Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
Message-ID: <005901c6b22a$49d05b40$70c428c3@captbrian>
From: "captbrian" <captbrian@ukonline.co.uk>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <000001c6b187$b87981f0$e6a4c593@RD40002>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 10:42:39 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: LF: Tapped loading coil design spreadsheet
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

Surely if antenna impedance is lo and amplifier higher then the antenna
needs to be
tapped down from the top and the amplifier final  tapped "up" from there ?
If moving the antenna tap detunes the the whole then  a 'bit of coil at the
bottom' needs
adding or removing ?

in short there a 3 "switch- wipers" to roam over a multiplicity of
turns-taps. Earth,amplifier and antenna. - just like the schoolboy crystal
sets ; substitute amplifier for crystal/headphone.

Mock it all up with infinitesimal power input , adust to matching /
resonance.

measure the inductances  and build a Big  Beefy copy.?

 Just a simple G3 [ who is well aware that he might do well to just  shut up
until he actually emits on 136 himself ]

But watch the ether space

Bryan

----- Original Message -----
From: "james moritz" <j.r.moritz@herts.ac.uk>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: 27 July 2006 15:19
Subject: RE: LF: Tapped loading coil design spreadsheet


Dear John, LF Group,

This design approach would work fine if there was no or negligible coupling
between the portion of the coil "below" the tap, and the portion "above",
i.e. if the loading coil was divided into two separate coils at the tap
point. Then you would indeed have an L network as you describe. This would
be approximately true with a "long, thin" coil, with large length/diameter
ratio and well-spaced turns. The limitation is that it can only match to
antenna resistances less than the TX output resistance. But the important
difference in the amateur type of tapped loading coil is that it has
substantial coupling between the two sections of the coil, and the resulting
mutual inductance allows an antenna resistance substantially higher than the
TX output resistance to be matched.

Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
[mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of John Andrews
Sent: 27 July 2006 14:58
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: Tapped loading coil design spreadsheet

Jim,

I have always viewed tapped loading coils as a high-pass "L" network,
where the upper part of the coil leaves a small amount of capacitive
reactance, representing the "C" in the network. The shunt inductor is
the part of the coil below the tap. The issue is then to design the coil
for the inductances above and below the tap. In the couple of these
calcs I have done, I had accurate R+jX readings of the antenna in
advance. That may be more difficult for amateur work.

John Andrews, W1TAG