Return-Path: Received: from rly-da09.mx.aol.com (rly-da09.mail.aol.com [172.19.129.83]) by air-da01.mail.aol.com (v121.5) with ESMTP id MAILINDA011-a8a48847afd2da; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:03:17 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-da09.mx.aol.com (v121.5) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDA092-a8a48847afd2da; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:03:12 -0400 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1KKu6Y-0004d3-Ot for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:02 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1KKu6Y-0004cu-B0 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:02 +0100 Received: from mk-filter-4-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.100.55]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KKu6V-0003Qa-43 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:02 +0100 X-Trace: 46838541/mk-filter-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com/B2C/$b2c-THROTTLED-DYNAMIC/b2c-CUSTOMER-DYNAMIC-IP/88.106.119.154 X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 88.106.119.154 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: g4wgt@tiscali.co.uk X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwEAJcXhEhYanea/2dsb2JhbACDXYgKoV8D X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,223,1215385200"; d="scan'208";a="46838541" Received: from 88-106-119-154.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com (HELO asus) ([88.106.119.154]) by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2008 13:02:51 +0100 From: "Gary - G4WGT" To: References: Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:02:51 +0100 Message-ID: <002901c8eb29$b39ce6d0$6401a8c0@asus> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcjrJXIPRmFcSy7ZTSqVK4AqeguEAgAA4ajA X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080720-0, 20/07/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Karma: 0: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: LF: RE: Loop Conundrum Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_helo : n X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_822_from : + Andy, LF, You wrote :- "Now, I take two identical such loops and mount then on the same centre line but at right angles to each other so there should be no coupling between them, whatsoever. Now, I connect the two loops in series and resonate the combination with a single capacitor of half the original value." I have been pondering about something similar as I have problems remotely rotating yet another antenna. My idea is to make the loops in the same way as you describe but feed the 2 loops to the two inputs of a balanced pre-amp like the G3LNP loop pre-amp shown in the "LF Experimenters Handbook" What are your thoughts on that please. Gary - G4WGT. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Andy Talbot Sent: 21 July 2008 12:30 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Loop Conundrum Was pondering this while out walking the other day, and couldn't come to a satisfactory conclusion either way... A small magnetic loop mounted vertically has a defined radiation resistance that is a function of its diameter, a loss that is function of its conductor and hence a loss or efficiency that is the ratio of the two. It is resonated with a good quality vacuum capacitor, and fed/matched by any suitable metrhod. Lets also leave aside all the myth and folklore about small loops, and also ignore the environment for now. It also as a radiation pattern with nulls. Now, I take two identical such loops and mount then on the same centre line but at right angles to eachother so there should be no coupling between them, whatsoever. Now, I connect the two loops in series and resonate the combination with a single capacitor of half the original value. The resulting radiation pattern should have the nulls filled in, and be a reasonable approximation to omnidirectional in azimuth. BUT... What is the resulting change in efficiency? Argument 1: Two identical loops = two times the loss R, but also two times the radiation resistance (since they don't couple) so net efficiency remains the same. Argument 2 : Chu-Harrington relates efficiency / Q / bandwidth / volume enclosed. Therefore, as the enclosed volume has increased, the effciency ought to rise. Both arguments developed little side trendrils & thoughts as I walked and pondered, and both appear valid in their own way. So the floor is open for discussion :- And where does the net radiation pattern fit into the equation? Does it, at all ? -- Andy G4JNT www.scrbg.org/g4jnt ps. Fascinating paper on EMP btw. - I was up way past midnight last night reading it.