Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id wASMkZvN019542 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 23:46:56 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1gS8Mn-0006r3-Vm for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 22:31:35 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1gS8Gl-0006qh-8z for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 22:25:19 +0000 Received: from resqmta-ch2-11v.sys.comcast.net ([2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:43]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91_59-0488984) (envelope-from ) id 1gS8GZ-0008Ol-8H for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 22:25:11 +0000 Received: from resomta-ch2-14v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.110]) by resqmta-ch2-11v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTP id S86CgYTb6lfVIS8GRgQreP; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 22:24:59 +0000 X-DKIM-Result: Domain=comcast.net Result=Signature OK DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20161114; t=1543443899; bh=fI/5Ra6xjMIijVFcyMSEFoFeo+TjFJBaoJ234cSuNLg=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=OW2v+L0F08WcokWjoyeSozmYSB8r/2RQlz5f1QE71/6oADrNtxXSB2a36envvakgN xgneoYi8Nel1D9bH75nugwwN5HNqeqkWv4z49mrjqRIcgZibGdO4MGL6wP6SHOEnJY hE969cT48gBNew6+XXO4N5Fem9VnWTXlLb85wQZfoONwdmDDop/emPIFcguwkkeXTq SIQV7I3wWfK4/FLS375dXMKIkUczT+diWmOqgyPQY8c3eeOL6zE1xDFhvStXXjU/c3 BC4TKealzr9PhXKG23tQy1IqKpGaVz6I9hl1x15Zaz4kaBpjAnaQ9HC5Nq7N3RR4UP iNyAiQ3Zv26dw== Received: from Owner ([IPv6:2601:140:8500:7f9f:78f6:dd:b547:d008]) by resomta-ch2-14v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPA id S8GOgUBnYhmLqS8GPgVdiy; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 22:24:58 +0000 From: To: References: <5BE0C0CE.10008@posteo.de> <5BE19D5E.7000408@posteo.de> <5BF7C6B4.8090104@posteo.de> <5BFCFF7D.8090006@posteo.de> In-Reply-To: <5BFCFF7D.8090006@posteo.de> Subject: LF: RE: EbNaut @ 80 Hz Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 17:24:40 -0500 Message-ID: <041701d48769$2e6cb8e0$8b462aa0$@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0418_01D4873F.4596B0E0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQHgdirWgwX/aRwQiLXxXwMjbK+3sQL/2MgsAie3hBsBnybMc6UXpMUQ Content-Language: en-us X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfJIb40XFUw2q9WbqTC3zmlY9wVJ2vYP1Yss9G1wEVJazrYvb7jllQhQP7kOJcql14ne2eWsietmKdp7r+F3tW3XluDn8diiBDsGYTy3HTkdqO784ZvbW aLqlT3xUteGtosNAZ1AkMpv3q2d9M77DGa71bOMORwLBVFVPkliLFupmASQKyS/L+flgBJVi0SF4NL1v7p0YJ/Qb/vgl2Zm/Be6tcEBOHCofaWIckAa1WwNH X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Hello Stefan, Your SLF (270 Hz, 80 Hz and 60 Hz) experiments and observations have been fascinating. It's been enjoyable to guess what your next result would be; and encouraging to see that things at 270 Hz and 80 [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:43 listed in] [list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (hvanesce[at]comcast.net) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID BODY: Test for Invalidly Named or Formatted Colors in HTML 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: b28d3e72b5adfaf9991664afe0a993a6 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SA Timed out after 180 secs Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0418_01D4873F.4596B0E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Stefan, Your SLF (270 Hz, 80 Hz and 60 Hz) experiments and observations have been fascinating. It's been enjoyable to guess what your next result would be; and encouraging to see that things at 270 Hz and 80 Hz seem fairly well behaved so far. It was also interesting to notice on your grabber that the 60Hz fading might not be diurnal. A question regarding your ZEVS and SLF spectrograms: Does your ZEVS spectrogram (79.8 Hz - 83.2 Hz span) show lower SNR for your 80 Hz signal than your SLF spectrogram (79.95 Hz - 80.05 Hz span) because one comes from an H-field sensor in the forest and the other comes from an E-field sensor in the forest? The integration time difference (3.8mHz vs 424 uHz?) would seem to account for 9.5 dB lower SNR at 3.8 mHz, but the SNR in the ZEVS spectrogram (3.8 mHz) seems lower by more than 10 dB, so I wondered if the two spectrograms came from different antennas. 73, Jim AA5BW From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of DK7FC Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 3:26 AM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: SLF: EbNaut @ 80 Hz Hi SLF, Yesterday, a 45 character EbNaut was transmitted at 80.005 Hz. It was received on my tree in 3.5 km distance. After the improvement of the RX antenna it looks like i gained about 2.5 dB SNR. It was an easy decode, the message could have been transmitted 4 times faster. Capture attached :-) 73, Stefan PS: With that SNR, a 5 character message could be transferred out to 7 km distance in less than 1 day. Am 23.11.2018 10:21, schrieb DK7FC: Dear SLF friends, A new step forward towards DC: Since yesterday 22:30 UTC i'm TXing a carrier at 80.005 Hz. That's the 3750 km band, where the far field begins at a distance of 598 km. The antenna voltage is just 5 kV and i'm getting 1.2 mA antenna current, giving an ERP of 20 fW (2E-14 W). The voltage is even higher than in my recent experiment on 270 Hz, anyway the S/N is lower, indicating that my RX lacks of sensitivity. Indeed this experiment helps to estimate the lack of sensitivity. Looks like i'm missing about 10 dB on that frequency. Anyway the signal is making the path of 3.5 km to my tree grabber, as usual shown at http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/DK7FC_VLF_Grabber2.html. Not a big distance but still well beyond most garden fences! The signal leaves a barely visible trace in the ZEVS window which is running at 3.8 mHz FFT bin witdh. Unfortunately ZEVS is off the air since a week or so. actually i wanted to transmit side by side with ZEVS, of course a bit deeper even. >From a quiet period at night, i calculated the SNR of a 1 hour carrier period using vlfrx-tools: carrier S/N: 16.83 dB in 277.8 uHz, -18.73 dB in 1Hz For the crazy homebrewers i'd like to share that website where i ordered the HV-transformer, http://www.hosin.de/Specials/HV-Trafo/hv-trafo.html A nightmare for all safety-fetishists! For the completeness it must be mentioned together with that page: http://kurts-werkstatt.de/hv-trafo.htm 73, Stefan ------=_NextPart_000_0418_01D4873F.4596B0E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Stefan,

 

Your SLF (270 Hz, 80 Hz and 60 Hz) experiments and observations have = been fascinating. It’s been enjoyable to guess what your next = result would be; and encouraging to see that things at 270 Hz and 80 Hz = seem fairly well behaved so far. It was also interesting to notice on = your grabber that the 60Hz fading might not be diurnal. =  

 

A question regarding your ZEVS and SLF = spectrograms:

Does your ZEVS spectrogram (79.8 Hz – 83.2 Hz span) show lower = SNR for your 80 Hz signal than your SLF spectrogram (79.95 Hz – = 80.05 Hz span) because one comes from an H-field sensor in the forest = and the other comes from an E-field sensor in the forest? The = integration time difference (3.8mHz vs 424 uHz?) would seem to account = for 9.5 dB lower SNR at 3.8 mHz, but the SNR in the ZEVS spectrogram = (3.8 mHz) seems lower by more than 10 dB, so I wondered if the two = spectrograms came from different antennas.

 

73,

 

Jim AA5BW  

 

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of = DK7FC
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 3:26 = AM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: SLF: = EbNaut @ 80 Hz

 

Hi SLF, =

Yesterday, a 45 character EbNaut was transmitted at 80.005 Hz. = It was received on my tree in 3.5 km distance. After the improvement of = the RX antenna it looks like i gained about 2.5 dB SNR. It was an easy = decode, the message could have been transmitted 4 times faster. =
Capture attached :-)

73, Stefan

PS: With that SNR, a 5 = character message could be transferred out to 7 km distance in less than = 1 day.



Am 23.11.2018 10:21, schrieb DK7FC: =

Dear SLF friends,

A new step = forward towards DC: Since yesterday 22:30 UTC i'm TXing a carrier at = 80.005 Hz. That's the 3750 km band, where the far field = begins at a distance of 598 km.

The antenna voltage is just 5 kV = and i'm getting 1.2 mA antenna current, giving an ERP of  20 = fW (2E-14 W).

The voltage is even higher than in my recent = experiment on 270 Hz, anyway the S/N is lower, indicating that my RX = lacks of sensitivity. Indeed this experiment helps to estimate the lack = of sensitivity. Looks like i'm missing about 10 dB on that frequency. = Anyway the signal is making the path of 3.5 km to my tree grabber, as = usual shown at http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/DK7FC_VLF_Grabber2.ht= ml. Not a big distance but still well beyond most garden = fences!
The signal leaves a barely visible trace in the ZEVS window = which is running at 3.8 mHz FFT bin witdh. Unfortunately ZEVS is off the = air since a week or so. actually i wanted to transmit side by side with = ZEVS, of course a bit deeper even.

From a quiet period at night, = i calculated the SNR of a 1 hour carrier period using vlfrx-tools: = carrier S/N: 16.83 dB in 277.8 uHz, -18.73 dB in 1Hz

For = the crazy homebrewers i'd like to share that website where i ordered the = HV-transformer, http://www.h= osin.de/Specials/HV-Trafo/hv-trafo.html A nightmare for all = safety-fetishists! For the completeness it must be mentioned together = with that page: http://kurts-werkstatt.de= /hv-trafo.htm

73, Stefan

------=_NextPart_000_0418_01D4873F.4596B0E0--