Re: Working with shorter (and cheaper) ferrites - The Backpack FSL
Michael <michael.setaazul@...>
Thanks for your detailed consideration of this, Kevin.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
It confirms what I half-assumed, but wasnt sure of. I hadnt thought of the opposing "grain" of ferrite rings as compared to rods or bars, which may well be significant. Early on in the FSL discussion, we briefly mentioned the coil-diameter issue and the assumed simplified underlying principle that the ferrite allows the loop to be reduced in size for similar performance. It would be interesting to experiment with a, say, 12inch loop and different arrays of "lumped" ferrite inside, which would doubtless be inferior to the best FSL designs, but might give additional insight into viable variants. Is Chinese ferrite available? Quality? Price? Michael UK
----- Original Message --------------------------------------------------------
From: "dhsatyadhana" <dhsatyadhana@...> To: <ultralightdx@...> Sent: 29 October 2011 18:47 Subject: [ultralightdx] Re: Working with shorter (and cheaper) ferrites - The Backpack FSL Hi Micheal: I forgot to mention, in response to your other question: Steve R.'s experiments showed that ferrite length doesn't add sensitivity, but only adds to the inductance. So, wrapping a couple more turns around shorter ferrites would give the same inductance, and at least equal performance. As long as you don't run out of space to wind the coil, the shorter ferrites appear to provide the same result. This matched what Graham reported in his theory discussion. Kevin --- In ultralightdx@..., "Michael" <michael.setaazul@...> wrote: Loop (FSL) antennas using shorter ferrites, seeing if smaller and cheaper FSLs are possible. Graham's
|
|