Return-Path: Received: from mtain-db10.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-db10.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.64.94]) by air-de06.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDE062-5eb74caa617b146; Mon, 04 Oct 2010 19:21:31 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-db10.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id ADD45380000CD; Mon, 4 Oct 2010 19:21:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1P2uK6-0002mD-0f for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 00:19:58 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1P2uK5-0002m4-Dw for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 00:19:57 +0100 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1P2uK4-00025W-35 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 00:19:57 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (cyrus-portal.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.176]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o94NLZQU022432 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 01:21:35 +0200 Received: from extmail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (extmail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.140]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o94NJtB8011586 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 01:19:55 +0200 Received: from [147.142.13.77] (vpn513-077.rzuser.uni-heidelberg.de [147.142.13.77]) by extmail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o94NJUS5013932 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 01:19:30 +0200 Message-ID: <4CAA611C.9050400@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 01:19:56 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <4CA9BDE0.4000601@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <646839.20132.qm@web111910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4CAA4521.6070301@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <455470.92877.qm@web111911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <455470.92877.qm@web111911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,RATWARE_GECKO_BUILD=1.426 Subject: Re: VLF: VLF at different locations and QRN as a function of daytime Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050702060601080400020400" 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=HTML_MESSAGE 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: 3039ac1d405e4caa61793c25 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) --------------050702060601080400020400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de id o94NLZQU022432 Hello Daniele, VLF, Yes, sharing the same usr file could be useful. My grabber is currently=20 covering about 13 hours in the wideband window but 24 hours makes sense=20 i think. The sampling rate should be 48 kS/s since most amateurs have no= =20 'special' and expensive soundcards. If you want i will arrange a suitable usr file? But the time that is=20 covered is a function of the size of your monitor so we should define=20 the capture size in pixels. I am using 980 pixels on my grabber... The next question is the frequency response of differnet RX antennas=20 (due to the design). If the lower cut off frequency is above 6 kHz, it=20 might be difficult t compare. Maybe it is best you and others who want=20 to take part of this idea, just show a capture from 0...24 kHz and some=20 hours (> 10) to get a first impression? 73, Stefan Am 04.10.2010 23:56, schrieb Daniele Tincani: > Hello Stefan, VLF, > would a wide-band capture over 24 hours from my QTH/receiver be of=20 > some interest for you? If so, I think I could be able to send the=20 > results to you by the end of this week or so (hoping batteries last=20 > enough :-)). Probably it could make sense to share the same .usr file=20 > for SpecLab so that to ensure a bit of consistency when comparing=20 > figures from different locations. > My sound card support 96KHz sampling at 24 bits/sample, but I found=20 > that card's noise looks much better when sampling at 48KHz. > Best regards > Daniele > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Stefan Sch=E4fer > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > *Sent:* Mon, October 4, 2010 11:20:33 PM > *Subject:* Re: VLF: VLF at different locations and QRN as a function=20 > of daytime > > Hi Daniele, > > No problem about the callsign ;-) On VLF you don't even need one for=20 > transmitting, hi. > > Oh, you are in JN53EM, i haven't known that. The distance is 707 km!=20 > This is the 3rd best distance at all! Unbelivable, for a antenna in=20 > that location, very fine!!! > > I hope cou can improve your RX situation if this is your goal. > > And i hope i can transmit more meaningful messages the next time ;-) > > 73, Stefan/DK7FC > > Am 04.10.2010 14:57, schrieb Daniele Tincani: >> Hello Stefan, VLF, >> frankly speaking, it is still unbelievable to me that I was able=20 >> to catch a faint trace of your signal and see it appearing on my PC.=20 >> This is because of the intense hum at my location and the=20 >> unsophisticated reception system that I use. Anyway, I'm glad to read= =20 >> your opinion that the screenshot I captured was really showing your=20 >> tx :-) >> I'm also interested in supporting your idea of collecting information= =20 >> about local QRN at different locations. I'm aways looking for=20 >> simple-to-build solutions for improving my setup. May be some helpful= =20 >> information could emerge from this data analysis you are proposing. >> For the time being, these are the information you have requested: the= =20 >> locator is JN53EM. As for the callsign, I'm sorry, I haven't one. I'm= =20 >> only "registered" as a SWL and my identifier is I0169LI=20 >> (http://www.qrz.com/db/I0169LI/). >> Cheers >> Daniele >> >> > --------------050702060601080400020400 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Daniele, VLF,

Yes, sharing the same usr file could be useful. My grabber is currently covering about 13 hours in the wideband window but 24 hours makes sense i think. The sampling rate should be 48 kS/s since most amateurs have no 'special' and expensive soundcards.

If you want i will arrange a suitable usr file? But the time that is covered is a function of the size of your monitor so we should define the capture size in pixels. I am using 980 pixels on my grabber...

The next question is the frequency response of differnet RX antennas (due to the design). If the lower cut off frequency is above 6 kHz, it might be difficult t compare. Maybe it is best you and others who want to take part of this idea, just show a capture from 0...24 kHz and some hours (> 10) to get a first impression?

73, Stefan

Am 04.10.2010 23:56, schrieb Daniele Tincani:
Hello Stefan, VLF,
 
would a wide-band capture over 24 hours from my QTH/receiver be of some interest for you? If so, I think I could be able to send the results to you by the end of this week or so (hoping batteries last enough :-)). Probably it could make sense to share the same .usr file for SpecLab so that to ensure a bit of consistency when comparing figures from different locations.
My sound card support 96KHz sampling at 24 bits/sample, but I found that card's noise looks much better when sampling at 48KHz.
 
Best regards
Daniele

From: Stefan Schäfer <schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Mon, October 4, 2010 11:20:33 PM
Subject: Re: VLF: VLF at different locations and QRN as a function of daytime

Hi Daniele,

No problem about the callsign ;-) On VLF you don't even need one for transmitting, hi.

Oh, you are in JN53EM, i haven't known that. The distance is 707 km! This is the 3rd best distance at all! Unbelivable, for a antenna in that location, very fine!!!

I hope cou can improve your RX situation if this is your goal.

And i hope i can transmit more meaningful messages the next time ;-)

73, Stefan/DK7FC

Am 04.10.2010 14:57, schrieb Daniele Tincani:
Hello Stefan, VLF,
 
frankly speaking, it is still unbelievable to me that I was able to catch a faint trace of your signal and see it appearing on my PC. This is because of the intense hum at my location and the unsophisticated reception system that I use. Anyway, I'm glad to read your opinion that the screenshot I captured was really showing your tx :-)
I'm also interested in supporting your idea of collecting information about local QRN at different locations. I'm aways looking for simple-to-build solutions for improving my setup. May be some helpful information could emerge from this data analysis you are proposing.
For the time being, these are the information you have requested: the locator is JN53EM. As for the callsign, I'm sorry, I haven't one. I'm only "registered" as a SWL and my identifier is I0169LI (http://www.qrz.com/db/I0169LI/).
 
Cheers
Daniele



--------------050702060601080400020400--