Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-df02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 1AF70380000AF for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 12:33:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Rt070-0006rg-0g for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:06:18 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Rt06z-0006rX-BL for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:06:17 +0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Rt06y-00050M-01 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:06:17 +0000 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q12H6E1u016377 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:06:14 +0100 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id q12H6ERi019805 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:06:14 +0100 Message-ID: <4F2AC269.7090605@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:05:45 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000001cce062$f75dfad0$e619f070$@broadpark.no> <8CEAED202205706-C78-2162B@webmail-stg-m04.sysops.aol.com> <4F2929BD.4070308@charter.net> <4F2946AE.6040205@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: <4F2946AE.6040205@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_10_20=0.945,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,RATWARE_GECKO_BUILD=1.426 Subject: VLF: Progress using WOLF on VLF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050306080300070602090109" 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-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:442956704:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40d64f2ac8da0fb7 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050306080300070602090109 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 q12H6E1u016377 VLF, Yesterday in the night i tried some further tests on VLF, Dreamers-Band,=20 *8970 Hz*, using the WOLF 10 mode. An active E field probe was used on=20 my home QTH which is *950 m distant* to my work, where the fixed antenna=20 (used for LF) was used to transmit on. That's not really a remarkable=20 DX, not even in the far field. Anyway, it was fun and keeps me promising. In contrast to the usual VLF work that is done from local fixed=20 antennas, where "only" a few dashes are visible on the grabbers, i hope=20 to cover some distance with this mode, where a full call and locator and=20 something like 73, 55, CU, GL, TU... can be sent. In contrast to e.g.=20 WSPR, what was reported to be about as "good" as QRSS-3 i want to give=20 this mode a chance on VLF, as an exception. Maybe it helps me a bit to=20 understand why so many LFers like the data modes, hi. ;-) The receive site in the yesterdays test showed a quite good spectrum! To=20 my surprise there is much less QRM at home. Here is a photo which shows=20 the wideband situation during the test using the WOLF10 mode:=20 http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/VLF/Wideband%20at%20home%20in%203Hz%20FF= T%20bin%20width.png The TX was the LOPT driven by a more than suboptimal working class AB=20 PA. The output voltage didn't really look like a sine wave but seemed to=20 contain the wanted spectrum as well ;-) The PA took about 3 W input=20 power and the PA efficiency must have been terrible. But the results=20 were fine and so its worth (for me) to optimise things to gain at least=20 10 dB output power. The signal wasn't visible in the WOLF gui spectrogram. Since its a=20 spread spectrum it may not be useful to try to display it in QRSS-60 or=20 slower. The first decode appeared after about 6 minutes. 2012-02-01 23:26:43 >WOLF10 -r 22050 -f 8970 -*t 0.3* -w 0.0000 -ut 23:27:07 f: 0.175 a:-0.9 dp: 73.4 ci: 3 cj: 66 LTEA6I*44POZVOC ? 23:27:31 f: 0.180 a:-1.1 dp: 69.2 ci: 4 cj:469 AESB3A64IHMY91V ? 23:28:19 f: 0.176 a:-0.9 dp: 66.5 ci: 0 cj:348 XETAVDCFKFJ/6ZL ? 23:29:55 f: 0.273 pm:1.216 jm:407 q:-13.2 -8.6 TFVIM68HW6GXMMB ? 23:31:31 f:-0.127 pm:2.044 jm:741 q: -5.4 -6.2 71DU8HVLDJN49IK - 23:33:07 f:-0.127 pm:3.457 jm:741 q: -4.3 -5.2 73 DK7FC JN49IK - 23:34:43 f:-0.127 pm:5.364 jm:741 q: -3.0 -3.5 73 DK7FC JN49IK - 23:36:19 f:-0.127 pm:5.745 jm:741 q: -1.8 -2.3 73 DK7FC JN49IK - 23:37:55 f:-0.127 pm:6.250 jm:741 q: -0.9 -1.6 73 DK7FC JN49IK - 23:39:31 f:-0.127 pm:7.205 jm:741 q: -0.2 -1.3 73 DK7FC JN49IK - Then i've done several tests using different frequency tolerance values=20 (above: t =3D 0.3 Hz). After calibrating the soundcard by using the shown= =20 offset, the offset was 0, consequencial ;-) But even if a tolerance of=20 0.002 Hz was choosen, it still took /about/ the same time to get the=20 first decode. Any comments? 2012-02-02 01:33:16 >WOLF10 -r 22050.222 -f 8970 *-t 0.002* -w 0.0000 -u= t 01:33:40 f: 0.005 a: 1.6 dp: 70.7 ci: 3 cj:391 U3K6J06JK76C6J0 ? 01:34:04 f: 0.002 a:-1.5 dp: 67.0 ci: 2 cj:395 0V*9CNF9T3VME9V ? 01:34:52 f:-0.001 a:-1.4 dp: 62.8 ci:13 cj:151 N9KZRESEV9.EUHJ - 01:36:28 f: 0.000 pm:1.159 jm:659 q: -6.8 -8.5 3DZ037H*TFCZL10 ? 01:38:04 f: 0.000 pm:2.101 jm:659 q: -4.7 -5.1 73 DK7FC JN49IK - 01:39:40 f: 0.000 pm:2.699 jm:659 q: -5.1 -3.8 73 DK7FC JN49IK - 01:41:16 f: 0.000 pm:3.896 jm:659 q: -3.4 -2.4 73 DK7FC JN49IK - Currently the PA has problems with self oscillations that even seem to=20 be present when there is a input signal. But sometimes the self=20 oscillations were OFF. During this time the signal was visible in the=20 spectrogram. So i am optimistic to cover much more distance as soon as=20 the PA works as intended. I want to ask the experts which S/N imrpovements can be expected when=20 using the WOLF 5 or WOLF 2.5 mode? Is it 3 dB respectively 6 dB? Right now i feeld that i am missing a spectrogram which i can show here.=20 Just text! Odd. 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 01.02.2012 15:05, schrieb Stefan Sch=E4fer: > > Yesterday i decided to build a quick class-AB "linear" mode PA to=20 > drive the LOPT for a local test which i will do in some hours. My=20 > first test to propagate and receive a WOLF 10 VLF signal over a=20 > distance of 950m,=20 > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/VLF/WOLF%20VLF%201st%20test.png=20 --------------050306080300070602090109 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit VLF,

Yesterday in the night i tried some further tests on VLF, Dreamers-Band, 8970 Hz, using the WOLF 10 mode. An active E field probe was used on my home QTH which is 950 m distant to my work, where the fixed antenna (used for LF) was used to transmit on. That's not really a remarkable DX, not even in the far field. Anyway, it was fun and keeps me promising.
In contrast to the usual VLF work that is done from local fixed antennas, where "only" a few dashes are visible on the grabbers, i hope to cover some distance with this mode, where a full call and locator and something like 73, 55, CU, GL, TU... can be sent. In contrast to e.g. WSPR, what was reported to be about as "good" as QRSS-3 i want to give this mode a chance on VLF, as an exception. Maybe it helps me a bit to understand why so many LFers like the data modes, hi. ;-)

The receive site in the yesterdays test showed a quite good spectrum! To my surprise there is much less QRM at home. Here is a photo which shows the wideband situation during the test using the WOLF10 mode: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/VLF/Wideband%20at%20home%20in%203Hz%20FFT%20bin%20width.png

The TX was the LOPT driven by a more than suboptimal working class AB PA. The output voltage didn't really look like a sine wave but seemed to contain the wanted spectrum as well ;-) The PA took about 3 W input power and the PA efficiency must have been terrible. But the results were fine and so its worth (for me) to optimise things to gain at least 10 dB output power.

The signal wasn't visible in the WOLF gui spectrogram. Since its a spread spectrum it may not be useful to try to display it in QRSS-60 or slower.
The first decode appeared after about 6 minutes.

2012-02-01 23:26:43 >WOLF10  -r 22050 -f 8970 -t 0.3 -w 0.0000 -ut
23:27:07 f: 0.175 a:-0.9 dp: 73.4 ci: 3 cj: 66 LTEA6I*44POZVOC ?
23:27:31 f: 0.180 a:-1.1 dp: 69.2 ci: 4 cj:469 AESB3A64IHMY91V ?
23:28:19 f: 0.176 a:-0.9 dp: 66.5 ci: 0 cj:348 XETAVDCFKFJ/6ZL ?
23:29:55 f: 0.273 pm:1.216 jm:407 q:-13.2 -8.6 TFVIM68HW6GXMMB ?
23:31:31 f:-0.127 pm:2.044 jm:741 q: -5.4 -6.2 71DU8HVLDJN49IK -
23:33:07 f:-0.127 pm:3.457 jm:741 q: -4.3 -5.2 73 DK7FC JN49IK -
23:34:43 f:-0.127 pm:5.364 jm:741 q: -3.0 -3.5 73 DK7FC JN49IK -
23:36:19 f:-0.127 pm:5.745 jm:741 q: -1.8 -2.3 73 DK7FC JN49IK -
23:37:55 f:-0.127 pm:6.250 jm:741 q: -0.9 -1.6 73 DK7FC JN49IK -
23:39:31 f:-0.127 pm:7.205 jm:741 q: -0.2 -1.3 73 DK7FC JN49IK -

Then i've done several tests using different frequency tolerance values (above: t = 0.3 Hz). After calibrating the soundcard by using the shown offset, the offset was 0, consequencial ;-) But even if a tolerance of 0.002 Hz was choosen, it still took about the same time to get the first decode. Any comments?

2012-02-02 01:33:16 >WOLF10  -r 22050.222 -f 8970 -t 0.002 -w 0.0000 -ut
01:33:40 f: 0.005 a: 1.6 dp: 70.7 ci: 3 cj:391 U3K6J06JK76C6J0 ?
01:34:04 f: 0.002 a:-1.5 dp: 67.0 ci: 2 cj:395 0V*9CNF9T3VME9V ?
01:34:52 f:-0.001 a:-1.4 dp: 62.8 ci:13 cj:151 N9KZRESEV9.EUHJ -
01:36:28 f: 0.000 pm:1.159 jm:659 q: -6.8 -8.5 3DZ037H*TFCZL10 ?
01:38:04 f: 0.000 pm:2.101 jm:659 q: -4.7 -5.1 73 DK7FC JN49IK -
01:39:40 f: 0.000 pm:2.699 jm:659 q: -5.1 -3.8 73 DK7FC JN49IK -
01:41:16 f: 0.000 pm:3.896 jm:659 q: -3.4 -2.4 73 DK7FC JN49IK -

Currently the PA has problems with self oscillations that even seem to be present when there is a input signal. But sometimes the self oscillations were OFF. During this time the signal was visible in the spectrogram. So i am optimistic to cover much more distance as soon as the PA works as intended.

I want to ask the experts which S/N imrpovements can be expected when using the WOLF 5 or WOLF 2.5 mode? Is it 3 dB respectively 6 dB?

Right now i feeld that i am missing a spectrogram which i can show here. Just text! Odd.

73, Stefan/DK7FC


Am 01.02.2012 15:05, schrieb Stefan Schäfer:

Yesterday i decided to build a quick class-AB "linear" mode PA to drive the LOPT for a local test which i will do in some hours. My first test to propagate and receive a WOLF 10 VLF signal over a distance of 950m, http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/VLF/WOLF%20VLF%201st%20test.png 
--------------050306080300070602090109--