Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Received: from rly-md05.mx.aol.com (rly-md05.mail.aol.com [172.20.29.143]) by air-md02.mail.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILINMD021-9074ad6dc2c201; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:24:27 -0400
Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-md05.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMD057-9074ad6dc2c201; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:24:14 -0400
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14)
id 1MyLc4-0004nv-Ga
for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:23:08 +0100
Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net)
by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14)
id 1MyLc3-0004nm-Qg
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:23:07 +0100
Received: from smtp137.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.107.120])
by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.63)
(envelope-from <ken.h.wright@btinternet.com>)
id 1MyLaX-0006La-Kq
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:21:34 +0100
Received: (qmail 90804 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2009 08:22:48 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=btinternet.com;
h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MIMEOLE;
b=0YWMQ1X6uv7VrZ8rVUTzWu6ZiyUqE0ZMaQ9awf45bZRGC32mhPpHYaNje1mdFLLOMXv3ADRdmXdLK1WtYduEsPYZ3uN/64/CMRhEVLnXEZdZC2+6y5v2MRglVmXo166XOhiAXsZBT2Y5vTvaWK8ki36lh93r32oX9zCLa0ed93E= ;
Received: from host86-134-101-34.range86-134.btcentralplus.com (ken.h.wright@86.134.101.34 with login)
by smtp137.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Oct 2009 01:22:48 -0700 PDT
X-Yahoo-SMTP: 9Y6mUHuswBAgnrOsukIiNdFDf95uy_Dz34nY1hlg2liKgYD952sjbg--
X-YMail-OSG: DlmASdIVM1mI8sHwZdpNOoFxZr..S1T0dKPLofIrxbRUI7UaEap7wgZKr2X12WtbA577r2Fgc54bkhQ0nP5cndSsq7RkJRcNFtGfjNBse2_ILQH7DMYWzxbMDEVVtYLPY5RAPr2EX3Kr7S1JIo_w7xH.COQiKcD9G3c1fu5XsFkjdrgx2.gbjcTSZs2zl7wWR4Z_WDi_E_k5pKeHA7.OasSUt7kYJENNcZmaP341_sRMBkwMGyQi4.fUH05xrBQLLxOFicG1pRdM6jgnXGKFMdhMSBG7Xb1G8Rfq.iX_92IAQUwjzw1Gbaonu__7pZOdWP9tUTpGWzsELQt0UR4d1PVhym_IYq1DDme9QdFSTYobKGlqGEcn_K1E9iA784qrHTPFjUqzHlIIiX_6gtjJfCbb
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
Message-ID: <AE858F0BD147442BA7A92DD3FA30FC22@lindavideo>
From: "Ken" <ken.h.wright@btinternet.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <734614.81731.qm@web28102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:22:46 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
DomainKey-Status: good (testing)
Subject: Re: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA4D79.0ED349B0"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,
HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY autolearn=no version=2.63
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-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20
------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA4D79.0ED349B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Pete.
Having a weak DSL signal, how does your 500kHz TX output affect the DS=
L synchronisation?. I am in a similar position, and my 500kHz TX 100mW=
ERP cw causes complete loss of synchronisation dispite copious use of=
common mode filters.
73.
Ken
M0KHW
----- Original Message -----=20
From: M0FMT=20
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 1:36 PM
Subject: RE: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise
Hi LF group
Thank you Jim and Laurence for you interest and information.
Lifting this from Wikipedia ....... "With standard ADSL (annex=
A), the band from 25.875 kHz to 138 kHz is used for upstream communic=
ation, while 138 kHz =E2=80=93 1104 kHz is used for downstream communi=
cation" .......=20
Jim is right about 136 and I find the band unaffected it is in=
a dead spot in the ADSL spectrum, assuming its clean of course.
I have considered filters that are advertised but since we hav=
e a weak ADSL signal here, easily knocked out by Amateur TX on virtual=
ly any band I felt that a filter would make things worse in that respe=
ct. The reasoning being that a filter notch sitting right in the middl=
e of the down stream channel would adversely affect the down load time=
s which are only a tad better than dial up here. I may make something=
and try it, thanks for putting that idea into the mix.
It doesn't help that my antenna runs above the BT line (at rig=
ht angles) to my neighbours place but having said that trials at the=
furthest distance from the line using a frame ant and battery run RX=
things were no better. However I did not earth the LW that I will try=
next time.
Thanks to all for the inputs I have filed them for reference.
73 petefmt
--- On Wed, 14/10/09, Laurence BY3A-KL1X China <hellozerohello=
zero@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Laurence BY3A-KL1X China <hellozerohellozero@hotmail.c=
om>
Subject: RE: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Wednesday, 14 October, 2009, 3:39 AM
I had the same problem on 500 up in KL7 at home. I ended up=
moving the modem to the garage where the telephone line comes out of=
the ground and keeping the ADSL loaded wiring as short as possible -=
then on the telephone side of the router I connected up a pair of=
reasonable quality of seried ADSL filters outbound for normal telepho=
ne wiring in the house. From 20 over noise I cant "see it" now as the=
big antennae has been chocked off. I only use wireless around the pro=
perty so it wasnt an issue.
=20
Next job is to choke off the noise from the AC power line co=
ming out of the ground - its awful.
=20
relates to MTA Palmer Alaska solutions ADSL
=20
Laurence KL 1 X
=20
> From: james.moritz@btopenworld.com
> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:10:53 +0100
> Subject: Re: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise
>=20
> Dear Pete, Paul-Henrik,
>=20
> M0FMT wrote:
> ....> Well I can only conclude it is ADSL because it is ju=
st raising the=20
> noise floor it is very subtle not really identifiable like=
say TV LTB, it's=20
> a mush...>
>=20
> I have problems with ADSL on 500kHz at my QTH - it sounds=
like "white noise"=20
> with no audible distinctive features I can detect. The noi=
se can be about=20
> 10 - 20dB over the band noise here over a fairly wide band=
width in the MF=20
> range. It does not seem to be a problem at 136k, perhaps=
because this is in=20
> the guard band between upstream and downstream ADSL signal=
s. It is easy to=20
> tell if you are experiencing noise from your own ADSL conn=
ection -=20
> disconnect the incoming phone line (probably just unpluggi=
ng the modem from=20
> the phone socket will be enough) and there will be a reduc=
tion in noise=20
> level. Unfortunately, there also seems to be a significant=
level of similar=20
> noise here from other sources, probably my neighbors' ADSL=
via the overhead=20
> phone lines.
>=20
> I have had some success with a noise-cancelling arrangemen=
t here, where the=20
> ADSL noise is sampled using a current transformer made by=
passing the=20
> incoming phone line through a ferrite core, and summed wit=
h the signal from=20
> loop antennas via a variable phase-shifting and gain-adjus=
ting network,=20
> which is adjusted for a null in the noise. Also, moving th=
e loop around the=20
> QTH shows some positions are better than others. Actually,=
life is a bit=20
> more complicated at this particular QTH, since there also=
seems to be=20
> wide-band noise originating as very low-level sidebands fr=
om the local=20
> broadcast stations. This requires a second noise-cancellin=
g network to null=20
> noise from that direction. Also, it was necessary to inser=
t a relay in=20
> series with the loading coil to disconnect the TX antenna=
on receive,=20
> otherwise this coupled more noise into the receiving anten=
nas. But when it=20
> is all adjusted properly, the overall noise level can be=
reduced in=20
> favourable directions by about 20dB, which is worth doing.
>=20
> Cheers, Jim Moritz
> 73 de M0BMU=20
>=20
>=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft=E2=80=99s powerful SPA=
M protection. Sign up now. =20
------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA4D79.0ED349B0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8" http-equiv=3DContent-Type=
>
<META name=3DGENERATOR content=3D"MSHTML 8.00.6001.18812"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2 face=3DArial>Hi Pete.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2 face=3DArial>Having a weak DSL signal, how does yo=
ur 500kHz TX=20
output affect the DSL synchronisation?. I am in a similar position, an=
d my=20
500kHz TX 100mW ERP cw causes complete loss of synchronisation dispite=
copious=20
use of common mode filters.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2 face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2 face=3DArial>73.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2 face=3DArial>Ken</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2 face=3DArial>M0KHW</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT:=
5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color:=
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dm0fmt@yahoo.co.uk href=3D"mailto:m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk">M0FMT=
</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=3Drsgb_lf_group@=
blacksheep.org href=3D"mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org">rsgb_l=
f_group@blacksheep.org</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 14,=
2009 1:36=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: LF: MOFMT ADSL=
noise</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<TABLE border=3D0 cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=3Dtop>
<DIV>Hi LF group</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thank you Jim and Laurence for you interest and informati=
on.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Lifting this from Wikipedia ....... "With standard ADSL=
(annex A),=20
the band from 25.875 <A class=3Dmw-redirect title=3DKHz=
href=3D"http://uk.mc281.mail.yahoo.com/wiki/KHz">kHz</A> to=
138 kHz=20
is used for upstream communication, while 138 kHz =E2=80=
=93 1104 kHz=20
is used for downstream communication" ....... </DIV>
<DIV>Jim is right about 136 and I find the band unaffected it=
is=20
in a dead spot in the ADSL spectrum, assuming its clean=
of=20
course.</DIV>
<DIV>I have considered filters that are advertised but since=
we have a=20
weak ADSL signal here, easily knocked out by Amateur TX on vir=
tually any=20
band I felt that a filter would make things worse in that resp=
ect. The=20
reasoning being that a filter notch sitting right in the middl=
e of the=20
down stream channel would adversely affect the down load times=
which are=20
only a tad better than dial up here. I may make something and=
try it,=20
thanks for putting that idea into the mix.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It doesn't help that my antenna runs above the BT line (a=
t right=20
angles) to my neighbours place but having said that trial=
s at the=20
furthest distance from the line using a frame ant and battery=
run RX=20
things were no better. However I did not earth the LW tha=
t I will=20
try next time.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks to all for the inputs I have filed them for refere=
nce.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>73 <SPAN>petefmt</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--- On <B>Wed, 14/10/09, Laurence BY3A-KL1X China=20
<I><hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></=
DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px=
solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From:=20
Laurence BY3A-KL1X China=20
<hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com><BR>Subject: RE: LF:=
MOFMT ADSL=20
noise<BR>To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org<BR>Date: Wednesday=
, 14=20
October, 2009, 3:39 AM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyiv2024690703>
<STYLE>#yiv2024690703 .hmmessage P {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT=
: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
#yiv2024690703 {
FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt
}
</STYLE>
I had the same problem on 500 up in KL7 at home. I ended up=
moving=20
the modem to the garage where the telephone line comes=
out of the=20
ground and keeping the ADSL loaded wiring as short as possib=
le -=20
then on the telephone side of the router I=
connected=20
up a pair of reasonable quality of seried ADSL filters =
outbound=20
for normal telephone wiring in the house. From 20 over=
noise I=20
cant "see it" now as the big antennae has been cho=
cked off.=20
I only use wireless around the property so it wasnt an=20
issue.<BR> <BR>Next job is to choke off the noise from=
the AC=20
power line coming out of the ground - its awful.<BR> <B=
R>relates=20
to MTA Palmer Alaska solutions ADSL<BR><BR> <BR>Laurenc=
e KL 1=20
X<BR> <BR>> From: james.moritz@btopenworld.com<BR>&g=
t; To:=20
rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org<BR>> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009=
23:10:53=20
+0100<BR>> Subject: Re: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise<BR>> <BR>=
> Dear=20
Pete, Paul-Henrik,<BR>> <BR>> M0FMT wrote:<BR>> ...=
.> Well=20
I can only conclude it is ADSL because it is just raising th=
e <BR>>=20
noise floor it is very subtle not really identifiable like=
say TV LTB,=20
it's <BR>> a mush...><BR>> <BR>> I have problems=
with ADSL=20
on 500kHz at my QTH - it sounds like "white noise" <BR>>=
with no=20
audible distinctive features I can detect. The noise can be=
about=20
<BR>> 10 - 20dB over the band noise here over a fairly wi=
de=20
bandwidth in the MF <BR>> range. It does not seem to be=
a problem=20
at 136k, perhaps because this is in <BR>> the guard band=
between=20
upstream and downstream ADSL signals. It is easy to <BR>>=
tell if=20
you are experiencing noise from your own ADSL connection -=
<BR>>=20
disconnect the incoming phone line (probably just unplugging=
the modem=20
from <BR>> the phone socket will be enough) and there wil=
l be a=20
reduction in noise <BR>> level. Unfortunately, there also=
seems to=20
be a significant level of similar <BR>> noise here from=
other=20
sources, probably my neighbors' ADSL via the overhead <BR>&g=
t; phone=20
lines.<BR>> <BR>> I have had some success with a=20
noise-cancelling arrangement here, where the <BR>> ADSL=
noise is=20
sampled using a current transformer made by passing the <BR>=
>=20
incoming phone line through a ferrite core, and summed with=
the signal=20
from <BR>> loop antennas via a variable phase-shifting an=
d=20
gain-adjusting network, <BR>> which is adjusted for a nul=
l in the=20
noise. Also, moving the loop around the <BR>> QTH shows=
some=20
positions are better than others. Actually, life is a bit <B=
R>>=20
more complicated at this particular QTH, since there also se=
ems to be=20
<BR>> wide-band noise originating as very low-level sideb=
ands from=20
the local <BR>> broadcast stations. This requires a secon=
d=20
noise-cancelling network to null <BR>> noise from that di=
rection.=20
Also, it was necessary to insert a relay in <BR>> series=
with the=20
loading coil to disconnect the TX antenna on receive, <BR>&g=
t;=20
otherwise this coupled more noise into the receiving antenna=
s. But=20
when it <BR>> is all adjusted properly, the overall noise=
level can=20
be reduced in <BR>> favourable directions by about 20dB,=
which is=20
worth doing.<BR>> <BR>> Cheers, Jim Moritz<BR>> 73=
de M0BMU=20
<BR>> <BR>> <BR><BR>
<HR>
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft=E2=80=99s powerful SPA=
M protection. <A href=3D"http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/17714=
1664/direct/01/" rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank>Sign up no=
w.</A>=20
</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY=
></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA4D79.0ED349B0--