From: james.cowburn@virgin.net
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 09:20:57 +0100
Message-ID: <sb4QjpK05cRJ.NK7ZjcCD@smtp.virgin.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: i-default
Subject: Re: LF: AW: 8.97kHz - Near field and radiated signals?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Hi roger why dont you get him digging? :-)

-original message-
Subject: Re: LF: AW: 8.97kHz - Near field and radiated signals?
From: Roger Lapthorn <rogerlapthorn@gmail.com>
Date: 25/05/2010 9:10 am

Yes, the loop will null the signal when turned 90 degrees but the signal=
 was
strong enough yesterday to be copied, just, when the loop was in its worst
orientation some 300m away from the TX. In my view this supports the theor=
y
that the grounded electrodes act as a loop in the ground.

Things I need to try are:

   1. Improving the loop receiver to reject 50Hz interference better and
   provide narrower selectivity.
   2. Elevating the connecting wires to the TX electrodes to see if this
   increases the loop area making the signal stronger in the distant near
   field.
   3. Replacing the TX electrode pair with a single turn loop with as much
   area as possible and check if signal levels increase. I wonder what siz=
e
   loop gives the same signal level at maximum range?
   4. Seeing if the signal can be received as strong by grounded electrode=
s
   at 0.4km, or greater, range.
   5. TXing /P with a longer baseline electrode pair (100m or more) in the
   nearby field.
   6. Trying for reception with a voltage probe antenna.
   7. Increasing range using an up-converter or direct conversion RX with
   better 50Hz rejection and selectivity.
   8. Plotting the signal strengths in a full 360 degree sweep around the=
 TX
   to get some better idea of the signal levels in other directions includ=
ing
   in the line of the electrode pair as well as orthogonally.
   9. Increasing the TX power by at least 10dB.
   10. Trying a vertical antenna and feeding it via a TV transformer.
   11. Seeing the impact on range of moving to 8.97kHz.
   12. Reception with PC software, TXing with QRSS.
   13. etc etc....

So, for something so basic there is a LOT still to explore!

>From Friday I have our grandson staying for over a week, so experiments wi=
ll
have to stop during this period.

73s
Roger G3XBM



On 25 May 2010 08:00, Rik Strobbe <Rik.Strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be> wrote:

>  Hello Roger,
>
> as you mention the setup is far from perfect, so it is quite facinating
> that you can hear it with very simple means up to 400m.
> I guess that by increasing power, optimize antenna matching, moving to
> 9kHz and improving the RX you can improve the signal by many 10's dB.
> I am still wondering how an earth current antenna really works. I have=
 read
> an article that claimed that such an antenna was an underground loop. In
> that case changing the height of the wire connecting the ground stakes=
 (eg.
> from 20cm to 2m) should have very little effect on the signal strength.
> Did you try to "null out" the signal with the RX loop ?
>
> 73, Rik  ON7YD
>
>  ------------------------------
> *Van:* owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [
> owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] namens Roger Lapthorn [
> rogerlapthorn@gmail.com]
> *Verzonden:* maandag 24 mei 2010 22:53
>
> *Aan:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> *Onderwerp:* Re: LF: AW: 8.97kHz - Near field and radiated signals?
>
>  Yes Rik, my current earth-mode tests are around 1kHz so the signal is
> audible in my crystal earpiece. My TX consists of a TDA2003 fed by a 1kH=
z
> oscillator keyed every second, so I hear a distinctive "beep,   beep,
> beep..." at the RX end.
>
> I measured the DC resistance between the (original) TX electrodes as aro=
und
> 40-60 ohms and I use a toroidal step-up transformer to achieve rough
> matching. At the RX end the loop is untuned. When using an up-converter=
 or
> direct conversion receiver (such as M0BMUs) I will try at 8.97kHz as wel=
l. I
> still have a LOT to do to optimise the receive system before I try QRSS=
 or
> WSPR to extend range.
>
> It's all basic, low tech, stuff but it is such fun, HI.
>
> 73s
> Roger G3XBM
>
> On 24 May 2010 21:37, Rik Strobbe <Rik.Strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be> wrote:
>
>>  Hello Roger,
>>
>> interesting.
>> Did I read it correct that your transmit frequency is 1kHz instead of=
 9kHz
>> ?
>> I gues that also ground antennas become more efficient at higher
>> frequencies.
>> How did you match the antenna ?
>>
>> 73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *Van:* owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [
>> owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] namens Roger Lapthorn [
>> rogerlapthorn@gmail.com]
>> *Verzonden:* maandag 24 mei 2010 22:28
>> *Aan:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>> *Onderwerp:* Re: LF: AW: 8.97kHz - Near field and radiated signals?
>>
>>    Attached is a map showing how far I managed on 1kHz earth mode this
>> evening. Green is strong RS56 signals and orange is just copied RS33
>> signals, by ear. TX power 4W + 20m base electrodes, RX 80cm loop.
>>
>> 73s
>> Roger G3XBM
>>
>> On 24 May 2010 20:36, Roger Lapthorn <rogerlapthorn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Horst.
>>>
>>> I'll try a Marconi antenna at some point, although my space is limited=
 to
>>> little more than the antenna I used on 500kHz (a top loaded 5m vertica=
l).
>>>
>>> This evening I extended the TX electrode spacings by connecting one en=
d
>>> to the copper pipes in the house, almost doubling the effective TX bas=
eline
>>> to about 20m. With this, my "earth mode" signals were *much* stronger
>>> and I was able to cover further than before in a "by ear" walk-about=
 test
>>> around the fields.  Ultimate range tonight was 0.4kms using 4W (probab=
ly
>>> less as the TDA2003 was hot and probably turning down the power) and
>>> receiving on an 80cm loop. active HPF, small AF amp and crystal earpie=
ce.
>>> Range was limited by 50Hz mains hum and background sferic noise. I mus=
t try
>>> this set-up with my HF up-converter and FT817 this week which has good
>>> rejection of 50Hz  (and its harmonics) mains hum and a narrow CW filte=
r.
>>>
>>> 73s
>>> Roger G3XBM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24 May 2010 18:18, Horst St=C3=B6cker <horst.stoecker@web.de> wrote=
:
>>>
>>>> Hello Roger, Dreamers,
>>>> if we define near field as < 2 lambda we are talking about everything
>>>> below 60 km.With this distance I woul be extremely lucky.
>>>> I also do "walkaround tests" near my garden. But I bet only in the fl=
at
>>>> field one can see what is possible with small antenna an without a bi=
g
>>>> loading coil.
>>>> Out from my garden I tried my 10h/20t Marconi as well as a 30m earth
>>>> base. The Marconi worked better, but not good enough. A TV transforme=
r (must
>>>> be flyback of course) made it much better.
>>>> But all the trees and houses are coupling the radiated signal to eart=
h
>>>> and also the AATIS-RX is very much influenced by them.
>>>> I also assume that the horinontal parts of a wire do the same. So onl=
y a
>>>> vertical should work.
>>>> For operation in city environment smaller antennas at the roof top (o=
ld
>>>> CB antennas) will possibly work better than the bigger vertical in my=
 garden
>>>> between trees and houses at ground level. It might be worth a test.
>>>> One of the next tests will be with my gig earth base. I have collecte=
d
>>>> about 800m of surplus wire. Possibly this is another way to even radi=
ate
>>>> more then near field. But I would be very surprised it this was good=
 for any
>>>> DX.
>>>> I bet Stefans kite antenna will at least be the only way to DX
>>>> operation. Unfortunately this is just portable and just temporary.
>>>> vy73 Horst DO1KHS/DI2AN
>>>>
>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>> *Von:* Roger Lapthorn <rogerlapthorn@gmail.com>
>>>> *Gesendet:* 24.05.2010 18:36:28
>>>>
>>>> *An:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>>>>  *Betreff:* Re: LF: AW: 8.97kHz - Near field and radiated signals?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your fast reply Stefan.
>>>>
>>>> In answer to your questions:
>>>>
>>>>    - Currently, my *TX electrode spacing is 10m*, which is the best=
 I
>>>>    can manage in my small garden. Both electrodes are as far away fro=
m the
>>>>    mains and other utility services as I can manage.
>>>>    - I have *not tried /P* transmit testing yet.
>>>>    - My *nearest ham who will listen/look is 3kms away*, but using
>>>>    beaconing I am able to go out myself and see how far I can reach.=
 This is
>>>>    what I have done so far, going out into the fields behind my house=
 with
>>>>    electrode pairs or a loop receiver. Best (by ear reception) DX is=
 0.35kms,
>>>>    but the system has much scope for optimisation still.
>>>>    - The largest single turn loop I could erect in my garden would be
>>>>    about 50-70 sq m (about 15m top and 4m-5m high). The longest anten=
na length
>>>>    would also be 15m horizontal with some vertical section(s) too.
>>>>    - The best DX targets are quite modest: I would like to exceed 1km
>>>>    initially with the TX power I currently have (around 4W). If I cou=
ld reach
>>>>    G6ALB in the next village 3kms away I would be delighted. If I got=
 any
>>>>    further I would be both amazed and VERY happy!
>>>>
>>>> 73s
>>>> Roger G3XBM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2010/5/24 Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer <schaefer@hst.tu-darmstadt.de>
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Roger,
>>>>>
>>>>> For your ground electrodes, ground electrodes may be the best "anten=
na"
>>>>> in some 10...10m. I'm not sure how to calculate field strengths but=
 i just
>>>>> know about the 1/d^3 dependency, so twice the distance means 8 times=
 the
>>>>> power for the same signal reception, in the near field. But it is th=
e
>>>>> question what are the electrodes since there is ever a coupling to=
 the mains
>>>>> earth and all the metallic stuff in regions where people are living=
 so this
>>>>> dependency might not be valid in your tests. As mentioned here, you=
 could
>>>>> benefit from these conductors...
>>>>>
>>>>> But if you want to reach more distance with an antenna of the same=
 size
>>>>> (e.g. of your garden)and the same power, you could try such a TV
>>>>> transformer. Take a wire, as long as possible and as high as possibl=
e, and
>>>>> apply some kV on it by this transformer. It can even be resonated by
>>>>> adjusting the air gap between the both ferrite parts. That results=
 in a
>>>>> maximum output voltage and thus "ERP". At least this would be a good
>>>>> alternative to your ground electrode tests. You could easily compare=
 the
>>>>> reachable distances. Here i would use a E field antenna for receptio=
n in the
>>>>> near field.
>>>>>
>>>>> How far is your next receiving amateur radio station away? And have=
 you
>>>>> tried to do such tests outside the village/city, just like Jim does=
 it with
>>>>> his loop antenna? This could allow you to increase the distance of=
 your
>>>>> reception. Here, space is not limited and you could try 2x10m, 2x50m=
, 2x100m
>>>>> and so on and tell us the difference in the feed point impedance at=
 various
>>>>> frequencies and your ODX :-) Maybe i will also do some ground electr=
ode
>>>>> tests in summer but i am still not sure. The complete receiver of Ji=
m is a
>>>>> really good idea to check the QRM situation at a given QTH. Probably=
 i will
>>>>> also buit his loop design for such tests... Would be interesing what=
 is the
>>>>> maximum distance for a CW reception of my transmitted signal (with=
 the kite
>>>>> antenna and 6mW ERP) ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I will also do some near field tests in this week, to compare the
>>>>> performance of my 2 grabbers. This will be done here:
>>>>> http://www.google.de/maps?f=3Dq&source=3Ds_q&hl=3Dde&geocode=3D&q=3D=
heiligenberg+heidelberg&sll=3D47.820666,9.312449&sspn=3D0.106733,0.219383&=
g=3Dheiligenberg&ie=3DUTF8&hq=3D&hnear=3DHeiligenberg&ll=3D49.419391,8.704=
101&spn=3D0.001616,0.003428&t=3Dh&z=3D18in about 1,8km distance to my grab=
bers. Power will also be below 100W and
>>>>> the antenna wire will be mounted on a tower in abt 15m height. I wil=
l
>>>>> transmit with this TV transformer on a 40m wire.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roger, what size is your garden? What is the maximum wire length tha=
t
>>>>> you can apply and in which height? What is your goal (best DX, a rea=
ls QSO
>>>>> with the next equipped station or just do some funny tests?)
>>>>>
>>>>> So, wish you fun and success with your experiments!
>>>>>
>>>>> 73, Stefan/DK7FC
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: What is your locator / QTH?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
>>>> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
>>>> G3XBM    GQRP 1678      ISWL G11088
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    NEU: WEB.DE DSL f=C3=BCr 19,99 EUR/mtl. und ohne Mindest-Laufzeit!
>>>> http://produkte.web.de/go/02/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
>>> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
>>> http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
>>> G3XBM    GQRP 1678      ISWL G11088
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
>> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
>> http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
>> G3XBM    GQRP 1678      ISWL G11088
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
> http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
> G3XBM    GQRP 1678      ISWL G11088
>



--=20
http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
G3XBM    GQRP 1678      ISWL G11088