Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mj02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 8B857380000C9; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:41:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U69M8-00089y-DQ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:40:48 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U69M7-00089p-U1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:40:47 +0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U69M6-0000Za-Ao for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:40:46 +0000 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r1F0ej9t002479 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 01:40:45 +0100 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id r1F0ejw3019280 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 01:40:45 +0100 Message-ID: <511D8408.8030709@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 01:40:40 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi Dimitris, Do you have a photo showing the coil in its position? What are the ground losses, about? R coil = 9 Ohm with that Q and XL.... Litz wire helps of course, if you have enough... [...] Content analysis details: (-2.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [129.206.210.211 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: c1f72e5acb1277e013f90c915ad7ad68 Subject: Re: LF: how to increase the Q of my loading coil? 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 x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d7b96511d84425b10 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Dimitris, Do you have a photo showing the coil in its position? What are the ground losses, about? R coil = 9 Ohm with that Q and XL.... Litz wire helps of course, if you have enough... 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 15.02.2013 01:31, schrieb Dimitrios Tsifakis: > Hello group, > > I would like to increase the Q of my loading coil for 475 kHz. . It > consists currently of a 20-litre plastic bucket with standard house > 240V electrical wire (with PVC jacket). I measured the Q and found it > to be about 220 (XL is about 2 kohm). I do have some Litz wire I can > use. I also have a piece of large diameter (25 cm) storm water pipe, > which I think is made of PVC. Would you recommend using a PVC former > or should I look for a more exotic material (glass/porcelain)? Would > you think the inter-turn capacitance is very detrimental and some > exotic winding technique would yield better results? > > I understand that ground losses are bigger in my case than the > inductor losses, but I would like to address the inductor first. > > 73, Dimitris VK1SV >