Return-Path: Received: from mtain-dh06.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-dh06.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.65.26]) by air-ma03.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMA032-b5114d83a765207; Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:41:41 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dh06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 9898B3800008E; Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:41:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Q0ebV-0004jZ-6n for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:40:53 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Q0ebU-0004jQ-Kp for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:40:52 +0000 Received: from nm3.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.146.182.224]) by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Q0ebT-0004Tl-06 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:40:52 +0000 Received: from [217.146.183.183] by nm3.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Mar 2011 18:40:45 -0000 Received: from [217.146.183.74] by tm14.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Mar 2011 18:40:45 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1035.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Mar 2011 18:40:45 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 540965.32794.bm@omp1035.mail.ukl.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 14861 invoked from network); 18 Mar 2011 18:40:45 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com; h=DKIM-Signature:Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=rqEWXypNP88WPD8G+gKQT6FHZJDpp/n6bnsf6XD2KxnCj8FlCWHbvQSMCeoI4ue17VOQUXPcsQqe4Q6YyGohh5OMnG6YE3eabI7lom6BH6Hbu9h038iSN+a9aN+aLcQMCrr1P1LYcWxJjssb4DujwR5LzZj+fUL/HmFrWdAN3Zw= ; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btopenworld.com; s=s1024; t=1300473645; bh=kqlOgpyMALzTfkETRPPGKv4JhN5I7JCPjVZ+7HhxY2M=; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=rHLdsMGHvANar8nH1uz2gJKNSKIIvvRmL1wYXQmqvDgmDxhlWAmqHtUCMMTVF1s3Kbu/O4JycJ5Ay79x2ULje7RfPjPfk4lIdpfO2wKVnQigZk3jAorME4ceagTTtEG01FWY4lIJRv9rQgV4pyMTkMRZn7z0OffEibjzCRbbnGU= Received: from JimPC (james.moritz@86.176.86.80 with login) by smtp822.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Mar 2011 18:40:45 +0000 GMT X-Yahoo-SMTP: Cxhli3eswBD1ozmtAojhjrja86kWx0Qm9tycD5QR1DKWrOLgjJcXkw-- X-YMail-OSG: s1R0HxoVM1mubFSZ6WXjrq__iFEy.mztJOlDyxUX9z9re2B kQpUfoH_9NB3d5sMHcKdeieLgxFoFeUGmEMBqAX7tH7HHIJ3_cQxQ9NB0zxn TGJIcciXVgImc7jNZxjWo.jcfkfWkBHQPI2L5482iV14Qe7r.7ylChNnZz3. BYCwi_dQhtbDsKLxft2oKud72yN1m6vaUCFdlfzuWwC4UoT96u9m8A4pbU1d XYOsly8Y3uJd8IG6CYVJGesU1M2B6uhmhmDtG X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-ID: <72DDC8B018CB4996B1E7BB253B94C771@JimPC> From: "James Moritz" To: References: <59F87B1BA5D04A2F98902CF94C38DB30@JimPC> <000e01cbe589$d2324060$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> In-Reply-To: <000e01cbe589$d2324060$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:40:47 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18263 DomainKey-Status: good (testing) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001 Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: Loop TX antennas at VLF? Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original 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=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_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-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m252.2 ; domain : btopenworld.com DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d411a4d83a7620a08 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Dear Mal, LF Group, You are ignoring the fact that a number of amateurs have used loops quite successfully in the LF range, particularly in the US for 136k and "Lowfer" operation. The type of situation where loops can be more efficient than verticals of a similar size seems to be where the antenna is in a location with many tall trees. The trees can be used to support a large antenna, but also bring about high losses due to dielectric losses in, and the screening effect of, the poorly conducting wood. Loops, with generally reduced electric fields, are less adversely affected, it would appear. In the VLF range, using the same size of antenna and current level, the voltage on a vertical antenna is much higher, so one would expect extreme levels of loss of this type. So while on paper, and in the middle of a nice flat field, the vertical would be more efficient, the loop might actually be better in a practical situation with less than ideal locations. Loading coils are also a significant factor - it seems to be difficult to make a reasonably sized VLF loading coil for a small antenna that does not add significantly to the overall loss. The previous calculation shows that the requirements for a low-loss loop capacitor should not be too difficult. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU