Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mc04.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mc04.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.96.76]) by air-de07.mail.aol.com (v126.13) with ESMTP id MAILINDE074-5ebd4b6218bdf9; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:07:41 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-mc04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id B131B38000108; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:07:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1NadRJ-0004NL-7e for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 23:06:17 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1NadRI-0004NC-KQ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 23:06:16 +0000 Received: from mailout.toya.net.pl ([217.113.224.27] ident=postfix) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NadRG-00037W-Oa for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 23:06:16 +0000 Received: from mail.toya.net.pl (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.toya.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9566F20000065 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:06:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.103] (unknown [10.3.148.9]) (Authenticated sender: unimlyn) by mail.toya.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7BBB220000059 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:06:13 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4B621864.3030501@toya.net.pl> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:06:12 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGlvdHIgTcWCeW5hcnNraQ==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <004601ca9c46$6ef58b70$0217aac0@desktop> <1f0624b91001230856l62764f1cre510f71bd30d571b@mail.gmail.com> <20100123214413.ecsvgz9en4c080og@webmail6.kuleuven.be> <1f0624b91001231330x4a161aa6o583cc7e0e72589e1@mail.gmail.com> <20100123230642.5qgacajt6o04g04s@webmail6.kuleuven.be> In-Reply-To: <20100123230642.5qgacajt6o04g04s@webmail6.kuleuven.be> X-AV-Checked: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: LF: Signal strengths, WSPR reports , propagation Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d604c4b6218bb5c5d X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Dear Rik, James,LF group it is going to be long.... sorry... Some time ago Jim, G7NKS began a new topic on this reflector. it was about a link budget for wspr at given distance. Recently, Rik, ON7YD has made a nice thing i.e. comparing reception levels of three stations using a 'small statistics' - that is exactly what wspr stands for. investigations of propagation paths, limits etc... Being 'triggered' by these two mails and , additionaly, by a phrase 'mill' used by Rik which translated into polish sounds very much like my surname ( Mlynarski) Mlyn=mill :) I started to think about the estimate of an effective electric field 'felt' by RX station. Later, I will use Rik's collected data as numerical example. Due to the enormous and variable noise at my qth my reception data is not appropriate and lacks some stations. I like to do such 'guesstimates' almost from the scratch, so let me start from the 'basics' i.e. classical electrodynamics which states that in a free space the power P radiated by an isotropic antenna in a distance R has its density: D=P/(4*pi*R*R). On the other hand, the mean magnitude of a Poynting vector (D) can be expressed by an electric field: D = E*E/(2*120*pi) ( 120pi = 377ohm=impedance of a free space) Combining these two one gets that the amplitude of an electric field E equals: E = sqrt(60*P)/R. if R is in [km] then E is expressed in miliVolts/metr, P is in Watts. I assume that we are dealing with a short vertical monopole so following Rik's explanations ( veeery useful post to the reflector! ) its directivity gain is 3 but as the power in wspr reports is given as ERP power so it must be multiplied by a factor of 1.64 in order to replace power P (isotropic) in the last formula by ERP*1.64 , where "ERP" is the reported erp power. Also, we can multiply E by 0.707 to get the effective signal strength E(eff): E(eff) = 0.707*sqrt(60*ERP*1.64)/R I focus ONLY on the ionospheric propagation and 1 hop. At the night, the absorption of incoming wave (500kHz) to the ionosphere is really small so , at first approximation, can be simply ommited and we are left now with relatively simple geometric considearations with further assumption that the distance between station a (TX) and station b (RX) is not an earth arc but a straight line, segment. {sure, it can be done more precisely taking into account mean earth radius etc...) The wave is propagating from TX antenna with an elevation(take-off) angle alfa, the reflection takes place in E layer, say, 120 km above earth (H) and the distance between stations a and b is "d". At the RX place we are interested in the vertical component of incoming reflected wave being doubled by reflection from the earth and assumed antenna characteristic is described by a certain function A(theta) {theta= usual notation of one of the angles in spherical coordinate system) In the case of a short vertical monopole: A(theta) = sine(theta) = cosine(alfa) so we have: E(eff) = E(eff)*2*cos(alfa)*cos(alfa) R in formula for E(eff) becomes: sqrt(d*d + 4*H*H) and cos(alfa) = d/sqrt(d*d + 4*H*H) (in the course of programming it is convenient to multiply E(eff) by 1000 thus getting the values in microVolts/m) The above final formula gives real values of an effective signal strength. It is a 'product' of fundamental physics and simple geometric considerations. Obviously, there is an ample room for improvements but as i am not a radio-comm specialist i just do not know how to make it - some reflection losses, absorption attenuation which both seem to be frequency and (probably) time dependent etc.. Anyway, here comes 'numerical'side.. I took Rik's qth as RX station and the values of erp power as reported in wspr database ( or e-mails) by the TX stations: G4JNT: 420 km and 200 miliWatts of ERP pwr G3ZJO: 411 km 0.2 mW G3XBM: 337 km 1 mW H = 120 km ( the height of reflection point) (have found in literature it is 110-120 km on average) calculated values of E(eff) are: G4JNT: 9.777 microVolt/m G3ZJO: 0.311 G3XBM: 0.711 calculated relative differences of signal strengths: (first, 'left', stations are favored) G4JNT-G3XBM: 22.77 dB G4JNT-G3ZJO: 29.95 dB G3XBM-G3ZJO: 7.18 dB Now, the same differences made by Rik (night receptions, wspr readouts, averages etc..) G4JNT-G3XBM: 15 dB G4JNT-G3ZJO: 23 dB G3XBM-G3ZJO: 8 dB In the case of Roger,"Water Pistol", G3XBM and Eddie, "Dripping Tap", G3ZJO theory and experiment are fairly consistent if Andy, "Big Gun", G4JNT had run only 40 mW ERP then his E(eff) would be 4.372 microVolt/m so then the calculated diferences: G4JNT-G3XBM: 15.78 dB G4JNT-G3ZJO: 22.96 dB (pretty nice matching..) Final conclusion: "Big Gun" shrinks ! :) Yours, Piotr, sq7mpj qth: Lodz /jo91rs/