Going Magnetic Loop

<< < (6/12) > >>

The Slab Bacon:
Quote from: K5WLF on October 19, 2011, 11:01:41 PM

My lot is about 100' (E/W) X 70' (N/S). No trees that'd do any good and the roof of the 24' X 36' house has the Hustler 5-BTV in the geometric center for 80-10. The homebrew coil-loaded 160 dipole is about 20 feet off the deck along the south fence. It has lousy bandwidth, but I made S-9 into IA with it a while back on 100 watts SSB. I'm planning on getting an amp and I need something that'll take the power and give some decent bandwidth and coverage from a fairly low elevation.
ldb



Try this! ! !

W1AEX:
I have worked Ted - K1QAR a number of times on 160 meters while he was using his TX/RX loop. His signal was comparable to other stations running a dipole. It's really amazing when you think about it.

Fred, I have been looking at that Pixel loop and wondering how much signal it captures on 160m and 75m. In spite of the improvement in SNR it often seems that small loops don't grab enough signal to establish much quieting with our mode unless the station you are receiving is quite strapping. Still, it might be fun to mess around with one on a rotator installed away from the house. I've played around with several homebrew tuned loops, but the preamplified and broadband nature of the Pixel makes it very interesting. Any chance you could make a video showing it in action as you tune a few bands?

Rob W1AEX

W3GMS:
Quote from: flintstone mop on October 19, 2011, 07:20:50 PM

Hi Joe
this was the PIXEL 3 foot diameter receiving loop with pre-amp and mount and control that will shut down the pre-amp and prevent your TX RF from coupling into your receiver. Their price jumped up from last year, to $400.........but very good sturdy construction.
http://www.pixelsatradio.com/product/shortwave-magnetic-loop-antenna/
http://www.hlmagneticloopantennas.com/
Fred


Thanks Fred for the response.  I was kind of guessing that is what you were using.  Like Rob, W1AEX said in a later posting, it would be good to hear some more of your analysis on its performance especially on 160 and 80M.  Maybe a separate thread is in order.  The video was pretty impressive but the signal in the video was very strong.  It would be nice to find a weak signal on the "wire antenna" and then switch to the loop and see what the overall perceived signal to noise ratio improvement was

I have never messed with an un-tuned receiving loop.  I guess for the lack of resonance he is just making it up with sheer gain from the low noise preamp.
 
It seems like as time goes on my receiving conditions just worsen.  I can remember moving in some 35 years ago and the S meter would be around an S-1 or so.  That certainly is not the case anymore and one could make a full time job of finding the noise sources.  We are out in the county and one would think that would help but not the case anymore.  Our little country general store installed some modern computer gear to scan prices as you checkout along with new computer terminals.  Ever since then, I get "buzzies" on 75 meters about every 15 KHz or so.  That issue alone even with diplomacy dial in could take major time and effort to correct.

I have established a good working relationship with our utility company.  I find the noise and let the guys whose job it is where the spots are.   

Joe, W3GMS       

KL7OF:
I would think that resistive and or corrosive losses in the joints of a loop built of copper or aluminum tubing could be eliminated by welding aluminum tubing at the joints and silversoldering (silfos) copper tubing.....the way that these antennas use skin effect would seem to mandate low resistance joints...

ke7trp:
Is aluminum Good enough?  I found aluminum loops.  I could have the fabricator at work cut one down and Tig weld fittings for me.  This would be lightweight, Cheap and easy to mount.

C

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page