Topband: Loopsticks on 160

[Tom Rauch]

Hi Ford,

> broadside to the loop.  Why do I get no (or very little) response held
> vertically?  These experiments are done at 4' to 7' height above loamy
> ground.  Can anyone explain the polarization differences?

This is an excellent demonstration of the false myth that this an 
other small loops are "magnetic radiators" and are not influenced 
by electric fields. 

You are holding the loop so the magnetic flux lines are vertical. 
That means the electric field lines are horizontal.

Electric field lines are "short circuited" by the earth. If you don't 
allow time-varying electric fields, you must have no time-varying 
magnetic fields. Because you "shorted the electric field out" by 
parallelling it with the conductive earth, the response goes to near 
zero. 
 
> 2) The permeability of the ferrite is listed in the specs as "minimum
> 1000 and maximum 3000"  All the formulas and information I can gather
> from experimentation indicates that with the loop geometries the way
> they are, a permeability of 90 to 100 is obtained, which is consistant
> with the article in the antenna book and suggested by the formulas
> presented therein.

The "advertised" permeability is given at dc, and it varies with 
frequency. You should always find the effective permeability at the 
operating frequency when selecting a core. At some higher 
frequency it will drop like a rock, go high enough in frequency...and 
it acts like a shorted turn and cancels inductance. You also have 
an open core, and so air is part of the path. Geometry is important. 
 
> (e.g. a pair of them) using principles similar to those used in
> traditional verticals (e.g. 130' in air for 1/4 wavelength spacing) or
> will some other principle apply?

You could, but sensitivity will be poor and it will be no better than a 
bigger conventional loop. The small loop trades size for efficiency, 
and since the directivity is about the same you see no 
improvement in S/N.. 

You also run into another problem, the loop antenna has narrow 
bandwidth when resonant. That means phase and sensitivity level 
will shift like crazy with frequency and temperature. It will not make 
a good element for a phased array.   
 
> (<15kHz).  E.g.  Wind three coils on a rod.  Couple the antenna to the
> end coil, the receiver to the other end, and resonate the middle core.
>  I was shocked at the depth and sharpness of the filter--and
> incredibly simple!  My question is, why is this so?  Why can't I wind
> three, five, or 15 coils in parallel and resonate them together?
> Instead, they act as attenuators.  What's up with that?

Think of what each one is. A series tuned circuit that is shorted in 
a closed loop with little resistance. Each winding reflects an 
opposing field back into the core, and that opposes any flux 
passing through the core.

If you connected a load resistance (like a receiver) across each 
winding, they would pass flux because they would not look like a 
resonant shorted turn. They would look like resistances, and 
absorb some of the power and let the rest pass.

I hate to be a wet blanket, but unless you intend to carry the 
antenna around or have very limited room for a larger loop...ferrites 
are going to be a waste of time and money.

73, Tom
(W8JI@akorn.net) 


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/topband
Submissions:              topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-topband@contesting.com