Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 X-Spam-DCC: : mailn 1480; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by lipkowski.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u1) with ESMTP id v3IC4PFR005178 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:04:26 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1d0Roh-0003G0-NT for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:01:07 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1d0Roh-0003Fp-CG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:01:07 +0100 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1d0Roe-0005HT-Ir for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:01:06 +0100 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA07C210B7 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:01:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 3w6kHL1h0lzynk for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:01:02 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <58F5FFFD.1020903@posteo.de> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:01:01 +0200 From: DK7FC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <58F5E1F9.9060.92EC4E@roelof.ndb.demon.nl> In-Reply-To: <58F5E1F9.9060.92EC4E@roelof.ndb.demon.nl> X-Scan-Signature: 60b21f5b7eb190e65b65540006a87038 Subject: Re: LF: Staic Rain Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010404090801020409060905" X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes 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 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.75 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 11367 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010404090801020409060905 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Roelof, Hmmm, i would say it is the frequency response of the front end of the antenna. The input frequency spectrum is that of a discharge of a charged rain drop through the RC network on the input. Maybe protection diodes could help here, a bit. They could become conductive and lead the biggest part of the charge towards GND. On the other side your probe is protected against direct water contact, so no galvanic connection. Anyway there is an electric field building up arround the probe when a charged drop is falling on the wet tube arround the antenna and there is a dynamic current flow against ground, so it will have a frequency spectrum that you seem to observe... 73, Stefan Am 18.04.2017 11:52, schrieb Roelof Bakker: > Hello all, > > Last night reception on 630m was severely effected by static rain. > See attachment. > > I have often noted that the effect of static rain is worse for> 450 > kHz and that it is almost completely gone below 300 kHz. > > Does anyone have an explanation for this phenomenon? > > 73, > Roelof, pa0rdt > > > > The following section of this message contains a file attachment > prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. > If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any other MIME-compliant system, > you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. > If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. > > ---- File information ----------- > File: Static Rain.jpg > Date: 18 Apr 2017, 11:45 > Size: 71165 bytes. > Type: JPEG-image > --------------010404090801020409060905 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Roelof,

Hmmm, i would say it is the frequency response of the front end of the antenna. The input frequency spectrum is that of a discharge of a charged rain drop through the RC network on the input. Maybe protection diodes could help here, a bit. They could become conductive and lead the biggest part of the charge towards GND.
On the other side your probe is protected against direct water contact, so no galvanic connection. Anyway there is an electric field building up arround the probe when a charged drop is falling on the wet tube arround the antenna and there is a dynamic current flow against ground, so it will have a frequency spectrum that you seem to observe...

73, Stefan

Am 18.04.2017 11:52, schrieb Roelof Bakker:
Hello all,

Last night reception on 630m was severely effected by static rain.
See attachment.

I have often noted that the effect of static rain is worse for > 450 
kHz and that it is almost completely gone below 300 kHz.

Does anyone have an explanation for this phenomenon?

73,
Roelof, pa0rdt
  
The following section of this message contains a file attachment prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any other MIME-compliant system, you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. ---- File information ----------- File: Static Rain.jpg Date: 18 Apr 2017, 11:45 Size: 71165 bytes. Type: JPEG-image
--------------010404090801020409060905--