Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: DK7FC's 3rd VLF transmission

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Re: DK7FC's 3rd VLF transmission
From: "James Moritz" <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:03:27 -0000
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btopenworld.com; s=s1024; t=1269209008; bh=/3+d/WBCNrHrWRfJAAg0DpICy7Mqdk/gQ7s75fJ4RZY=; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=ZAVwmQrZwn5aE03IuSGh1NfAcSZhoRFzPpRQ1dE6MicUMP7bwpgB5DXHhSzYgnmZITJCkvpG0IIzurw7DyW3c2pw/HLLh0cVhzNtzZ5ekwjAhsBUPrE1ni8UAq38TO5vWpCVVuiRfs91b3+jx/is33pvsZP646XodKNuls3ywNw=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com; h=DKIM-Signature:Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=d7eVbi0MzzQ+fqurt1cg/pAacDdOdyO5fraTp2Oh2uJmkBsNlyawR2yZ3MU8MWeB+cDhk+h9Ahjvei0v3tRYdxFMZrhk6EB7Xba3Z4bLtcfhNJeF3aHTb4IQXOM+c80oykqFQXlkkyfSo2GV9snik9/MXeYV8G6iLC2NLmVutE8= ;
Domainkey-status: good (testing)
In-reply-to: <EC07745A4D35494FB0C8E1EB1CECAD91@JimPC>
References: <[email protected]> <38A51B74B884D74083D7950AD0DD85E82A1B81@File-Server-HST.hst.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de> <[email protected]> <56800827A5644E1BB3F320CB51E2300E@Black> <26E279AD762E44FB937A8A7DF8F934BC@Black> <8C7F2923D86B4517B1C156BA499E96E4@Black> <F277E8E705B545489E6506C9E10C1225@Black> <1D7C1022CC7646F299B54148323D8F8B@JimPC> <EC07745A4D35494FB0C8E1EB1CECAD91@JimPC>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Dear LF Group,

After the long "K"s, DK7FC's signal was visible up until 1630, but not readable. I'm not sure what transmission speed Stefan was using - I was using settings for 120s dots, but am not sure, looking at the spectrogram (see attachment), if they were actually longer. I think if they had been DFCW240, they probably would have been just readable with the correct FFT length.

I made a rough estimate of field strength of DK7FC's signal as 1.4uV/m, or 4.7fT if you prefer. The distance was about 650km. Assuming the SNR equates to about 6dB, with a noise BW of about 7mHz this would make the apparent noise level about 8uV/m per sqrtHz, or 28fT/sqrtHz.

I used basically the same preamp and antenna as before. By replacing the loop antenna with a dummy antenna (a small choke of about the same resistance and inductance) I could compare the band noise and RX system noise floor. The RX noise was at least 10dB below the band noise. However, I also added a 7.8 - 10.5kHz bandpass filter to the preamp, which allowed the use of clipping, without cross-modulation from the strong VLF utilities at higher frequency. I used the Spectrum Lab Hard Limiter, with "clipping level B" set to "0dB above average level", so fairly heavy clipping I guess. Clipping like this has proved effective in the past with high QRN levels when receiving QRSS on 136kHz, and has been mentioned recently in connection with VLF also. In this case, it had the effect of reducing the apparent noise level by roughly 10dB, while having little if any effect on the apparent signal level. So this was rather effective - I doubt I would have seen the signal otherwise.

The wide-band noise floor at the portable QTH (IO91WR I think) was actually about the same as my home QTH. There were quite strong 50Hz harmonics - the field I was in is criss-crossed by 11kV overhead lines, although these seem to be no worse than domestic mains wiring for noise. But there were many fewer narrow-band spectral lines at the /P location - at home these drift into the signal bandwidth quite often.

So a very interesting and quite successful afternoon - thanks to all involved in the tests!

Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU

Attachment: capt_9k_3.jpg
Description: JPEG image

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>