DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references;
        b=knb+fV2Qj3v+6+eQTQGHwS0BZAbJ04TeScg4VU5oTiUn/JvJdeQ8i7WWQJPiwZGK/3
         6APqeTctnPVSLXXbY32wuYSp4yph3elDL1rNlZxM1L5Y5TrSIgN6SetIsswRMRUVWBz7
         knd8OUgG90ewQLf75LVUE+jeMCa1GkPpA/vQ4=
Message-ID: <48ff10040807210834v58d6be30sf2424ec4f2d5af25@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:34:33 -0400
From: "Mitch Buchman" <mitchbx@gmail.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
In-Reply-To: <002901c8eb29$b39ce6d0$6401a8c0@asus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <fc7eccec0807210429u3cb27e9bmf36df1d765510bea@mail.gmail.com>
	 <002901c8eb29$b39ce6d0$6401a8c0@asus>
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: Re: LF: RE: Loop Conundrum
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


How is this different from an eggbeater or turnstile antenna, that is
often used at VHF?

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/on6wg/Doc/Antenne%20Eggbeater-Engl-Part1-Full.pdf

and
ARRL Radio Amateur Satellite Handbook 1st ed, p10-16

Mitch
KB3MYC

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Gary - G4WGT <g4wgt@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> 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.
>
>
>