Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 2 Mar 2011 15:29:55 -0800 (PST), Wimpie
wrote: Formula is only valid for electrically large structures, so not an electrically small loop or dipole. "Large" or "small" are not quantities. For electrically small loops, reactive fields are dominant for: and how small (quantifiable) is small (qualifiable)? r 0.16*lambda given that I have already demonstrated that, and more, what importance do you attach to this that hasn't already been shown? Smaller loop size does not result in smaller reactive field zone. What a curious defense for magnetic antennas's noise immunity. However, the magnetic antenna is not immune from the reactive fields of noise emitters that are very much larger than any loop discussed here. It is the field of the emitter that is important. I thought I would wait and see if anyone cottoned on to that aspect of the discussion. If we proceed with the assumption (repeated here): Smaller loop size does not result in smaller reactive field zone. then the magnetic antenna is doomed to noise in the same sense as an electric antenna is. Offhand I would speculate that in an apartment situation, a magnetic antenna on the balcony is saturated with reactive noise fields. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
SBS-1 - information. Does anyone have any experience with ? | Scanner | |||
Material of wi does it affect a loop antenna's performance? | Antenna | |||
Magnetic Loop !!! | Antenna | |||
Dipole vs. Delta loop vs. Quad loop -pratical experience | Antenna |