Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: 160 RX Loops

To: rick darwicki <n6pe@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: 160 RX Loops
From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 08:55:17 -0800
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
If you want to null out power line noise, the loop
circumference needs to be something like 50 feet
maximum, and the nulling is better with smaller
loops.  A small loop needs to be tuned to get reasonable
sensitivity.  A non-resonant loop might not over
come the receiver noise.  Adding a preamp may or may
not work because of the noise floor in the preamp.
The preamp may overload on BCB signals; tuning the
loop makes it a cheap BCB reject filter.  So called
"shielding" makes the loop implementation much less
critical, but is not fundamentally a game changer.
OTOH, there is no disadvantage associated with shielding.
You may want to read my NCJ article on loop antennas
in the Sept/Oct 2009 issue.  If you don't have this
issue, a scan is posted in the "files" section of
the Yahoo group "loopantennas".

Rick N6RK

rick darwicki wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> With high local line noise, is a TUNED LOOP or non-resonant RX loop a better 
> option? 
> 
> I've seen blogs that shielding a loop really doesn't do much.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> 
> Rick, N6PE
> ===============================================================
> Remember, Some things are not worth doing well
> _______________________________________________
> 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M
> 
> 
_______________________________________________
160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M

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