Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id vA4GGLeA031515 for ; Sat, 4 Nov 2017 17:16:24 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1eB12y-0005Gf-Pk for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 04 Nov 2017 16:11:48 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1eB12y-0005GW-6G for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 04 Nov 2017 16:11:48 +0000 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eB12v-0003AN-Jd for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 04 Nov 2017 16:11:46 +0000 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C32F20C11 for ; Sat, 4 Nov 2017 17:11:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 3yTkNF68phz10Hl for ; Sat, 4 Nov 2017 17:11:41 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <59FDE6BD.5050606@posteo.de> Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2017 17:11:41 +0100 From: DK7FC 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: <15f68ccfd03-c09-1dcf0@webjas-vaa134.srv.aolmail.net> <40168a26-8991-6998-e541-585a8575ad32@abelian.org> In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi Joe, Am 04.11.2017 16:52, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca: > the far halyard on the rotated L was taken in for > another increase in the average height of the aerial. This is the > first change since 25 Oct. The aerial current did not increase and > the inductance for peak current actually increased which seems a bit > strange. Not at all. When the wire was very close to the trees and is not lifted a bit higher, you can expect a lower capacity of the wire against 'ground', which must be compensated by the coil. The current did not increase? Did you measure it before re-tuning the antenna to the peak current maybe? Or you had to add more turns on the coil which just compensated the saved R? Or maybe you increased the coupling of two coils to rise the L and this caused higher coil losses, which may have compensated the gained R. Anyway, it will have increased the radiation resistance! As long as we talk about voltage limited systems, the losses don't play a real role, just the antenna capacity or coil inductance. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: bb61bee384896e075004ae5ec954ddd2 Subject: Re: VLF: VO1NA in Todmorden on 8270 Hz - also in Amberg? 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 Hi Joe, Am 04.11.2017 16:52, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca: > the far halyard on the rotated L was taken in for > another increase in the average height of the aerial. This is the > first change since 25 Oct. The aerial current did not increase and > the inductance for peak current actually increased which seems a bit > strange. Not at all. When the wire was very close to the trees and is not lifted a bit higher, you can expect a lower capacity of the wire against 'ground', which must be compensated by the coil. The current did not increase? Did you measure it before re-tuning the antenna to the peak current maybe? Or you had to add more turns on the coil which just compensated the saved R? Or maybe you increased the coupling of two coils to rise the L and this caused higher coil losses, which may have compensated the gained R. Anyway, it will have increased the radiation resistance! As long as we talk about voltage limited systems, the losses don't play a real role, just the antenna capacity or coil inductance. I'm looking forward to Pauls new SNR report... 73, Stefan