgrove" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000f01c4c75e$a00d5ca0$bbab7ad5@jgtdiynm> <200411111539200989.0518CDF5@mail.zetnet.co.uk> <001401c4caa7$c59a7600$33d78351@jgtdiynm> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:14:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: 204.127.202.56 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of comcast.net X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no,RCVD_IN_SORBS=0.1 Subject: Re: LF: Loading coil 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-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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) Jim Nice photo! You wouldn't happen to have a close up of the wood grain by chance? Two likely species of American "white" hardwood would be white oak and white birch. Once kiln dried both maintain their dryness and have excellent long-term dimensional stability. Have used both types extensively in furniture making...can't say I've built any massive loading coils, though. ;~) Jay, W1VD ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Moritz" To: Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 7:11 PM Subject: Re: LF: Loading coil > Dear LF Group, > > I have attached a picture of GBR's wooden loading coil taken last year - the > hexagonal spiders are about 5m across, the litz wire conductors are about > 50mm thick and I believe are 6561 strands of 36swg wire. The inductance is > of the order of a few millihenrys. The papers describing the original 1926 > station indicate the coil Q was a few thousand; the timber used was > "American Whitewood", whatever that may be - it was reckoned to be much > lower loss than other types of wood. The plates attached to the coil frame > said it was rated for 1000A at 16 - 22kHz. > > John Rabson wrote: > > But didn't the helix house burn down once? > > I think that was in 1943, when the original wooden roof caught fire and > gutted the top part of the building containing the loading coil. The lower > floor housing the transmitter was repaired fairly quickly, but it was not > possible to replace the coil immediately, so a temporary outdoor loading > coil was used for a while. The coil in the photo seems almost identical to > pictures of the original 1926 loading coil, except that pairs of spiders are > paralleled up, presumably because the later antenna top loading had more > capacitance than the original, and required less inductance. Also in 1926 > the antenna feed was connected through a big glass window in the wall, > wheras last year it passed through the (now concrete) roof. You can see the > copper sheet shield above the coil; also there was a grid of copper wires > covering the walls, which connected to the earth bus-bar, which can be seen > going round the wall. > > Cheers, Jim Moritz > 73 de M0BMU >