X-GM-THRID: 1216204467021881261 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf X-Gmail-Received: 2266a6ae896a845ecce9b9bb96f01b7a6b00e17c Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.78.127.8 with SMTP id z8cs78187huc; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 06:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.66.244.10 with SMTP id r10mr3784541ugh; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 06:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id o30si6243358ugd.2006.10.03.06.54.25; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 06:54:26 -0700 (PDT) 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) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1GUkdJ-0001OO-Um for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 14:48:29 +0100 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1GUkdI-0001OF-Ub for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 14:48:28 +0100 Received: from smtpout10-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net ([64.202.165.238]) by relay2.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.51) id 1GUkdD-0004RQ-83 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 14:48:28 +0100 Received: (qmail 26040 invoked from network); 3 Oct 2006 13:48:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (208.37.242.34) by smtpout10-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.238) with ESMTP; 03 Oct 2006 13:48:13 -0000 Message-ID: <45226A30.2080704@w1tag.com> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 09:48:32 -0400 From: John Andrews User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <45220984.5050008@telus.net> <000f01c6e6e9$455bf260$0100a8c0@HOST> <001601c6e6ee$01426050$5d9b8418@MARLEEN> In-Reply-To: <001601c6e6ee$01426050$5d9b8418@MARLEEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=-0.846 Subject: Re: LF: Re: miniwhip miniresults...? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: 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 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4195 > */However I do not have any powerful transmitters in the neighbourhood ./* I do, and that simple circuit generates many 2nd-order intermod products from the local MW AM stations. The loudest signal at my QTH is on 580 kHz, at about 600 mV/m. The Burhans designs (such as the AMRAD circuit, but with a J-310) are definitely cleaner. The best results so far have been from a Burhans variation published in The Lowdown about a year ago. I believe John Reed was the author, and the front end uses a 3:1 transformer in place of the usual 1:1 version. This yields about 6 dB less gain, but the extra feedback does help. He follows the FET with a push-pull bipolar amp that has a very high 2nd-order IMD intercept. In my testing of these circuits last winter, I always used a variable attenuator between the preamp and the receiver to make sure that the receiver was not the culprit. I finally gave up when I realized that the AC noise pickup was always better on the loops, and that I could never eliminate the 2nd-order IMD products, only reduce them. Many grounding and choking variations were tried. I do plan to go back to this project as time permits this winter, and will report any successes from my noisy and RF-infested back yard. John Andrews, W1TAG