Date
1 - 4 of 4
8" Diameter FSL vs. 4' Sided PVC Air-core Loop Runoff
Hello All,
With a DXpedition trip scheduled to the Oregon coast in about a week (with the family) and only enough space to pack a relatively compact antenna, it was time to choose the best performer for DU-chasing this summer. The 4' sided portable PVC Loop had performed very well in the August 20-22 DXpedition to Lincoln City last year, receiving over 30 South Pacific stations when inductively coupled to to a C.Crane SWP Slider model (as described in the article posted at http://www.mediafire.com/?9tjd0pqpa4ld2f0 ). But recently there has been a lot of experimentation with Ferrite Sleeve Loop antennas, indicating that these compact ferrite-based antennas provide a real DXing breakthrough for hobbyists with limited setup space. As such, it was time to see if one of the new FSL's could really compete on MW with a proven DXpedition performer like the 4' portable PVC Loop. An 8" diameter FSL was constructed w/ 63 Russian surplus 100mm x 10mm ferrite rods, purchased on eBay from an Eastern European seller (who, presumably, is amazed at his recent financial bonanza). The ferrite rod assembly was secured on soft rubber form filled with padding material, then wrapped with 18 turns of 660/46 Litz wire from the eBay seller "Mingmak222." A 381 pf variable capacitor from Crystal Radio Supply (part # N50P) was used to tune the compact loop, providing frequency coverage from 450-1700 kHz. The design and construction of this FSL was chosen based on extensive A/B testing with another 8" diameter FSL control model, and a photo of the FSL twins is posted at http://www.mediafire.com/i/?pp9sa4pl56dm4kf (with the DXpedition model on the right, before MW frequency conversion). At local noon here in Puyallup, WA four fringe stations were chosen to test the two compact loop systems, most of which were well over 100 miles distant. 550-KARI and 550-KOAC are fringe stations in the Vancouver, BC and Portland, Oregon market, while 1040-CKST is a station in Vancouver, BC. 1070-CFAX is in Victoria, BC, and 1110-KWDB is in Whitbey Island, northwest of Seattle. In all four MP3's the reception on the 4' sided PVC air core loop is first (about 15 seconds), then the reception on the 8" diameter FSL: 550-KARI-KOAC mix http://www.mediafire.com/?akf4xkx3sjwlwp3 1040-CKST http://www.mediafire.com/?jvcps6shc99i0q7 1070-CFAX http://www.mediafire.com/?bn16gdvoa2bdcnn 1110-KWDB http://www.mediafire.com/?ea3zczjet3mw1cj Although the antenna testing was done with a completely open mind, it soon became quite clear which antenna provided a low-noise signal advantage, especially on the weaker stations! The above recordings were all made on a stock PL-606 model, which was inductively coupled to both loop antennas at the optimum range. The new 8" FSL can easily be converted to an "LW Optimized" antenna by switching in about 700 pf of capacitance in parallel with the N50P variable cap, providing the best of both DXing worlds in a compact system taking up only one cubic foot of space. A photo of the relative size of these two antenna systems is also posted at http://www.mediafire.com/i/?yr7grir83488ii3 , which hopefully will be of interest to picnic-table DXers like me! 73 and Good DX, Gary DeBock (in Puyallup, WA, USA)
|
|
Michael <michael.setaazul@...>
Thanks for the nteresting, informative report, Gary!
Would it be possible to do a three-fold comparison, including LW, between the 4' loop, the FSL and a single-ferrite such as the 7" loopstick, all inductively coupled? Cost unfortunately renders the FSL unfeasible, and the big loop is unwieldy, so it would be valuable/comforting to know to what degree the basic single-ferrite would be inferior. There was mention of a basic FSL with fewer ferrites spaced round the tube, but I have not seen any further reference to this. Not worth persuing further? What would happen if ferrites of different origins, lengths and quality from old radios were used in a compromise FSL? As an off-shoot, I would like to have a compact performing LW/MW receiver with a genuinely portable antenna. It would have to be either a single ferrite or a small loop. I am also interested in phasing out local interference from CFLs and digital sources by using a second aerial and a cancelling circuit. Is there any information on this aspect in the group? Michael UK
|
|
Rik
Gary - Thanks for all your experimenting and reporting of test results. You and several others are doing a huge service to improve ULR DXing results for all members.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Because I am a computer idiot, I could not hear the media clips, and explaining to me how to do that would probably be a challenge. Could you briefly describe the results or post the RSSI numbers if you recorded them? I am guessing the FSL did very well, but wonder if it would be able to be used anywhere near a computer or other home electronics? With my 4 foot air core loop or even my 2 footer, I can usually null out electronics in the room, and still hear some signals, but of course the ones the antenna pattern points to are much better than the ones in the null for interference. The ferrite rod antennas you made for my PL 360 have a much tighter pattern than the air cores. -FARMERIK
--- In ultralightdx@..., D1028Gary@... wrote:
|
|
Hello Michael,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks for your interest in Ferrite Sleeve Loop antennas, and for your comments on my post. <<<Would it be possible to do a three-fold comparison, including LW, between the 4' loop, the FSL and a single-ferrite such as the 7½" loopstick, all inductively coupled? Cost unfortunately renders the FSL unfeasible, and the big loop is unwieldy, so it would be valuable/comforting to know to what degree the basic single-ferrite would be inferior. >>> Yes, it certainly would be possible to do such a comparison, although because of limited experimental time here it's probably a little too ambitious to consider for the near future. In general a 7.5" loopstick (MW or LW) provides a quantum leap in DXing sensitivity over a stock Tecsun loopstick, and a serious-sized FSL (8" or larger) or air core tuned passive loop (4' side or larger) provides another quantum leap in sensitivity over the 7.5" loopstick. Regarding the relative reception capabilities of a 7.5" MW loopstick and a stock Tecsun-built model, detailed TP-DXing records were kept during a November 2008 DXpedition to Grayland, Washington, showing the huge sensitivity advantage provided by a transplanted 7.5" loopstick in an Eton E100 model. This "E100 Four Variant Shootout" article may be of interest to those who have wondered about this sensitivity advantage http://www.mediafire.com/?mjmn0xijxod . For those looking for an additional signal boost, I've personally had very good results with smaller air-core loops (2' and 3' sided) and FSL's (4" diameter), either of which can provide some additional MW or LW sensitivity beyond that of a 7.5" loopstick. <<<There was mention of a basic FSL with fewer ferrites spaced round the tube, but I have not seen any further reference to this. Not worth pursuing further?>>> Both Steve and Kevin (among others) have done extensive FSL experimentation before me, and I had a pretty late start because of a need to finish up 7.5" Longwave loopstick testing. I did some limited testing of a basic FSL with spacing between the ferrites, but was not satisfied with the results. Others who have done such testing may have other impressions, and I welcome their comments. In general (because of limited time), my objective was to determine whether the FSL design would provide a compact DXing breakthrough over existing antennas, and devote the necessary resources to test out the most effective designs as soon as possible. Presumably, the eBay sellers of surplus Russian ferrite are extremely grateful for this kind of attitude, and for the additional contributions of Steve and Kevin :-) <<<What would happen if ferrites of different origins, lengths and quality from old radios were used in a compromise FSL?>>> It's tough to give an accurate answer about this because nobody has yet tried it, to my knowledge. The results would probably depend on the size, quality and consistency in the ferrite rods, but it's doubtful that any such composite FSL would be competitive with the larger, standardized designs, in my opinion. <<<As an off-shoot, I would like to have a compact performing LW/MW receiver with a genuinely portable antenna. It would have to be either a single ferrite or a small loop.>>> This was the concept behind the recent development of the 7.5" MW and LW loopsticks for the Tecsun DSP models, Michael. These loopsticks have sensitive performance compared to the stock Tecsun antennas, and there have been many positive comments about their DXing results. Unfortunately there isn't much time here to make more of them in quantity, but the MW version article is posted at http://www.mediafire.com/?yummxhqeyjy , and the LW version article is posted at http://www.mediafire.com/?845snah2h4ek9z9 . A PL-380 model may be modified to accept either 7.5" loopstick (MW or LW) in a plug-in design, or a stock PL-360 model will accept either loopstick without the need for modification. <<<I am also interested in phasing out local interference from CFLs and digital sources by using a second aerial and a canceling circuit. Is there any information on this aspect in the group?>>> None that I am aware of, Michael. I know that this has been done extensively in the amateur radio community with noise-canceling antennas and phasing units, but not in relation to CFL's with Ultralight radios. 73 and Good DX, Gary DeBock (in Puyallup, WA, USA)
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael <michael.setaazul@...> To: ultralightdx <ultralightdx@...> Sent: Thu, Jul 7, 2011 12:42 am Subject: Re: [ultralightdx] 8" Diameter FSL vs. 4' Sided PVC Air-core Loop Runoff Thanks for the interesting, informative report, Gary! Would it be possible to do a three-fold comparison, including LW, between the 4' loop, the FSL and a single-ferrite such as the 7½" loopstick, all inductively coupled? Cost unfortunately renders the FSL unfeasible, and the big loop is unwieldy, so it would be valuable/comforting to know to what degree the basic single-ferrite would be inferior. There was mention of a basic FSL with fewer ferrites spaced round the tube, but I have not seen any further reference to this. Not worth pursuing further? What would happen if ferrites of different origins, lengths and quality from old radios were used in a compromise FSL? As an off-shoot, I would like to have a compact performing LW/MW receiver with a genuinely portable antenna. It would have to be either a single ferrite or a small loop. I am also interested in phasing out local interference from CFLs and digital sources by using a second aerial and a canceling circuit. Is there any information on this aspect in the group? Michael UK
|
|