Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: G3XIZ TX Monday 3 Jan

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Re: G3XIZ TX Monday 3 Jan
From: "James Moritz" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 21:07:50 -0000
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=s1024; t=1294088873; bh=ebl5K34b54hv3aYaTMlROJc1kOyo/8O9UT+l1hRCkcE=; 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:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=SooY6uIAzlwfVqF9FTu3AdaaWrJvwplH505giaBhrGlEo5Ullr6SlGKr+wKBotJHRsowBNJsYOEp2MSw7+YyITY+qHJ9FXdt8NGuF1NSw98X2ZJWL7jq/HZfHJRkHQTBdgeTCBijOjZKPb8oF0cXn7bgPX6WqdSvnGathrr8kO4=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024;; 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:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=u2HNC3hJcD2T6d4ay2+caFdaasyKcjkOO8SF2epgBLjjwSEPY2kKNoR2SkXLJpsr9eMOxSk8sLCyBD3iyCnFWLyweCsX+/P5/KLFuunW3vDcUn37+j/nbApcBqe6sz3oL2fm+KUJ9MOQ5N1gWYGUWy2MVCTKXxQdJbvTmi5n8kw= ;
Domainkey-status: good (testing)
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Dear Pete, LF Group,

Good to see you are getting some results... The equipment in use here was nothing unusual - a "budget" Acer laptop abt 4 years old with internal sound card, and the VLF loop and preamp, the schematic for which I posted some time ago. Probably the main difference between my spectrogram and the one from M0FMT is you appear to be using settings for relatively fast QRSS speeds; QRSS10 or thereabouts. The pixels appear to have a resolution of about 100mHz, compared to the 1.5mHz I used. Using the narrower resolution increases the SNR by about 18dB, at least when averaged over the 600s period of the FFT. I am also using the SpecLab hard limiter in conjunction with a 9kHz bandpass filter (which could alternatively be implemented in SpecLab instead of in the preamp, as I have it), which reduces the contribution of QRN to the overall noise level by perhaps several more dB. It looks like the noise level in both spectrograms is dominated by external noise, so there is little that can be done beyond this in terms of equipment design to improve SNR.
In some cases, using a loop may give some advantage over a vertical, if the
source of QRN is in a different direction from the wanted signal, but often
QRN seems to originate from a wide area, so the sharp null of a loop is not
particularly effective. A definite advantage of small whip or loop antennas
over bigger fixed wire antennas is that they can be moved around easily to
find a location with minimum local QRM, whether this is different places
around your home QTH, or going /P in the middle of a field well away from
mains wiring This has brought a few more dBs improvement when I have done it
in the past. In both cases, having a portable PC is also very helpful, since
it can be operated independently from the mains power, which helps to
determine and/or eliminate this as a noise source.
Trying to receive weaker signals would require longer integration periods
with even higher FFT resolution. The Acer laptop and its sound card are
adequate for QRSS600/millihertz resolution as in this case, but for
microhertz resolution, higher short and long term frequency stability would
be needed for both TX and RX.
Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU

----- Original Message ----- From: "M0FMT" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: VLF - G3XIZ TX Monday 3 Jan

Hi LF and Jim what pc are you running? Like processor speed and memory? Please

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