The only thing which would make this "better" than the usual mag loop is better
balance - but W8JI has shown a single wire loop can be much easier to balance
than the coax. Not sure how broad banded they get with the Mobius design -
that COULD be it's only advantage for this antenna type. By the way, I've use
a number of magnetic loops and have found the balance issue to be un-critical
as you still get the ultra sharp null off the two ends.
Sent from my iPad
On May 8, 2011, at 15:58, "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com> wrote:
> Steve Lawrence wrote:
>
>> Baum addresses loop frequency response in Note 8:
>>
>> http://www.ece.unm.edu/summa/notes/SSN/note8.pdf
>>
>> The demo I saw compared the Pixel loop to a vertical whip. The noise
>> rejection was a sharp contrast especially when the loop was rotated. A
>> more interesting comparison would be against a standard coax split shield
>> loop.
>>
>> The Pixel product - loop and preamp - looked to be extremely well made.
>>
>> 73 - Steve WB6RSE
>
> The question is: why a "Moebius" loop? Note 8 is about loops
> in general, and says nothing about Moebius loops. Virtually any
> loop design will have nulls broadside to the loop, and even Baum
> doesn't claim the Moebius loop has superior nulling. I threw together
> a loop for a contest a few years ago and got 70 dB nulling.
> It was nothing special, just a shielded loop. Whether the
> Pixel product is well made or "works well" (whatever that means)
> is unrelated to whether the Moebius design is responsible for
> the performance. It may work in spite of being a Moebius design.
>
> Rick N6RK
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
|