Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Balanced vs. Unbalanced loops

To: [email protected]
Subject: LF: Balanced vs. Unbalanced loops
From: "James Moritz" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:19:23 +0000
In-reply-to: <[email protected] .telenor.no>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
Dear LF Group,

I think what Jan-Martin is saying is that by having a grounded center tap on the windings of a loop antenna, you are effectively producing an integrated 1:1 balun transformer, which forces the voltages on the loop to be balanced, even if the output is single-ended. However, the balun effect will not be entirely perfect because the coupling between the loop windings is less than unity. But then, neither will a balanced preamp be perfectly balanced. An advantage of a push-pull type of balanced preamp is that it will give some cancellation of distortion products, but it's fair to say this can be achieved in other ways too.

As far as I can see, the balanced, tuned loop with push-pull preamp has changed little since the 1920s, except the bright-emitter triodes are normally replaced with JFETs in modern designs :-) The idea then was to produce an antenna with accurate and deep nulls in the MF range for direction finding. By making the circuit physically and electrically balanced, a symmetrical directional pattern was produced. It is a bit different with an LF receiving loop, where the precision of direction finding is usually less important than achieving high sensitivity, with adequate nulling of unwanted signals. Also, especially where larger diameter loops with relatively low inductance are used, the "antenna effect" does not seem to be a very serious problem. The effect of the E field pick up will be 1) to make the positions of the nulls asymetrical, 2) if there is a quadrature component between the two induced voltages, the depth of the nulls will be reduced, and 3) if local nose generates a localised E field, the antenna will pick this up. For simple reception, 1) is of little consequence, 2) in practice is not very bad - I find I can usually get >25dB null even with no attempt at balancing, and the depth of null is usually limited by how accurately the antenna can be positioned. I also find that since local noise tends to be at least as much H field as E field, 3) is not really an issue either.

I also find that external effects affect the depth of null you get - in my field strength measuring experiments, I found some locations where there was almost no null - This seemed to occur near overhead wires and power lines, which were presumably acting as parasitic antennas, inducing signals in the loop.

Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>