LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
Old September 20th 03, 03:46 PM
Reg Edwards
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The radiating and receiving efficiencies of ALL small ferrite- rod antennas
is very, very small.

It's crudely about the same as a whip 10 times longer than the rod.

The rod has the advantage over the receiving whip because it can be fitted
inside a medium-wave pocket transistor radio and contains its own tuner and
matching transformer. In addition, the rod does not need a ground.

The MF receiving rod appears to behave very well only because MW broadcast
stations are high power, relatively local, and pocket-transistor receivers
have a higher gain than your shack transceiver which at MF is intended to be
connected to a 260-feet length of wire at a height of 60 feet.

If efficiency of a small transmitting rod should be as high even as 1
percent, regardless of whether the loss is in the wire or in the ferrite, it
is obvious 99 percent of the transmitter power will be dissipated in the
antenna and only a 20-watt transmitter would wreck it.

PS: As with a magloop the ampere-turns are high but nearly all loss occurs
in the ferrite. A serious problem is the high permeability temperature
coefficient. As the core gets hot the antenna detunes itself.

If you MUST have a dinky 160m pocket transceiver then try a dust-iron
antenna. Six rods round one rod or a number of stacked slabs will have fewer
suicidal tendencies. By far the fastest way of finding the number of turns
is to wind on some wire and if there are too many take some off again.
----
Reg, G4FGQ

------------------------------------------------------------

"Roy Lewallen" wrote
It's really hard to tell anything from a press release, and even harder
to believe most of what you can tell from it. One thing that stands out
is that the antenna being described is apparently operating at a pretty
low frequency, where all antennas are very small in terms of wavelength,
and very inefficient. Without any technical information, I can only
offer some generalities.

A small antenna (in terms of wavelength) is going to be inefficient, and
a tiny antenna is going to be very inefficient. And efficiency is
important in a transmitting antenna. (I noted an exception to this in
another posting about a terminated vee or rhombic antenna, but the
exception doesn't apply here.) Often, for a given size small antenna,
you can get lower loss by putting it on a ferrite core. But unless the
chunk of ferrite is truly awesome in size or the frequency is pretty
high, the antenna you're starting with will be tiny in terms of
wavelength. That is, you might improve a very, very, very inefficient
antenna to a very, very inefficient antenna. And that's probably the
reason you don't usually see ferrite cores in transmitting antennas --
it's better to make them a bit bigger, too big to practically use a
ferrite core.

Somebody mentioned saturation as a consideration. I'd have to work
through the numbers with an actual core size and material, frequency,
number of turns, and power level to see if it would be a problem. But
the very large air gap in the magnetic path (from one end of the rod to
the other -- which is, in fact, where the radiating field escapes)
greatly reduces the flux density, so you could probably run a surprising
amount of power without saturation. In many ferrites routinely used at
RF, losses cause objectionable heating at flux densities well below
saturation, and can often shatter the ferrite before saturation is even
approached. Among amateurs, core heating seems to be almost universally
blamed on saturation, due to a lack of understanding of the mechanism
really causing the heating.

There are certainly many applications for small, inefficient
transmitting antennas. Even a small improvement in efficiency is
beneficial, and that might be what the folks in the article have
accomplished.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

No Spam wrote:

Thanks for the excellent description. It's not clear if the device works

like a
regular antenna - apparently it is encased in ferrite the size of a

grapefruit.
Here is the url again:

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/lo...ticleID=609108

Now we all know ferrite antennas work great in AM radios, especially

where a
strong interfering signal can be nulled out. But it's not clear how well

they
work as transmitting antennas.

Wouldn't they have the same inefficiency problems as a small loop

antenna? In
other words, very low radiation resistance? If so, it doesn't seem

possible it
would have long range.

Perhaps it is meant for local communication over short distances, which

can be
useful for secure links. There is an interesting article on magnetic

induction,
where the field strength falls off as 1/r^6 instead of 1/r^2. This group

talks
about using very small antennas for distances up to 2 meters:

http://www.auracomm.com/Downloads/webwireless.pdf




 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. Serge Stroobandt, ON4BAA Antenna 8 February 24th 11 10:22 PM
The "TRICK" to TV 'type' Coax Cable [Shielded] SWL Loop Antennas {RHF} RHF Antenna 27 November 3rd 04 01:38 PM
Mobile Ant L match ? Henry Kolesnik Antenna 14 January 20th 04 04:08 AM
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? lbbs Antenna 16 December 13th 03 03:01 PM
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna Serge Stroobandt, ON4BAA Antenna 12 October 16th 03 07:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017