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 x599PeXj018297 for ; Sun, 9 Jun 2019 11:25:42 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1hZtro-0006tJ-Kt for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 09 Jun 2019 10:11:56 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1hZtrn-0006tA-Qm for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 09 Jun 2019 10:11:55 +0100 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hZtri-0002G6-QA for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 09 Jun 2019 10:11:54 +0100 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42C0D2400E6 for ; Sun, 9 Jun 2019 11:11:49 +0200 (CEST) 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=1560071509; bh=OYBpjAOGZEB63GKY5cG8FrYk1oy+fLwmYr5YVLSi7cc=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=i6w8mM24fMQhCPkr0RX1fJu1qsT0fonwKE5m3saWzx2HYR3SWHFHW1QsuteYu3il3 2e6H+5B+hVcskfwgJ0G8LaYm6fyPTbK66K013GJhu8dQLBwlOPzg+5CmZAI6LmJHgS YFzJoAMZuu++GZonKLprczX/QFx0zEelUP4fc/2B2PMaJXs5p8re6IzVp/3RUnlxPc /drMfxyChFEY9UgBeLkKRxtqGzJ9f0biF+/OeHGRtoqiyVIxMo9QxNYkU41BiItcv/ k5GqfjuzR+mA7LsiLJC2sdvMNqu9WLietB/HjVi/nQAyFh2g85+zD1dGEwA/G7NeUx vVdV6HqGQL3bQ== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 45M9W84z60z9rxK for ; Sun, 9 Jun 2019 11:11:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5CFCCD52.2000203@posteo.de> Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2019 11:11:46 +0200 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: <6DB8451D7F3D3947A5918808A59621EA31596319@servigilant.vigilant.local>,<5CF283CC.9010701@posteo.de> <6DB8451D7F3D3947A5918808A59621EA5BEB7DAC@servigilant.vigilant.local> <5CF57C41.7020008@posteo.de> <6DB8451D7F3D3947A5918808A59621EA5BEB9071@servigilant.vigilant.local>,<5CF75AE7.8080103@posteo.de> <6DB8451D7F3D3947A5918808A59621EA5BEBAD4F@servigilant.vigilant.local>,<5CF907FC.803@posteo.de> <6DB8451D7F3D3947A5918808A59621EA5BEBBACC@servigilant.vigilant.local>,<5CF9695E.8020006@posteo.de> <6DB8451D7F3D3947A5918808A59621EA5BEBBF0B@servigilant.vigilant.local> <5CFA7580.5070009@posteo.de> In-Reply-To: <5CFA7580.5070009@posteo.de> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) 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 @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Hi ULF/VLF friends, Last wednesday there was a heavy local thunderstorm with cloud-earth but also with cloud-cloud lightnings. The latter produce well visible tweak resonance patterns in spectrograms taken from the H fie [...] Content analysis details: (-2.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [185.67.36.66 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_EF Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.0 DKIMWL_WL_MED DKIMwl.org - Whitelisted Medium sender X-Scan-Signature: 85c54099682e8e65d9e25bf804a68673 Subject: ULF/VLF: Tweak resonance measurements Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050004040702010207000509" 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 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050004040702010207000509 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi ULF/VLF friends, Last wednesday there was a heavy local thunderstorm with cloud-earth but also with cloud-cloud lightnings. The latter produce well visible tweak resonance patterns in spectrograms taken from the H field. The fundamental frequency is at a wavelength where the distance between ground and D-layer is just Lambda/2, i.e. near 1650 Hz. But they also appear at integer multiples. Such peaks can reach in the order of 20 dB above the level besides the resonance frequency. A reprocessed spectrogram from that night shows such tweaks for a time of about 6 hours. http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/ULF/Tweaks_on_NS-Loop.png They started in daylight, where the D layer refelction height is lower. Then the night set in and the resonance frequency went down to about *1638 Hz*, which becomes visible in this spectrogram and plot: http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/ULF/Tweak-resonances_detail1.png Again it is a good result done by vlfrx-tools and SpectrumLab. SpecLabs 'long term average graph' (red colour in the spectrum) was set to different half time values, 10 minutes was one of the best values. The plot shows the frequency of the highest peak of that graph. Unfortunately the time stamps are not correct, but they are correct for the spectrogram. It looks like the frequency is reasonably stable from 21 UTC onwards. Sometimes that frequency is jumping by a few Hz. I guess that is because the location of the lightnings is varying and this will have an effect. However the peak is not to small, so it could work to make use of that resonator for amateur transmissions? Also the 2nd resonance at 3305 Hz is quite expressed. The antenna efficiency at that frequency is much higher so maybe it is a good idea to start in that range. With some luck, there will be a time-stamped and streamable VLF station at DL0AO soon. Signals from DL0AO and DK7FC could be joined in vlfrx-tools and then analysed side by side in SpecLab. With the plotter, the resonance frequencys from both locations could be plotted synchronuously, which will give a better impression of the dependency of the peak resonance from the location. It is the ideal time for analysing such resonances from lightnings, however not for transmitting amateur signals ;-) 73, Stefan --------------050004040702010207000509 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi ULF/VLF friends,

Last wednesday there was a heavy local thunderstorm with cloud-earth but also with cloud-cloud lightnings. The latter produce well visible tweak resonance patterns in spectrograms taken from the H field. The fundamental frequency is at a wavelength where the distance between ground and D-layer is just Lambda/2, i.e. near 1650 Hz. But they also appear at integer multiples. Such peaks can reach in the order of 20 dB above the level besides the resonance frequency.
A reprocessed spectrogram from that night shows such tweaks for a time of about 6 hours. http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/ULF/Tweaks_on_NS-Loop.png
They started in daylight, where the D layer refelction height is lower. Then the night set in and the resonance frequency went down to about 1638 Hz, which becomes visible in this spectrogram and plot:
http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/ULF/Tweak-resonances_detail1.png

Again it is a good result done by vlfrx-tools and SpectrumLab. SpecLabs 'long term average graph' (red colour in the spectrum) was set to different half time values, 10 minutes was one of the best values. The plot shows the frequency of the highest peak of that graph. Unfortunately the time stamps are not correct, but they are correct for the spectrogram.
It looks like the frequency is reasonably stable  from 21 UTC onwards.
Sometimes that frequency is jumping by a few Hz. I guess that is because the location of the lightnings is varying and this will have an effect. However the peak is not to small, so it could work to make use of that resonator for amateur transmissions?

Also the 2nd resonance at 3305 Hz is quite expressed. The antenna efficiency at that frequency is much higher so maybe it is a good idea to start in that range.

With some luck, there will be a time-stamped and streamable VLF station at DL0AO soon. Signals from DL0AO and DK7FC could be joined in vlfrx-tools and then analysed side by side in SpecLab. With the plotter, the resonance frequencys from both locations could be plotted synchronuously, which will give a better impression of the dependency of the peak resonance from the location.

It is the ideal time for analysing such resonances from lightnings, however not for transmitting amateur signals ;-)

73, Stefan

--------------050004040702010207000509--