Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+RE\:\s+Re\:\s+RE\:\s+Loop\s+vs\s+Marconi\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Re: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Rusgrove" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 09:16:00 -0500
Alex Us loop users here have been seeing the ground loss contributing about 0.3 ohm (plus or minus .1 ohm depending on soil type and moisture content). In my case, using an RG-11 loop conductor, the
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00166.html (11,264 bytes)

2. RE: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "Ashlock,William" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 09:57:16 -0500
Hi Alex, My present loop is constructed from .63" OD copper pipe. The figure of merit for 50/50 loop antennas is the total AC resistance (Rac), including ground losses, and this one measures under 0.
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00168.html (11,868 bytes)

3. Re: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "Alexander S. Yurkov" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 20:50:26 +0000 (GMT)
Hi, Jay. Bill Ashlock's measurements have shown that the loop needs to be at least 5 - 6 feet off the ground. He's currently running a 1/2" copper tubing loop. If you're interested, I'm sure he can f
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00169.html (9,434 bytes)

4. Re: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "Alexander S. Yurkov" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 20:32:10 +0000 (GMT)
Hi, Bill. My present loop is constructed from .63" OD copper pipe. The figure of merit for 50/50 loop antennas is the total AC resistance (Rac), including ground losses, and this one measures under 0
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00170.html (10,192 bytes)

5. RE: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "Alexander S. Yurkov" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:03:12 +0000 (GMT)
Hi, Mike and Group. Hi Alex, We use vertical loops here. The trees don't affect them much. I can walk up to my loop and watch the RF current meter and not see any change until I get closer than 1 foo
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00173.html (10,197 bytes)

6. Re: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "Alexander S. Yurkov" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:22:45 +0000 (GMT)
Hi, Group. You sir, are absolutely WRONG! A spent 100s of hours on my vertical antennas before changing over to loops. It seems to me a loop (if wire diameter is large) may be bit better then vertica
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00180.html (10,055 bytes)

7. RE: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "WE0H" <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 22:49:32 -0600
Hi Alex, We use vertical loops here. The trees don't affect them much. I can walk up to my loop and watch the RF current meter and not see any change until I get closer than 1 foot from the loop and
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00181.html (11,089 bytes)

8. LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi (score: 1)
Author: "Ashlock,William" <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 22:17:57 -0500
Hi Mal, Sort of figured you would be popping in on this. A loop only 6db down is a BIG DOWN ie signal 4 times weaker than a vertical 6db is 6db! That's 1/2 the reading in uv/m on my SVM. You can try
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2002-11/msg00182.html (12,195 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu