Message-ID: <5BAFE7D6.8050708@posteo.de>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 23:00:06 +0200
From: DK7FC <selberdenken@posteo.de>
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: <00e801d457a0$f0c456d0$d24d0470$@comcast.net> <166244011c2-1ec5-3af1@webjasstg-vab11.srv.aolmail.net> <013301d4580b$080ef6f0$182ce4d0$@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <013301d4580b$080ef6f0$182ce4d0$@comcast.net>
Subject: ULF: The next experiment on 970 Hz - Cracked the far field border
 below 1 kHz
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------090600080704030002090102"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------090600080704030002090102
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi ULF,

Today i run a carrier transmission on 970.01 Hz. Start time was 08:05 
UTC. The carrier run for 3 hours without an interruption. I got 1.9 A 
antenna current on my ground loop antenna, about 320 W DC input to the PA.
The signal was received on my 3-axis RX on the tree in JN49IK. The 
distance was, as usual, 55.6 km.

So far the results were disappointing. I expected a strong SNR (at least 
10 dB in 424 uHz) from the new E field antenna which seems to perform 
very well in the complete ULF range. However the analysis of a two hour 
segment of the carrier showed an SNR of 6 dB, i.e. just noise. However, 
as i routinely calculated the SNR from the N-S loop i got a surprising 
SNR of 13.03 dB in 139.5 uHz.
At about 08:40 UTC the reception on the tree was disturbed by its own 
solar charger, just for a few seconds but that was enough to create a 
bright vertical line in the 424 uHz spectrogram showing the E field.

Anyway, i just analysed the full 3 hour segment, only from the N-S loop 
(which actually points rather to 30/210 deg) and got the following 
result (including processing command line):
*vtread -T2018-09-29_08:05,+3h /raw | vtcat -p | vtmix -c0,1,0 | 
vtfilter -a th=6 -h lp,f=1500,poles=8 | vtblank -a27 -d0.0005 -t100 | 
vtmult -f970.01 | vtresample -r240 | vtresample -r1 | vtraw -oa | ebnaut 
-dp8K19A -r1 -c2 -v -f15 -f16 -M'***' -N3 -k20 -S24
carrier phase: -111.2
carrier Eb/N0: 1.9 dB
carrier S/N: 14.25 dB in 93.0 uHz, -26.07 dB in 1Hz, -60.05 dB in 2.5kHz*

This is the first far field detection of a 970 Hz signal generated by 
amateurs on the 309 km band! A true milestone for me. Since more than a 
year it was my goal to cross that far field border on that band. :-) The 
efforts were immense.
The result is just preliminary. I want to tweak the parameters for a 
higher SNR and try to filter out the short QRM from the charger.

So now, why does the E field produce such bad results? At 
http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/ULF/ULFSLFELF.png you can 
see what it receives in the range of interest. The day/night QRN 
difference is higher than on the loops, so the loops seemed to be rather 
deaf. Does it maybe mean a steep reflexion on the ionosphere, so that 
the E field antenna doesn't see it, but the loops do?

Later i've done a DC measurement and got 1 A at 86.5 V, quite much this 
time. Maybe a bad contact somewhere. Will check that.

My 120 Ah LiFePo4 accu is fully recharged and i plan to do a new 
experiment on monday morning, 3 hours before my solar charger starts to 
work :-) The SNR seems to be promising, i plan to send a 5 character 
EbNaut message.

More results and a spectrum peak image will follow.

73, Stefan

--------------090600080704030002090102
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi ULF, <br>
<br>
Today i run a carrier transmission on 970.01 Hz. Start time was 08:05
UTC. The carrier run for 3 hours without an interruption. I got 1.9 A
antenna current on my ground loop antenna, about 320 W DC input to the
PA.<br>
The signal was received on my 3-axis RX on the tree in JN49IK. The
distance was, as usual, 55.6 km.<br>
<br>
So far the results were disappointing. I expected a strong SNR (at
least 10 dB in 424 uHz) from the new E field antenna which seems to
perform very well in the complete ULF range. However the analysis of a
two hour segment of the carrier showed an SNR of 6 dB, i.e. just noise.
However, as i routinely calculated the SNR from the N-S loop i got a
surprising SNR of 13.03 dB in 139.5 uHz.<br>
At about 08:40 UTC the reception on the tree was disturbed by its own
solar charger, just for a few seconds but that was enough to create a
bright vertical line in the 424 uHz spectrogram showing the E field.<br>
<br>
Anyway, i just analysed the full 3 hour segment, only from the N-S loop
(which actually points rather to 30/210 deg) and got the following
result (including processing command line):<br>
<b>vtread -T2018-09-29_08:05,+3h /raw | vtcat -p | vtmix -c0,1,0 |
vtfilter -a th=6 -h lp,f=1500,poles=8 | vtblank -a27 -d0.0005 -t100 |
vtmult -f970.01 | vtresample -r240 | vtresample -r1 | vtraw -oa |
ebnaut -dp8K19A -r1 -c2 -v -f15 -f16 -M'***' -N3 -k20 -S24<br>
carrier phase: -111.2<br>
carrier Eb/N0: 1.9 dB<br>
carrier S/N: 14.25 dB in 93.0 uHz, -26.07 dB in 1Hz, -60.05 dB in 2.5kHz</b><br>
<br>
This is the first far field detection of a 970 Hz signal generated by
amateurs on the 309 km band! A true milestone for me. Since more than a
year it was my goal to cross that far field border on that band. :-)
The efforts were immense.<br>
The result is just preliminary. I want to tweak the parameters for a
higher SNR and try to filter out the short QRM from the charger. <br>
<br>
So now, why does the E field produce such bad results? At
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/ULF/ULFSLFELF.png">http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/ULF/ULFSLFELF.png</a> you can
see what it receives in the range of interest. The day/night QRN
difference is higher than on the loops, so the loops seemed to be
rather deaf. Does it maybe mean a steep reflexion on the ionosphere, so
that the E field antenna doesn't see it, but the loops do?<br>
<br>
Later i've done a DC measurement and got 1 A at 86.5 V, quite much this
time. Maybe a bad contact somewhere. Will check that.<br>
<br>
My 120 Ah LiFePo4 accu is fully recharged and i plan to do a new
experiment on monday morning, 3 hours before my solar charger starts to
work :-) The SNR seems to be promising, i plan to send a 5 character
EbNaut message.<br>
<br>
More results and a spectrum peak image will follow.<br>
<br>
73, Stefan<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------090600080704030002090102--