NAVAL POST!
Monterey, California
ri
tolo
December 1978
Thesis Advisor:
Paul
H.
Moose
1187419
Unclassified
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PACE (Whan Data
Enl.r.d)
READ INSTRUCTIONS
BEFORE COMPLETING FORM
1.
2.
GOVT ACCESSION
NO.
TITLEfmdSuhl/ll.l
4.
S.
TYPE OF REPORT
PERIOD COVERED
AUTHOR^
7.
3.
6.
9.
10.
1.
Postgraduate School
Monterey, California 93940
12.
REPORT DATE
13.
NUMBER OF PAGES
IS.
SECURITY CLASS,
Naval
14.
Decemhpr 197R
Unclassified
ISa.
SCHEDULE
16.
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
17.
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
18.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
IS.
KEY WORDS
20.
ABSTRACT
(Contlnuo an
rovfo
tldm
11
It
tntmtmd
in
Block
aiocir
mmbmr)
This paper describes and gives the results of an experiment to measure the
D.C. and ULF (0.1 to 1 Hz) relative impedance in sea water of several materials
considered as possible electrodes for a submerged electric dipole antenna.
The results of the ac and dc impedance tests are given for Ag, Al
C, Cu, Ni
Pb, Pt, Sn, Ti, W, Zn, and Stainless Steel, in the form of potential difference;
vs current and impedance vs frequency curves.
Tests concerning the relative
receiving impedance of Silver Silver-Chloride, Platinum Platinum-Black,
,
DD
JAN 73 1473
EDITION OF MOV
S/N 0102-014- 6601
I
IS
OBSOLETE
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Whan Dmlm Mnltod)
HOtfWw
ttmlm
tHf<
DD
Form
1473
Jan 73
/N 0102-014-6601
1
'
ttcumrv ci.amiication o*
tmi
notf** o.
Bnt.,.d>
by
from the
0\U$
OUOirfKNOXUBRAW
SCHOOL
NAVAL POSTGRADUftTE
MONTEREY. CA 93940
ABSTRACT
C,
frequency curves.
submerged
Pb,
Pt,
Sn, Ti
W,
Based
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
INTRODUCTION
II.
THEORY
11
11
B.
11
C.
-13
3.
4.
Antenna
2.
Dipole Impedance
Noise----------------
13
18
18
19
EXPERIMENTS
24
A.
PURPOSE
24
B.
EQUIPMENT
24'
C.
PROCEDURES
26
-----------------
AC Impedance
2.
DC Resistance
3.
Receiving Impedance
26
27
-------------
28
29
DISCUSSION
33
D.
IV.
A.
1.
III.
DATA
'
A.
ELECTRODE IMPEDANCE
33
B.
ANTENNA DEPLOYMENT
35
C.
NOISE
36
-
APPENDIX A
38
-
FIGURES
44
87
LIST OF REFERENCES
-
89
LIST OF FIGURES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
'TM'
7.
Dipole Antenna
8.
9.
and
'
Configuration
TE'
10.
11.
12.
Experimental
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21
Silver, Z vs f
22.
Silver Silver-Chloride, Z vs f
23.
Aluminum, Z vs f
24.
Carbon, Z vs f
25.
Copper, Z vs f
Electrode Construction
.
.
26.
Nickel, Z vs f
27.
Lead, Z vs f
28.
Platinum, Z vs f
29.
Platinum Platinum-Black,
30.
Tin, Z vs f
31
Stainless Steel
32.
Tungsten, Z vs f
33.
Titanium, Z vs f
34.
Zinc, Z vs f
35.
Silver, E vs
36.
Silver Silver-Chloride,
37.
Aluminum,
E vs
38.
Carbon,
vs
39.
Copper,
vs
40.
Nickel
vs
41
Lead,
vs
42.
Platinum Platinum-Black,
43.
Tin,
44.
Stainless Steel,
45.
Tungsten, E vs
46.
Zinc, E vs
47.
48.
vs
Z vs
Z vs
vs
vs
vs
I.
INTRODUCTION
day or less
have been known to exist for well over two centuries [Graham 1724].
But
only in the last few decades, as ever more sensitive magnetometers were
developed in response to military and geophysical exploration requirements, have systematic investigations of these complex fluctuations
become possible.
agreed that most of the field variations are generated by current systems
flowing in the ionosphere and magnetosphere and by the response of the
(sea water) and complex propagation phenomena associated with the geology
due to geological
(i)
magnetic anomalies
In
anomaly introduced into the earth's field by steel hulled ships has been
used successfully for mine, torpedo, and antisubmarine warfare over the
last forty years.
Another application in which the low frequency electromagnetic background noise is important is in the field of undersea communications.
Since the skin depth increases at low frequency, ULF (ultra low frequency,
< 5 Hz)
waves can penetrate the ocean to great depths and may be used
[Fraser-Smith et
al
1977].
Reliable
reception of signals of limited power requires high receiver sensitivity and low ambient background noise at the depth of the receiver
[Dinger et al
1977].
ambient magnetic field near the earth's surface [Fraser- Smith and
Buxton 1975, Gillespie et
al
1977].
Another source of noise which limits signal detectability is equipment or system noise [Skolnik 1962].
If system
Background noise
Although measurements on the ocean floor using superconducting magnetometers have been carried out, the logistic and engineering problems,
such as cryogenic atmosphere are considerable [Dinger et
al
1977].
Because of the engineering difficulties incurred with the superconducting magnetometers, other means of signal
Postgraduate School
(NPS), in conjunction
self-contained
A block
of
kHz, consisted
1.
two single stage, common source configured zn4869aj FET amplifiers and
a
mounted in
2.
Throughout the summer of 1978, the system was tested from the NPS
research vessel ACANIA , in 250 feet of water approximately three miles
Several
-9
Further improve-
10
II.
A.
THEORY
The normal
conducting medium.
determined by dividing this, power by one half the square of the peak
value of the input current.
portant because
In
In
sphere of
Power dissipation,
B.
understood.
[Kraichman 1976].
Siemens/m).
Tl
(5
10""
Siemens/m)
of magnitude,
is a
b)
Attenuation of
orders
At
signal
to 55db/
reflected, but
small
large
phase velocity contrast (v
The
wave
In
Fig.
the
subscripts o,
r,
transmitted.
In
Fig.
6(a),
and
H.
.5=L
+ H
H
Q
!=
%
- 2H
q
12
Where n
"sw
n sw
2
ST
and n
are the Intrinsic impedances of air and sea water
sw
respectively.
and
E.
lo
HT =
= n
cos
sw
H, -
- -E.
or
+ H
cos
cos
~ 2
(Ijai)
cos 9
Eq
From the above relationships it can be seen that the transmitted magnetic
transverse com-
transmitted
for
x 10
Hence, the
will
for
field
detection.
C.
Pi
pole Impedance
13
that senses the potential difference between two points in the medium.
is a
diagram of
and
is the
Electrodes are
tangential
component along the axis of the dipole, the difference in potential between the electrodes is given as:
B
V
Jt-dL
AB
An equivalent electrical
impedance and
AB
E*
is the sea
water impedance.
where
The total
is the dipole
impedance is
given by:
Since Z
a=4
Zn
is typically less than 0.5 ohm and for sea water with
is
and in general
Z. s
"- li
Z
D
14
2 R
+ R
<*w
+
e
+
r
+ R
+
r
>L W
> Cw
where:
R =
e
R.
r
L
electrode resistance
The radiation impedances for an infinite one wire cable have been computed
R
L
TO"
[12.6
it
n/m
R..
2ttE
n(b
2
CTf )]
10" 7 H/m
F/m
Inf
=
a a
w
Q/m
where:
a
w
o"
b & c
lating material
15
+ jol
+ R
(R
^V
+ R
+ -3-4-
jcoL
jwC
UjuC
jcoL
J
+ R
reduces to
jojL
J
+ R
+ R
R
E
+ R
+ R
+ jwL
Consider
source surrounded by
radial
current
J =
16^
tt
spherical
conducting medium
with conductivity a.
V =
t*&
J
a
Substituting for
yields
iy2
dr =
a r
ti
-.
it
a a
V _
R
E
sphere.
tt
shape of the electrode and had been found in general to be [Strarup 1966]
"
R
E
where
K is
is
from shape to shape, unless one dimension is much larger than the others
For example:
K sphere = 0.14 ohm.m
K disc
K prolate
K
0.16 ohm.m
Ellip
prolate Ellip
7
+ 10"
Z n = -rr~ + R
w
D
./ S
tt
f I + jco [12.6 - In
17
7
a f] I + 10"
Comparing terms it is seen that at low frequencies and with copper wires
with good conductance,
-^~
to the re-
2.
where A and
are electrodes in
exit at B.
In
11
be attracted to B.
As the frequency is
increased,
these clouds do not have time to form and therefore the impedance is
smaller.
3.
Antenna Gain
Antenna gain is normally defined as [Skolnik 1962].
2
G =
^A
K
Tr
where
area.
K is
18
is
the effective
4 K I S
<5
is
Combining the
above gives:
"3
G =
_4
IT
Since K
= -=-
and I and
it can be
seen that the gain is less than 1, and determined by I for any given
frequency.
4.
Antenna Noise
The inherent noise of the dipole antenna in
conducting medium
magnetic field
b.
c.
d.
be looked at individually.
gi
<j>,
ven by
NM
* Bsin*
19
and frequency
or
NM
B sin
co
cos
(J>
co
where
S
sin
co
This
voltage is random and consistent with the central limit theorem, has
and
= a
(tt
kg T) 2
R volts
rr
is
Planck's constant.
This is
It is
f)
"
exp.
(hAf/k T)
-1
For
Af
= 100
and T
290K
,
n -n
y =1.7x10
hAf
20
result of
,
1
/Hz
Hence
exp (hAf/k T) ;
py
And
(f) =
A Mi
= 2
v2/H
z
the spectral
R
R k T
P =
2
<iS
<v
_LI
r =
>
(R + R
1
)
1
,
therefore:
2
<v >
4R
<V > R
P
max
max
p
4R
density
(f)
-^ =
ff-
Watts/Hz
From which it is seen that the maximum thermal noise power delivered to
the load is independent of the resistance of the antenna.
However, it is
21
The exact
It is
possible that water motion across the surface of the electrode disturbs
the ion cloud and noise results from the attempts of the system to
electrodes in
baffle system,
period of two years, there was no detected noise which could be correlated
with or attributed to corrosion currents.
This becomes
Since
Appendix A contains
frequency of
Hz and
the same open circuit voltage) has less short circuit current, less
gain and higher potential
22
Furthermore, the
23
III.
EXPERIMENTS
PURPOSE
A.
Table
The impedances
(resis-
tances) in the table are not absolute, but since conditions were held
satisfactory relative
picture.
In
tional
are several
physical constants of
the materials which were compared with the data obtained in the experi-
ments.
positive to negative.
are listed in
B.
EQUIPMENT
All
200 x 25 x 25 cm.
trough measuring
24
Material
10 Hz
Hz
1
k.
OHMS
100 Hz
1000 Hz
Stainless
Steel
200
60
25
19
Monel
210
40
19
12
Aluminum
720
200
115
35
Aluminum
Alloy
700
240
100
30
Bronze
160
50
15
12
18
14
13
11
450
70
15
10
Zinc
Carbon
Table
Z vs
(Nannestad, 1965)
Contact
Work
Function (ev)
Electro
Negativity (v)
Material
a(yftm)
Platinum
.095
4.52
2.2
Silver
.616
4.35
1.9
Titanium
.024
4.14
1.5
Stainless
1.8
4.75
.7996
-2.0
-
Nickel
.145
Copper
.593
Tungsten
.181
4.38
1.7
.04
Tin
.088
4.35
1.8
.1364
Lead
.046
3.94
1.8
.1263
Aluminum
.382
3.75
1.5
-1.706
Zinc
.167
4.0
1.6
Carbon
.0007
2.5
Table
1.9
Test Materials
25
(v)
1.2
Electro
Chem
Potential
.23
.522
.7628
.6992
as shown
12.
most of the available material was in sheets, so flat rectangular electrodes were fashioned.
slightly, they were constructed to have very nearly the same total surface area of 52 cm
mounted in
banana jack
plastic cup; the cup was then filled with fiberglass resin
it easy to change electrodes during the experiments and allowed the use
lead acetate Pb (C
them with
H- 0-)~ in 100 ml
pletion of the
silver chloride.
film of
Figures 16
C.
PROCEDURES
1
AC Impedance
26
Mark 220 Clevite Brush recorder, and was fed to the electrodes in the
tank through
The
The voltage across the one ohm resistor indicated the total
ohm resistor and, once adjusted, was held constant for all
frequencies.
The drive voltages required for good current readings varied between
5
tested.
0.1
to 1.0 hertz.
The actual
hertz for
DC Resistance
Fig.
14.
dc null
voltmeter.
Hewlett Packard
voltmeter.
The signal
volts dc across the electrodes, the system was then allowed to settle
27
and the voltage across the one ohm resistor was recorded.
The output
of the Wavetek was then stepped incrementally to zero with the system
being allowed to stabilize at each
rent, and voltage versus current plots made for each electrode pair.
Four volts was found to be about the maximum voltage which could be
applied across the electrodes without exceeding the work function of the
Receiving Impedance
b.
The tests were designed to measure the open-circuit voltage and short-
field.
Figure 15a shows the circuit used to measure the open circuit
voltage across the electrodes.
centimeters apart, as shown in the diagram, and the voltage across them
was monitored on the X axis of the Varian pen recorder.
The receiving
electrodes C and D were positioned 50 centimeters apart, centered between the transmitting electrodes, and connected to the Y axis input
0.05, 0.1, and 1.0 hertz for each of the four electrodes pairs.
28
The
phase angle between the transmitted and received voltages was determined
using standard Lissajous pattern techniques [Michel
1957].
was used.
The Y
(I
and trans-
and transmitted
voltage were taken for. each frequency to give the receiving impedance
/E
/u
t L
t
<
*!
D.
E- fields.
DATA
The experimental results are presented in Figs. 21 through 46 and
summarized in table
3.
Figures
21
The values of
square root of the surface area of the electrodes, hence the unit ohmmeters.
29
graph paper and the results in all cases were fairly linear.
tion which best fits the data was determined using
The func-
linear regression on the log-log plots and is given on each of the impedance versus frequency graphs.
tin, lead, and aluminum show altogether
tremely active in the sea water and low voltage tests were very difficult.
Small
fluctuations.
surface area.
and 'Low
resistance.
determine
electrode impedance.
<j>
30
Material/f
High Voltage
Low Voltage
(dc)
(dc)
Silver
1.34
11.88
Silver Silver
Chloride
1.997
3.75
.921
14.76
Aluminum
.1
Hz
8.15
1.0 Hz
Hz
.5
2.74
.397
1.91
.375
155.75
238.83
.363
238.83
Carbon
1.306
2.041
1.10
1.08
1.0
Copper
1.089
5.072
3.0
2.15
1.8
Nickel
.914
Lead
7.947
7.947
313.16
95.35
56.66
50.97
52.27
52.27
Platinum
7.875
5.653
Platinum
Platinum-Black
.579
3.14
Tin
.869
16.24
71.82
63.13
Stainless
.963
10.67
31.35
10.33
.847
Titanium
Tungsten
Zinc
203.66
21.17
127
.979
Z vs
|z|
.761
.761
44.7
6.88
49.0
27.3
60.24
21.58
12.86
3.14
2.09
1.75
1.91
Table
4.822
m
.05 Hz
|z|
Silver
Silver-Chloride
Platinum
Platinum-Black
.1
50.12
.75
49.1
Hz
Izl
1.0 Hz
n
3.47
55.88
2.32
8.97
6.8
-13.63
5.97
-12.65
5.43
Carbon
22.61
-43.29
16.65
-36.16
11.63
-18.21
Zinc
22.73
-31.32
26.85
-38.51
13.83
-33.68
Table 4
Receiving Impedance
31
Z vs
were observed.
of the electrodes as well as the size and shape of the tank are believed
to have a marked effect on the capacitance and it is therefore recom-
32
IV.
A.
DISCUSSION
ELECTRODE IMPEDANCE
The results of the experiments described in the preceding section
formed on the copper electrodes in the salt water was extremely delicate
and would slough off, causing sharp resistance changes during the tests.
Although all of the materials were found to form oxidation on their surfaces during the tests, only those on copper, zinc, and silver appeared
to cause radical
there is
cular nature, could increase the total surface area appreciably over the
smooth surface.
of this paper,
is
platinum platinum-black.
33
also shows
high degree of
In
earlier
In
carbon used in the later tests may have effectively increased the surface area in the same manner as the platinizing did to the platinum.
If this is the case,
good electrode for considerably less cost than either platinum or silver.
A second possible mechanism by which the coatings may reduce the
of the electron but holds the ions far enough away from the surface
of the metal to preclude the cloud formation.
does not explain the behavior of carbon.
It is
resistance.
The materials which show strong polarization characteristics such
as
trodes were also smooth and hard prior to coating, as they were cold
rolled into the desired thickness and had experienced some strain
hardening.
the surface characteristics of the electrode, other methods of reduction could be tested, such as machine roughening or acid etching, to
34
B.
ANTENNA DEPLOYMENT
Deployment and recovery of loop antennas and short rigid dipoles
up to several
non-rigid, long-
Also,
if there are any loops formed in the connecting wires, unwanted voltages
deployed and recovered in 150 feet of water in Monterey Bay from the
R/V ACANIA.
polypropylene line.
The antenna
The
pressure vessel was connected to the ship's winch with 600 feet of
35
water and the antenna was streamed out on the desired heading.
When
the antenna was fully streamed, the instrument package was lowered just
five pound
with the other electrode, while steaming dead slow on the desired
heading, until
Retrieval
connecting the electrode, then retrieving the antenna wire and other
Upon recovery
the antenna system was inspected for damage and none was found.
It is
anticipated that this system can be used for longer antennas and greater
depths, as long as the bottom is smooth sand or clay.
rough bottoms there is
and causing
C.
In
rocky or
damage.
ELECTRODE NOISE
As mentioned in section 2 of this paper, the main source of antenna
electrode.
due to a disturbance of
If this is
correct, then the choice of electrode material could greatly affect the
noise of the system.
In
water from moving directly across the surface of the electrode, while
allowing free contact of the electrode with the water.
Wrapping the
36
tendency to build up
compromise
between the maximum allowable resistance and the amount of noise which
can be tolerated.
porous polypro-
are accomplished.
It is
larger
impedance,
37
APPENDIX A
Antenna
Dipole
oc
IE
+ 2R
-Jtu
V
V
NM
sin $
^|
A B sin %
L
TT
3
3
N A B
L
A B
-Jo3 N
Loop
sc
5^2
JojL.
^|
Table
are made:
(i
semi
infinite conducting
medium,
is
is
Table
to the E field.
= signal
A,
number of turns
frequency
area of loop
L
B =
L,
L
a
38
and gives
The subscripts
and D will
respectively.
A.
(B).
displacement currents,
E--&T,
where n is the complex intrinsic characteristic impedance of the conducting medium and is given as
.0
j
where y,
a.
co
and a, and
VVl
disregarding the phase shift and using the values for sea water of
fay
= 4
S/m and y
tt
x 10"
E =
H/m obtains
4.46 x 10
2
B
\p*
ind
OC,
= i
E = I
4.46 x 10
39
Bv/oT
V
"
OCpj
oc.
implies
a NA
and substituting a =
at a frequency of
4.46
meter and
2-
I =
4.46
5.7
10
Hz
turns
10
B i/c7
meters.
used for the loop and the dipole, the wire resistances (R
are
B.
358 R
=
L
with V
ocL
SCD
scL
and
ocD
W^D V
+ 2
ocL
/(R
358
358 R
I
scD
scL
JwlJ
+
L
jcoL.
+ 2 Rr
E
40
surface area of
and number 12
copper wire,
.005 a
wD
=
2 R
L
^p
V
.28
(2
and
K79
I
C.
* JmL -
SC n
285
SC
>
6.28
SC
"
rD s (4 k
I S
rL
yields
2
)/tt
(3 k
)/4
from whence:
RD "
b
3
RL
D.
RD
=170G RL
earths static magnetic field, it is assumed that the motion of the dipole
is
in
the horizontal
axis.
and amplitudes
respectively.
41
oj
and
The noise voltage generated in the loop due to the above motion is
given by;
d
NML
= N
B sin
N A.
(e
sin
a)
t)
dt
Therefore
Vmmi
NML
co
B sin
4>
oj
from section II
NMD
l S
Sin
C0S w
co
N A.
sin
cos w t = i S
<J>
co
sin
cf>
and
A,
cos
co
from whence
-Lh
using I
100 m,
.01
E.
m,
"
N A,
5.7 x 10
tt
gives
5
5.58 x 10"
rad. = 11.5 sec of arc.
generate noise in both antenna systems. In the case of the loop antenna
the noise appears to be associated with turbulence in the water flow
42
Enclosing
of the loop, either by increasing its size or adding turns, also increases its sensitivity with respect to this noise whereas with the
dipole, an increase in sensitivity by lengthening the antenna has no
43
en
oo
3
S-
+J
c
Q.
O
O
c:
O)
+->
c
o
I
0>
CO
en
44
Antenn a
Fig.
2.
45
Configuration
i/>
1/7
sl/>
1/1
O)
s-
o.
aj
T3
C
03
iO)
T3
S_
o
o
d)
en
46
^WMHi
v.-v
S-
00
s-
9HBfS|
47
sfe
&?&&*ssa&;
:.- 'V:v:'
:
:
:'
:'
t0i
48
Incoming
TM Wave
Refracted TM
Wave
v
(a)
Incoming
TE Wave
Refracted TE
Wave
(b)
Fig. 6(a)
(b)
49
Amp
F1g.
7.
Dipole Antenna
El
Fig.
8.
Cw
El
Fig.
9.
50
F1g.
Electrode as
10.
Spherical
Current Source
e"
E
re\e
^*~ *
^+
o o o/o o
e
+
+-
+ +
y
o oo o o
B
Fig.
11.
Electrode
n.5 cm
.Material
Fiberglass
Res i n
A.
2.5 cm
Plastic Cup
Banana plug
<e
(-3 <**->)
Fig.
12.
Experimental
51
Electrode Configuration
o
100 cm
ir
Electrodes
vv
Recorder
Recorder
^v
Signal
Fig.
13.
B
Generator
100 cm
Electrodes
Voltmeter
in
Signal
Fig.
14.
(ftj Voltmeter
Generator
52
Signal
Generator
Signal
Generator
(a)
I""v y y
Si
c)
c
i
(b)
Fig.
15.
Receiving Impedance Measurement Configuration
(a) Open Circuit Voltage
(b) Short Circuit Current
53
CD
Scu
a.
UJ
S-
-a
CD
</i
in
<D
o
S_
4J
U
<D
54
+J
c
m
Q.
X
o
4-
-o
O
i.
55
a;
o
o>
c
c
o
o
o
rt3
CD
oo
'**>2v **:*>::*:::
56
Fig.
19.
57
"
'>,
m
fyspy.y;--:-
Iff^l-
WM .,
IS life
$%#
Hi'
il
'
'
'
'
-IP
1/)
^MMWJIt>iaca
4->
(0
S_
<0
Q.
<CL
13
a.
(1)
Q.
S
o
o
CM
58
10
.66
in
K
U
I
i
I
a
0.0
0.2
0.H
0.S
HERTZ
Fig.
21.
Silver
59
Z vs
0.5
.0
.0
0.S
Z =
.36
.044
f
0.S
in
y
h
z
0.H
I
I
a
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
0. H
0.E
0.9
HERTZ
Fig. 2.
Silver Silver-Chloride
60
Z vs
1.0
00
H0
H00
3S0
300
III
q:
bi
2S0
i-
UI
200
I
I
D
SB
!00
S0
0.0
0.H
0.2
0.E
HERTZ
Fig.
23.
Aluminum
61
Z vs
0.5
1.0
.0
H.S
H.0
3.s:
3.0
in
u
h
u
i
2,
2.0
r
i
D
.0
0.
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.H
0.S
HERTZ
Fig.
24.
Carbon
62
Z vs
0.B
.0
S.0
H.E
H.0
z = i.8
,23
3.S
3.0
in
2.E
y
i
2,0
i
i
.5
.0
0.2
0.0
0.H
0.2
0.E
HERTZ
Fig.
25.
Copper
63
Z vs
0.3
1.0
00
H0
H00
30
56.66 f
-.75
323
in
25:0
i-
y
i
200
i
D
!S0
!00
0.0
0.2
0.H
0.E
HERTZ
Fig.
26.
Nickel
64
Z vs
0.B
1.0
IBB
30
SB
7B
SB
IH
y
h
u
s
SB
H0
I
I
D
30
20
10
0.0
0.2
E.S
0.H
HERTZ
Fig.
27.
Lead
65
Z vs
0.B
.0
IB
B
Z =
4.65
.23
f"
in
III
u
I
1
I
I
0.3
0.E
0.H
0,2
HERTZ
Fig. 28.
Platinum
66
Z vs
0.5
1.0
.0
Z =
.-.04
.749 f
0.B
*
0.E
in
y
h
u
i
0.H
i
i
Q
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.H
0.E
0.H
HERTZ
Fig.
29.
Platinum Platinum-Black
67
Z vs
.0
100
312
B0
Z =
44.7
70
E0
in
k
id
h
y
S0
H0
30
20
10
0.0
0.G
0.H
0.2
HERTZ
Fig.
30.
Tin
68
Z vs
0.S
f"
100
30
B2
70
sa
in
Z =
y
h
6.88
f"
.64
y
s:
H0
i
i
30
20
10
0.0
0.2
0.H
B.S
0.0
HERTZ
Fig.
31.
Stainless Steel
69
Z vs
1.0
100
30
OB
70
50
in
III
h
u
I
Z =
12.86
f"
H0
I
I
a
30
20
10
0.2
0.0
0.E
0.H
HERTZ
F1g.
32.
Tungsten
70
Z vs
0.S
1.0
00
H0
H00
3zm
300
in
y
h
y
i
Z =
2S0
27.3 f
200
i
i
a
IS0
!00
0.0
0.H
0.2
0.S
HERTZ
Fig.
33.
Titanium
71
Z vs
0.5
1.0
.85
S.0
H.S
H.0
3.S
Z =
3.0
-.25
75 f
in
2.
u
i
2.0
i
i
a
.0
0.S
0.0
0,0
0.2
0.E
0.H
HERTZ
Fig.
34.
Zinc
72
Z vs
0.5
1.0
H.0
3.S
3.0
2.
2.0
Ifl
h
J
D
>
.0
0. s
0.0
0
00
MILL
Fig.
35.
Silver
73
IS0
RMPS
E vs
200
20
H.0
3.S
3.0
2.S
2.0
in
i-
D
>
!
.0
O
0.S
Q
0.0
4-
100
200
120
MILL! RMFS
Fig. 36.
74
vs
20
H.0
o
3.S
3.0
2.S
2.0
in
h
j
D
>
.0
0.S
G)
0.0
0
100
!S0
MILL! HMPS
Fig. 37.
Aluminum
75
E vs
200
2S0
H.0
3.S
3.0
2.S
O
O
2.0
in
i-
j
D
>
.s
.0
0.
0.0
o
o
2S
MILL!
Fig.
38.
Carbon
76
50
RMPS
E
vs
75
100
H.0
3.S
3.0
2. S
2.0
in
j
D
>
.0
O
0.S
O
0.0
50
!00
l0
MILL! RMPS
Fig.
39.
Copper
77
E vs
200
2S0
H.0
3.2
3.0
2.2
2.0
III
h
J
a
>
.0
O
0.2
O
0.0
50
120
100
MILL! BMPS
Fig. 40.
Nickel
78
vs
200
220
H.0
3.E
3.0
2.
2.0
in
i-
j
D
>
.0
0.S
O
0.0
= <^=
-2
MILL!
Fig.
2S
41.
Lead
79
sa
RMPS
E
vs
72
00
H.0
3.S
3.0
2.S
-0
2.0
01
1.5
a
>
!
.0
0.SQ
o
0.0
0
100
200
150
MILL! RMPS
Fig.
42.
Platinum Platinum-Black
80
vs
20
4.0
3.S
3.0
2 .
2.0
in
i-
j
D
>
.0
C)
o
0.0
M1LL1
Fig.
10
100
43.
81
Tin
RMPS
E vs
200
20
H.0
3.S
3.0
2.
2.0
in
h
j
n
>
.0
0.S
C)
C)
O
0.0
MILL1
Fig. 44.
RMP5
Stainless Steel
82
200
100
vs
2S0
H.0
3.E
3.0
2.
SI
2.0
in
I-
.s
J
a
>
o
1
.0
1
0.S
1
0.0r:
0.0
Fig.
'
1.0
MILL!
RMPS
45.
Tungsten
83
E vs
2.0
H.0
3.S
3.0
2.S
2.0
in
h
j
D
>
.0
0.2
2)
0.0
0
IS0
100
M1LL1 RMPS
Fig.
Zinc
46.
84
E vs
200
2S0
ZO
vwv'
-.J.OVwW'
to-oW
tO
- Z.O vw *
J-
T%V
1-
(a)
&
flRCC05(l-Sp
j4-iWccda(/-,
Fig.
47.
Receiving Impedance Lissajous
(a) E
vs E
I
vs I
,
r
T
T
r
(b) I
vs E
phase angle
T
(c)
vs E,
phase angle
85
Patterns
3"
Line
Polypropylene
Line
Electrode
Wire
Pressure Vessel
(a)
Ships Motion
(b)
Fig.
48.
Dipole Antenna Deployment
(a) On surface
(b) Lowering
(c) On Bottom
86
Electrode
Bouy
REFERENCES
1.
2.
Bannister, Peter R.
ELF Effective Noise Measurements Taken in
Connecticut During 1976 , Naval Underwater Systems Center,
Newport RI, 1977.
NUSC Tech Report 5681
3.
4.
Dinger, Robert J. and others, Techniques for Ocean-Bottom Measurements of Magnetic Fields with a Superconducting Magnetometer,
IEEE Transactions on Geoscience Electronics
V. GE-15, No. 4,
p. 228-231, 1977.
M.S.
p.
118-120, McGraw-Hill,
5.
6.
7.
8.
Fraser- Smith, A.C., Bubenik, D.M. and Villard, O.C. Jr., Air/
Undersea Communication at Ultra-Low-Frequencies Using Airborne
Loop Antennas, Stanford Electronics Laboratories, Stanford Tech.
Report No. 4207-6, 1977.
9.
10.
11.
Graham, G.
An Account of Observations Made of the Variation of
the Horizontal Needle at London in the Latter Part of 1722 and
the beginning of 1723, Phil. Trans. Ray. Soc, London, V. A32,
p. 96-107, 1724.
,
87
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Natural
Nannestad, L. Brock., EM Phenomena in the ELF Range:
Background Noise and Instrumentation for its Measurement, SACLANT
ASW Research Center, LaSpezia, Tech. Report No. 37, 15 June 1965.
17.
Oldenburg, 0., Stromverdrangung Beim Seekabel Archiv fur Elektrotechnik, (Germany), V. 7, No. 11, November 1920.
18.
1975.
260-265, McGraw-
19.
20.
Strarup, T., Equipment for Measuring the Horizontal Electric FieldStrength at Sea in the Frequency Interval of 1-32 Ops, SACLANT
ASW Research Center, LaSpecia, Tech. Memo No. 96, 31 January 1966,
unpublished.
21.
22.
88
p.
Elsevier
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
89
: 80131
Thesis
D1883 Dearth
c.l
Investigation of electrode materials for low
frequency electric antennas in sea water.
Thesis
D1883
'180131
Dearth
Investigation of elec-'.
trode materials for low
frequency electric antennas in sea water.