Timeline for Optimal frequency for penetrating 1 meter of water using radio waves?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 19, 2023 at 2:10 | vote | accept | Hypnos Stratagem | ||
| Jul 17, 2023 at 1:44 | comment | added | TimWescott | You may wish to edit your question for clarity -- specifically, is your waterborne application receive only, or do you wish to transmit? Do you have an idea of how much path loss is acceptable? I do know that submarine hobbyists were controlling model subs with 72MHz transmitters back in the 1990 -- but I don't know how much reliability they were seeing, nor is there enough detail in your question to know if that information is relevant. | |
| Jul 16, 2023 at 17:46 | answer | added | niels nielsen | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 16, 2023 at 12:16 | comment | added | jayben | Radios used to have a long-wavelength reception capability, without requiring a large antenna; a small coil wound around a ferrite rod seems to have been sufficient. | |
| Jul 16, 2023 at 2:58 | comment | added | Hypnos Stratagem | I think that we are going to try for 540 kHz wavelength. This should minimize the attenuation. We are trying to find out how large of an antenna we would need and how much power that would take if we used electrical loading and fractal antenna design for it. | |
| Jul 15, 2023 at 21:49 | comment | added | Hypnos Stratagem | @SolarMike: We have tried for very low wave frequency ( 10kHz), but the antenna wound up being massive according to our calculations. We are trying to penetrate the water while not needing a massive antenna or an antenna that requires 1MW to use. | |
| Jul 15, 2023 at 20:43 | comment | added | jsotola |
wavelengths of very low frequency ... wavelength is inversely proportional to frequency
|
|
| Jul 15, 2023 at 5:00 | comment | added | Solar Mike | Which ones have you tested so far? | |
| Jul 15, 2023 at 2:24 | history | asked | Hypnos Stratagem | CC BY-SA 4.0 |