Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29806 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2001 16:01:15 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by excalibur-qfe1-smtp-plusnet.harl.plus.net with SMTP; 15 Oct 2001 16:01:15 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 11140 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2001 15:58:59 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 15 Oct 2001 15:58:59 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.33 #2) id 15t9z2-0004zp-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:48:52 +0100 Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 15t9z0-0004zh-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:48:50 +0100 Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id RAA762336 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 17:48:07 +0200 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20011015164621.2d5f4ff8@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:46:21 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: Tree Losses In-reply-to: <5.0.2.1.2.20011015140639.00a2c4a0@mail.pncl.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello Walter, As far as I understand trees (dry or wet) do not shield on LF but they absorb RF energy. So instead of comparing them with a metal plate (as on VHF and up) one can better compare them with a lossy capacitor. Regarding the distance : the further the better, but if you can keep the trees further away than 2 times the hight of your antenna you might avoid the worst losses (the largest capacitance should be between the antenna and ground, not between the antenna and the trees). If you have trees close to the antenna try to keep the wire as far as possible away from the greenery. Close to the antenna (near field) the electric field decreases with the square of the distance, so despite a wavelength of over 2000m every inch can count ! Since antennas work reciprocal I would expect that trees will also absorb a part of the 'incoming' EM-signals, but that should be a much less problem as not only the usefull signals will be absorbed but also QRM/QRN, leaving the SNR unchanged (unless you come close to your RX noisefloor, rather unlikely on LF). 73, Rik ON7YD At 14:15 15/10/01 +0100, you wrote: >At 73/136 khz how far away from a wet tree do you have to be not to see >any RF loss? At one extreme if your ant runs through it you will lose a >lot; at the other if it is several kms away you won't lose anything. Is >there a critical distance? And the reverse - if there's a wet tree close >to you in the same direction as a transmitter, will you receive a much >weaker signal than you ought? Does it act like a metal plate does at >microwaves? > >Walter G3JKV. > > >