Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id v9QJuELl028074 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 21:56:16 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1e7o9Z-0002Ly-Ns for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 20:49:21 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1e7o96-0002LZ-KL for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 20:48:52 +0100 Received: from porthos.netcom.co.uk ([217.72.171.73]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1e7o92-0002QJ-MW for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 20:48:51 +0100 X-DKIM-Result: Domain=abelian.org Result=Signature OK DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=abelian.org ; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=gDnRaIXOzodL55Mj+a8MXyRam/JQnEJv2riUzj41Hc4=; b=nGxgkqzvilX/muN5YKCw+jgFAu GjpO3lBJjeO2Z1vcmuaaxs5I7JiBLrCeYIdhyAFYyE6dtS28MpeVZVhilSeHNOxcHujEa5c8pBrvO wEYKzvtQAIbmOHdqwtoMip0QO5zmCBTctDzjwF9wA/19qLEtjcy3H4c5u8FCSA3DdGOQ=; Received: from i-194-106-52-83.freedom2surf.net ([194.106.52.83]:49095 helo=pn.abelian.org) by porthos.netcom.co.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1e7o91-0006cX-NN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 20:48:47 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pn.abelian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC05400254 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:48:46 +0000 (UTC) To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <15f5559fe36-c0b-25e91@webjas-vac031.srv.aolmail.net> From: Paul Nicholson Message-ID: <1bceccfe-7198-01b8-b42d-7bfa66511280@abelian.org> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:48:46 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <15f5559fe36-c0b-25e91@webjas-vac031.srv.aolmail.net> Content-Language: en-US X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - porthos.netcom.co.uk X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - blacksheep.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - abelian.org X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: porthos.netcom.co.uk: authenticated_id: catchall@abelian.org X-Authenticated-Sender: porthos.netcom.co.uk: catchall@abelian.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Stefan wrote: > My ERP on 5170 Hz is 2 dB lower than on 6470 Hz. But the SNR we > observe seems not to differ much from that on 6470 Hz. > The opposite of what all the curves predict!!!!!! Not really. Attenuation is higher per unit distance, so the background from long distance sferics will be much lower. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 1e15d6d6179985f133b43d42d658878a Subject: Re: VLF: 300 mA on 5170 Hz 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=0.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS 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 Stefan wrote: > My ERP on 5170 Hz is 2 dB lower than on 6470 Hz. But the SNR we > observe seems not to differ much from that on 6470 Hz. > The opposite of what all the curves predict!!!!!! Not really. Attenuation is higher per unit distance, so the background from long distance sferics will be much lower. Attenuation of relatively close signals is not so much, so at this sort of range, you may find better S/N, not worse. Markus wrote: > shouldn't the conductivity from the free electrons rather > resemble a metal-like electric boundary, It depends on the angle of incidence. It's complicated! The reflection coefficient at the ionosphere is a matrix of four complex numbers - and there are two complex refractive indexes. For the TM mode, the relevant reflection coefficient is maybe magnitude 0.5 to 0.9 and the phase is close to zero for high angles of incidence (small zenith angle). For large zenith angles (grazing incidence) the phase shift can be closer to 90 deg. Eg, from my ray model for the 1-hop, some examples of the sky wave reflection matrix at 5170 Hz: Day, 100km range, zenith angle 30 deg: s->mat 9.0e-01/-6.9 1.2e-01/-141.6 1.2e-01/-141.4 9.2e-01/174.6 where the four components are TM to TM TE to TM TM to TE TE to TE and each is given as magnitude/phase_degrees. The important one for us is the top-left component, TM to TM. Day, 2000km range, zenith angle 80 deg; s->mat 4.5e-01/-72.6 1.7e-01/-159.6 1.7e-01/-157.2 9.5e-01/176.4 Now we have quite a lot of phase shift. The TE to TE component involves a phase inversion and it is interesting to note that its magnitude is generally higher than the TM/TM coefficient. Eg see http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=AD0740578 I don't really understand this propagation stuff, but I make some notes to try to learn. For example http://abelian.org/vlf/tmp/pn1214.pdf which is unfinished (I'm stuck on the groundwave stuff) and some of the graphs need replotting. But sections 12 and 15 might be useful. The s->mat matrix above is [S] in equ 15.1 -- Paul Nicholson --