Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1233; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id u3AG89dJ004062 for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:08:09 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1apHqT-0000UZ-Rh for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:04:17 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1apHqT-0000UQ-Ij for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:04:17 +0100 Received: from rgout0402.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk ([65.20.0.215]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1apHqR-0001xf-SM for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:04:16 +0100 X-OWM-Source-IP: 81.152.77.81 (GB) X-OWM-Env-Sender: alan.melia@btinternet.com X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A090201.570A797E.0079,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0 X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=38/50,refid=2.7.2:2016.3.30.105115:17:38.936,ip=81.152.77.81,rules=__HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, MSGID_32HEX_LC, INVALID_MSGID_NO_FQDN, __MSGID_32HEX, __HAS_FROM, __PHISH_FROM2, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL_FROM, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NO_NAME, __REFERENCES, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __HAS_X_PRIORITY, __HAS_MSMAIL_PRI, __HAS_X_MAILER, USER_AGENT_OE, __OUTLOOK_MUA_1, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC, __ANY_URI, __URI_NO_WWW, __CP_NOT_1, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE, __FORWARDED_MSG, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_1400_1499, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, __URI_NS, SXL_IP_DYNAMIC[81.77.152.81.fur], HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL, __PHISH_FROM, __OUTLOOK_MUA, __PHISH_SPEAR_STRUCTURE_1, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, REFERENCES, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS, NO_URI_HTTPS X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown Received: from gnat (81.152.77.81) by rgout04.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk (8.6.122.06) (authenticated as alan.melia@btinternet.com) id 56F68F5001A92666 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:03:13 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=btcpcloud; t=1460304194; bh=KDFA0oIWjOr6LbYIpwVCySFuNw9QW6nYNVcZOP1tz44=; h=Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:X-Mailer; b=RYspbi18mLUVjaxaXkRqDtzYrFI9L+parGmzmqyMQ71OafJ8e4Hjesjc+2Z+Xf1EtE91ZdMnGhfBUyBXsAdXuclV2xZpG0Q4+QH/t+bdozEh/AHsQQjV3HJr3GprQGG4Z8YpdkvCYLZ0OJmEcXeo+QU9DCne8DumvOeJ5CXC+h8= Message-ID: From: "Alan Melia" To: References: <570A7631.5050001@lineone.net> Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:04:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Scan-Signature: 739d4fb39bd02fc5a2de5437a39bb056 Subject: LF: Re: Screening an LF Loading Coil Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.11 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 7639 Hi Hugh I think the rule of thumb (or at least the one I use) is that the lowest turn should be at least half the coil diamter from the screen base (which if too close will exhibit the properties of a shorted turn) and the diameter of the screen should be at least twice the diameter of the coil....more is better, but....... I think that should be OK with your coil size supported in the middle of the keg, Hope you had the pleasure of emptying it :-)) Alan G3NYK ----- Original Message ----- From: "LineOne" To: Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2016 4:50 PM Subject: LF: Screening an LF Loading Coil >A few years ago I found an aluminium beer keg which had been used for >mixing cement. As it was damaged it was no good returning it to the brewery >so I have just moved my LF loading coil into it and placed the assembly >outside on a corrugated steel roof. (Having the coil suspended from the >shack ceiling was not a good idea for the long term). > > I took the end off the keg, which is 370mm internal diameter, and the coil > is on a 130 mm former, likely to be no more than 160mm diameter wound. The > antenna is predominantly current fed so no voltage larger than about 3kV > is present. > > Has anyone tried this and am I likely to lose radiated power by reducing > the Q of the coil, the Tx output voltage and current are just the same? > > Hugh, M0DSZ >