Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/28/2014 6:14 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message ... I have a project in mind that would need a very good antenna in the frequency range of 60 kHz. Originally I looked at loop antennas and liked the idea of a large shielded loop made of coax tuned with a capacitor. My goal is to get as large a signal as possible from the antenna and matching circuit to allow the use of a receiver with very low sensitivity... in fact an all digital receiver. I spent some time simulating antennas in spice and was able to get a bit of a feel for the circuit, but I'm not convinced it would work the way I want. Just before I set the project aside I was told I needed to model the radiation resistance. That has the potential of wrecking the Q of the circuit. I am counting on the high Q to boost the output voltage. If the radiation resistance is at all appreciable I would lose the high Q and need to start over. I don't think I would try and reinvent that type of antenna. There are several designs on the web that use a loop about 3 feet in diameter and several turns of wire inside the shield. In most cases a low noise preamp is needed, but that shold be simpleand inexpensive to build. Go to this page and go toward the bottom for some loop antenna ideas. http://www.w4dex.com/lf.htm I have known Dexter for around 40 years. I am not sure what you mean by "reinvent" that type of antenna. Every antenna can be optimized for a given design. My requirements are very unique. I need as much voltage from the antenna as possible. My receiver input impedance can be very high (~1 Mohm) which is very different from a typical receiver. I have already gone down the road of looking extensively at loop antenna designs. I have not found a significant difference other than the ease of construction. That is one reason why I chose to use coax rather than wire within a shield like pipe or a bicycle rim (as I found in one project). My current design is 100 feet (the 50 feet I said originally was due to my poor recollection) wound on a 2 foot diameter spoke arrangement of wood which turned out pretty well for a first pass. I have yet to characterize the antenna which may be the easier path than trying to construct a good model from theory and the known details. Several people have suggested that a preamp will be required. That may be possible. But this is not an analog receiver and don't need a lot of SNR for it to work. The time code signal is modulated at 1 bps using both phase and amplitude modulation and pulse width bit encoding. I will need a resolution of no worse than 100 milliseconds to decode the bits. So I figure a bandwidth of 10 Hz should be plenty enough. This means I can vastly over sample the signal and get lots of gain digitally. So the tricky part is to overcome the poor analog characteristics of the differential digital input. I only need it to turn the input signal into a one or a zero, but it needs to be sensitive to a very small signal. With the various imperfections of input offset, hysteresis, etc., I will be lucky if it works with very low voltage signals at all. I could rig up a test circuit and see just what signal levels are needed. The other part is that the purpose of this design is to receive the signal digitally on as low a power level as possible. The entire power budget is a couple hundred microwatts. I have yet to find an amplifier that will fit this power budget. Oddly enough some folks in s.e.d told me that transistors don't work well with low bias currents, but that may only apply to bipolar amps. They make time code receiver chips to do this on a few hundred microwatts and have an internal amplifier. So obviously it can be done. I just can't find a low enough power opamp for a 60 kHz signal. Also this a learning exercise for me. So reinventing something would be ideal! -- Rick |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|