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 w2HNBg33016134 for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:11:44 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1exKos-0003s2-Q3 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:00:58 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1exKos-0003rt-0M for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:00:58 +0000 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1exKon-0003UN-CP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:00:56 +0000 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAB8221114 for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:00:49 +0100 (CET) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=posteo.de Result=Signature OK DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.de; s=2017; t=1521327649; bh=ij/rdJcCGKqkQZYrFF0CmvRtBNw9FxQu9siQQha9TFk=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=n9OrxGeh2ZS/9h99kVaT8ZHiH6RQj9KfdckBB1i0ObjSek46Qk/FzbRfnY9dL5cT+ esysp3XCo6VtKjJ5gKWh089Q/OQ2gg0x+MG0L0GKAncuYVghr8jX5B1ANE2WMhm9Ko ilvthhVvJ9NuKedwj4bFJgJjl1z/oQqeulfhCQY0PlFAfJXWTuWrgIshL/0gikD1lU 7Qxnt8doa3iaR5OIlsHqANJDTABH5tJcXwh4JvelWShd0z/2HZsNOAhS4MxjfcXPi1 8BVHDMqBHsKFC63d4h7ssocCypUVZ8N2wToyGkMLodSxjP0+RT1e4sNdZu2YNW9Q2T QX1I0i6zebr3w== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 403d8w3nLFz9rxL for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:00:47 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5AAD9E1F.7000404@posteo.de> Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:00:47 +0100 From: DK7FC 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: <5A95721D.2060008@posteo.de> <5AAA8DBF.80604@posteo.de> <5AAAFB72.80406@posteo.de> <5AABF63A.30909@posteo.de> <5AAD2864.90408@posteo.de> <000001d3be2f$8ae04410$a0a0cc30$@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <000001d3be2f$8ae04410$a0a0cc30$@comcast.net> 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: Hi Jim, Yes, this is the idea. Edgar could monitor the phase of HWU as received aín Tasmania. Maybe it can be helpful to apply a phase correction to my transmission. It will be interesting to see if the phase of my signal will be less dynamic after the correction. There are many things to try. You know we operate in the field of ideas that won't work, so its allowed to think everything :-) You know, the garden fence... [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID BODY: Test for Invalidly Named or Formatted Colors in HTML 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 822c049e197981e4c3616576c3c24e11 Subject: Re: VLF: DL to VK7 ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060003000305080806010205" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,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 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060003000305080806010205 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Jim, Yes, this is the idea. Edgar could monitor the phase of HWU as received aín Tasmania. Maybe it can be helpful to apply a phase correction to my transmission. It will be interesting to see if the phase of my signal will be less dynamic after the correction. There are many things to try. You know we operate in the field of ideas that won't work, so its allowed to think everything :-) You know, the garden fence... 73, Stefan Am 17.03.2018 21:35, schrieb hvanesce@comcast.net: > > Hello Stefan, > > “One could try to track HWU and its phase and then correct the phase > of my signal by the HWU phase” > > Question: After first subtracting HWU transmitter phase variations > (based on HWU-signal phase variations seen at the grabber closest to HWU)? > > In other words, subtract the HWU phase variations seen at the grabber > closest to HWU, from the HWU phase variations seen at Edgar’s > grabber, and use the result to correct the phase of the DK7FC signal > seen at Edgar’s grabber? > > 73, > > Jim AA5BW > > *From:* owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] *On Behalf Of *DK7FC > *Sent:* Saturday, March 17, 2018 10:38 AM > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > *Subject:* Re: VLF: DL to VK7 ? > > VLF, > > Another file from Edgar. Now we can already compare two individual > days as well as stacked days. As expected, the phase seems to be quite > dynamic making it hard to pass a message to down under. > I improved the plot a bit by reducing the measurement interval to 5 > minutes. I also added a trace for a 30 minute carrier which reaches up > to* 7.55 dB in 556 uHz*! > 3 plots are available now. > 15 March: http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/VLF/VK7_15MAR.png > 16 March: http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/VLF/VK7_16MAR.png > 15+16 March, unweighted stack: > http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/VLF/VK7_1516MAR.png > > Unfortunately the stacking does not improve the SNR, it reduces it! > This can be expected from an extremely dynamic propagation as it seems > to be. > We can now continue to watch a few more individual days and the > stacked days. If the phase is not reproducable at all, the stacked SNR > will become lower each day. If it is reproducable, there will be a > peak building up. > > Another idea is to correct the phase by using other signals within the > band. HWU on 18.3 kHz is not so far away, regarding location and > frequency. One could try to track HWU and its phase and then correct > the phase of my signal by the HWU phase. Meanwhile i would call this > valid :-) Edgar is already preparing for HWU measurements! > > 73, Stefan > > > Am 16.03.2018 17:52, schrieb DK7FC: > > VLF, > > Edgar has sent me a txt file which i converted into a wav file using > Markus' tools. The file starts 15:11 UTC and covers nearly 9 hours, so > it covers the complete time where i transmitted on 17470.1 Hz. > I tried to decode a '*' EbNaut message taking 8 hours, without sucess. > > Then i moved the file on the Linux PC and tried to decode an '*' > EbNaut message again, which is equal than analysing a carrier. > BTW my antenna current was just 900 mA at times. I could run 1.5 A, so > i'm missing 4.4 dB! This is not acceptable at all. I need to build a > better PA quickly. > > I quickly wrote a script to generate the SNR of a carrier with > variable time offset (in 10 minute steps; relative to the file start) > and variable length. This way we can see how dynamic the propagation > (phase!) changes. > Working together with vlfrx tools and Microsoft EXCEL!!! is a thing > that some people don't like :-) > But this is how i can do it as fast as possible at the moment. > > Attached you see a mst confusing series of graphs. Selfeexplaining for > some, but, well you can for example see that a 2 hour long carrier at > *_6.3 dB SNR 138.9 uHz_* can be extracted when applying a time offset > of 4.5 hours to the file start. > You can also see that a 4 hour long carrier will only reach about 3 dB > SNR in 69.4 uHz! > BTW i ignored the 20 minute transmission break from last night, which > will cause a small error. > > Now we could generate another set of graphs showing how it looks when > applying the brand new iqnorm script by Paul. > And we can see how the curves develop when stacking two or more files! > This will tell something about the reproducability of the obviously > quite dynamic phase... > > So far so good. The TX is running again, same procedure than yesterday... > > 73, Stefan > --------------060003000305080806010205 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Jim,

Yes, this is the idea. Edgar could monitor the phase of HWU as received aín Tasmania. Maybe it can be helpful to apply a phase correction to my transmission. It will be interesting to see if the phase of my signal will be less dynamic after the correction.
There are many things to try. You know we operate in the field of ideas that won't work, so its allowed to think everything :-) You know, the garden fence...

73, Stefan

Am 17.03.2018 21:35, schrieb hvanesce@comcast.net:

Hello Stefan,

 

“One could try to track HWU and its phase and then correct the phase of my signal by the HWU phase”

 

Question: After first subtracting HWU transmitter phase variations (based on HWU-signal phase variations seen at the grabber closest to HWU)?

 

In other words, subtract the HWU phase variations seen at the grabber closest to HWU,  from the HWU phase variations seen at Edgar’s grabber, and use the result to correct the phase of the DK7FC signal seen at Edgar’s grabber?

 

73,

 

Jim AA5BW

 

 

 

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of DK7FC
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 10:38 AM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: VLF: DL to VK7 ?

 

VLF,

Another file from Edgar. Now we can already compare two individual days as well as stacked days. As expected, the phase seems to be quite dynamic making it hard to pass a message to down under.
I improved the plot a bit by reducing the measurement interval to 5 minutes. I also added a trace for a 30 minute carrier which reaches up to 7.55 dB in 556 uHz!
3 plots are available now.
15 March: http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/VLF/VK7_15MAR.png
16 March: http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/VLF/VK7_16MAR.png
15+16 March, unweighted stack: http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/VLF/VK7_1516MAR.png

Unfortunately the stacking does not improve the SNR, it reduces it! This can be expected from an extremely dynamic propagation as it seems to be.
We can now continue to watch a few more individual days and the stacked days. If the phase is not reproducable at all, the stacked SNR will become lower each day. If it is reproducable, there will be a peak building up.

Another idea is to correct the phase by using other signals within the band. HWU on 18.3 kHz is not so far away, regarding location and frequency. One could try to track HWU and its phase and then correct the phase of my signal by the HWU phase. Meanwhile i would call this valid :-) Edgar is already preparing for HWU measurements!

73, Stefan


Am 16.03.2018 17:52, schrieb DK7FC:

VLF,

Edgar has sent me a txt file which i converted into a wav file using Markus' tools. The file starts 15:11 UTC and covers nearly 9 hours, so it covers the complete time where i transmitted on 17470.1 Hz.
I tried to decode a '*' EbNaut message taking 8 hours, without sucess.

Then i moved the file on the Linux PC and tried to decode an '*' EbNaut message again, which is equal than analysing a carrier.
BTW my antenna current was just 900 mA at times. I could run 1.5 A, so i'm missing 4.4 dB! This is not acceptable at all. I need to build a better PA quickly.

I quickly wrote a script to generate the SNR of a carrier with variable time offset (in 10 minute steps; relative to the file start) and variable length. This way we can see how dynamic the propagation (phase!) changes.
Working together with vlfrx tools and Microsoft EXCEL!!! is a thing that some people don't like :-)
But this is how i can do it as fast as possible at the moment.

Attached you see a mst confusing series of graphs. Selfeexplaining for some, but, well you can for example see that a 2 hour long carrier at 6.3 dB SNR 138.9 uHz can be extracted when applying a time offset of  4.5 hours to the file start.
You can also see that a 4 hour long carrier will only reach about 3 dB SNR in 69.4 uHz!
BTW i ignored the 20 minute transmission break from last night, which will cause a small error.

Now we could generate another set of graphs showing how it looks when applying the brand new iqnorm script by Paul.
And we can see how the curves develop when stacking two or more files! This will tell something about the reproducability of the obviously quite dynamic phase...

So far so good. The TX is running again, same procedure than yesterday...

73, Stefan

--------------060003000305080806010205--