Return-Path: Received: from rly-mf10.mx.aol.com (rly-mf10.mail.aol.com [172.20.29.180]) by air-mf10.mail.aol.com (v124.15) with ESMTP id MAILINMF104-9844a66577e3ba; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:04:26 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-mf10.mx.aol.com (v124.15) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMF102-9844a66577e3ba; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:04:16 -0400 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1MTPIP-0000tj-Ee for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 01:02:57 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1MTPIP-0000ta-2h for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 01:02:57 +0100 Received: from mailout10.t-online.de ([194.25.134.21]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MTPI8-0002Yk-1T for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 01:02:40 +0100 Received: from fwd08.aul.t-online.de by mailout10.t-online.de with smtp id 1MTPIJ-00021a-03; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 02:02:51 +0200 Received: from [192.168.2.22] (EXVUfcZfrhTsYvCcMFatmAiVIalpDnXc3bIr6HGyy7scyU5nulrWy-ryQaN06yFZgQ@[93.211.94.234]) by fwd08.t-online.de with esmtp id 1MTPIE-2555Oq0; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 02:02:46 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: hajo.brandt.dj1zb@t-online.de To: X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 6.08.0003 Date: 22 Jul 2009 00:00 GMT Message-ID: <1MTPIE-2555Oq0@fwd08.t-online.de> X-ID: EXVUfcZfrhTsYvCcMFatmAiVIalpDnXc3bIr6HGyy7scyU5nulrWy-ryQaN06yFZgQ X-TOI-MSGID: e0b4a4ca-3522-4a42-a14c-e2a6a8603551 X-Karma: unknown: X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,NO_REAL_NAME=0.55,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: Loop (was Re: IGBT in 136 KHz TX?) Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME 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 Dear John, LF, I would like especially to comment on using a one winding loop combined with a step-up transformer: I am using such a loop for years with continuing success. The primary of the transformer should have the same inductance as the loop itself. The secondary should provide an inductive reactance of four times the cable impedance, either at the frequency or band of interest, or on the geometric mean frequency of a broader band, in my case 10 kHz to 500 kHz (using a mean frequency of 71 kHz). As in any pure receiving applications ferrites with high Al values can be used for the transformer (6800 in my case). Concerning sensitivity, in all cases so far the rf band noise has been the limiting factor, provided the loop area is not too small. I guess many loop builders overrate the formula saying that the voltage of a loop will increase with the number of turns (which is ok when tuning the loop). But what we really want from a receiving loop is receiving power (voltage across an rx input resistance), and it is the loop area which counts in this respect, not the number of turns. Just if the turns ratio of the transformer may become too high for practical reasons, a two or three turn loop may be easier to be matched to a cable. An untuned loop is a broadband rf source, however. Therefore I am using a preselector (at VLF an 80 kHz low-pass filter) before the receiver or converter, with some amplification behind. Tuning the preselector in the shack is much easier than a loop outside the house. > > And just one random thought on multi-turn receiving loops: As Jim Moritz has > pointed out a number of times, a loop of N turns can be quite nicely replaced by a > loop of one turn and an N step-up transformer. A one-turn loop is easier to > construct, and may provide a wider tuning range. > > John, W1TAG > 73 Ha-Jo, DJ1ZB