Arduino front end ideas

So, as mentioned in previous posts, I reckon it’s worth trying to use Arduinos as front-end microcontrollers for this project, as shown in the block diagram here. An Arduino Uno has 6 analog inputs, and the ESP8266 WiFi card which I plan to use has one. These are quite limited – 10 bit ADCs with bandwidth that at best may go up into a few kHz. As such, while they should be ok for picking up seismic data, they fall far short for the ELF/VLF radio capture which should really go up to the region of 20kHz.

On the seismic side, I think a first pass worth trying is a home-hacked sensitive, one axis sensor, plus a 3 axis gyro and a 3 axis accelerometer. I’ll come back to this is a while – I need to research & buy the gyro & accelerometers. But I have all the components for an attempt at a useful radio subsystem, provisional design as follows…


Starting at top left, the blue circle represents the actual ELF/VLF radio receiver. This will be some kind of antenna, picking up the electric field with a frequency range from somewhere probably in the 100s of mHz up to around say 200kHz. A good starting point for this seems to be the BBB-4 VLF Receiver. It’s a relatively simple 2-transistor design, with a high impedance FET input followed by a bit of further amplification provided by a regular BJT.

A major problem, as mentioned here before is mains hum interference. It seems that as well as the 50Hz fundamental, there’s also a significant amount of the 3rd harmonic at 150Hz. So I propose using notch filters at these frequencies (also in that earlier post). Given what will follow in the circuit, I don’t think these need to be very high Q/narrow, just enough to prevent these parts of the input swamping everything else, saturating what comes next. These filters are shown as the yellow block in the diagram.

Next comes a bank of bandpass filters. The Arduino+ESP8266 offer 7 channels, so I propose having the first being relatively broadband, pretty much just a buffer for everything coming from the receiver (post notches). After each of these will be a simple peak level detector, shown above as a diode & capacitor. The level on these will be passed onto the Arduino/ESP8266 analogue inputs.

(The diagram is simplified a bit. The gain of the different stages will need to be figured out, additional gain/buffering/level-shifting/limiting stages will be needed).

The key references on ELF/VLF radio precursors to earthquakes are (note especially the OPERA project) and a chapter in Roberto Romero’s Radio Nature book. Alas, it seems that research is fairly inconclusive (and in places contradictory). Radio frequencies from the milliHertz right up to microwave are mentioned, may contain useful information. But keeping things simple is a major consideration here, so I’ll stick to somewhere a bit below audio up to a bit above. Yes, this project is experimental…

I intend to do a bit more examination of the signals that appear in VLF before going further, though whatever, the choice of frequency bands at this point has to be fairly arbitrary. Pretty much decades in the audio range seem a reasonable starting point. So on top of 0. broadband, here goes:

  1. 0.01 … 10Hz
  2. 20Hz
  3. 200Hz
  4. 2kHz
  5. 20kHz
  6. 40kHz … 200kHz

The question of how narrow/broad to make the filters for best results is another question that I reckon can only be answered with the help of experimentation. But it is possible to make pragmatic educated guesses. I intend using general-purpose op amps for implementation.

At the bottom end of (1.), I suspect it’ll be more effort that it’s worth to worry too much about LF roll off, a simple buffered CR filter, should be adequate. Effectively just DC blocking. For the top end of (1.), a straightforward two op amp LP filter should be fine. For 2. – 5. bandpass filters made from 2 op amps should make a fair starting point. Regarding the steepness of their curves, Butterworth configurations (maximally flat in passband) keep design straightforward.

You may notice that 3. + are at multiples of 50Hz. But I’m hoping that using standard value/tolerance components will make enough offset to alleviate the hum harmonics. E.g. using the Sallen-Key circuit (this is a low pass, but shows what I’m talking about):


This gives fc = 15.9 kHz and Q = 0.5, subject to component tolerances (typical inexpensive capacitors are +/-10%). The kind of values that are probably close enough to the decades above to usefully split ranges, but (hopefully) offcentre for the 50Hz harmonics.

I don’t know if I’ve mentioned it before, but as the radio receiver needs to be as far away as possible from power lines (which will likely be determined by my WiFi range), I’m intending using little solar panels feeding rechargeable batteries for power.

While on the subject, I reckon it’ll also be worthwhile adding data from other environmental sensors, notably for temperature and acoustic noise (a mic). Pretty straightforward for Arduinos. Variations in this data may be unlikely to be useful as earthquake precursors, but they will almost certainly play a part in environmental noise picked up by the radio & seismic sensors. My hope is to get a Deep Learning configuration together that will in effect subtract this from the signals of interest.


Arduino – initial experiences

skip to Arduino/WiFi bit, also Issues Raised and a Cunning Plan

Requirements & Constraints

On the hardware side of this project, I want to capture local seismic and ELF/VLF radio data. I’ve given myself two major constraints: it should be simple; it should be low cost. These constraints are somewhat conflicting. For example, on the seismic side, a simple approach would be to purchase a Raspberry Shake, an off-the-shelf device based on a Raspberry Pi and an (off-the-shelf) geophone. Unfortunately, these gadgets start at $375 USD, and that’s only for one dimension (and there may be software licensing issues). I want to capture 3D data, and want to keep the price comfortably under $100. Note that project non-constraints are absolute measurement, calibration etc. So the plan is to hack something. I’m taking rather a scattergun approach to the hardware – find as many approaches as are feasible and try them out.

Both the seismic and radio sensor subsystems have particular requirements when it comes to physical location. The seismic part should ideally be firmly attached to local bedrock; the radio part should be as far away as possible from interference – mains hum being the elephantine wasp in the room. For my own installation this will probably mean bolting the seismic part to my basement floor (which is largely on bedrock) and having the radio part as far up the fields as I can get it.

What seems the most straightforward starting point is to feed data from the sensors into a local ADC, pass this through a microcontroller into a WiFi transceiver, then pick this up on the home network. (WiFi range may well be an issue – but I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it).

The two microcontroller systems that seem most in the frame due to their relatively low cost are the aforementioned Raspberry Pi and the Arduino family. For a first pass, something Arduino-based seems the best bet – they are a lot cheaper than the Pis, and have the advantage of having multiple ADCs built in (compared to the Pi’s none – though there are straightforward add-ons).

Arduino Fun

Quite a while ago I ordered a couple of Arduino Unos and WiFi shields from Banggood, a China-based retailer of low cost stuff. My only prior experience with Arduinos was when my brother was building something MIDI-related and hit a code problem. He mailed me on the offchance and amusingly I was able to solve the problem in my reply – it was a fairly easy bit of C (I hadn’t done any other C for years, but coding is coding).

I instantly fell in love with the Arduino boards (actually a clone by GeekCreit). After very little time at all I was able to use the Arduino IDE to get some of the example code running on one of the devices. Light goes on, light goes off, light goes on… Very user friendly.

ESP8266 Nightmares

In my naivety, I assumed the WiFi shields would be as straightforward. Most probably are, but the ones I ordered have been distinctly painful so far. But I can at least put slow progress so far down as a learning experience. Essentially the ones I got have several issues. The story so far:

The boards I got are labeled “Arduino ESP8266 WiFi Shiald Version 1.0 by WangTongze”. Yup, that’s ‘Shiald’, not auspicious. The first major issue was that the only official documentation was in Chinese (mandarin?). I wasted a lot of time trying to treat them as more standard boards. But then found two extremely helpful blog posts by Claus : Using ESP8266 Shield ESP-12E ( by WangTongze with an Arduino Uno and Arduino ESP8266 WiFi Shield ( by WangTongze Comparison.

The first of these posts describes a nifty little setup, using an Arduino board as a converter from USB to TTL level RS232 that the Shiald can understand (I didn’t think to order such an adapter). It looks like this:


By default the Shiald plugs its serial TX/RX pins to the Arduino’s, which does seem a design flaw. But this can (apparently) be flipped to using software serial via regular digital I/O pins on the Uno. A key thing needed is to tell the Shiald to use 9600 baud rather than its default 115200. The setup above allows this. This part worked for me.

However, at this point, after bending the TX/RX pins out of the way on the Shiald and plugging it in on top of the Uno (with jumpers to GPIO for TX/RX), I couldn’t talk to it. So going back to Claus’s post, he suggests updating the Shiald’s firmware. Following his links, I tried a couple, ended up with the setup spewing gibberish (at any baud rate).

At this point – after a good few hours yesterday, I was ready to cut my losses with the WiFi Shialds. I’d mentioned to danbri that I was struggling with these cards and he mentioned that he’d had the recommendation (from Libby) of Wemos cards. So I started having a look around at what they were. As it happens, they have a page on their wiki Tutorial – Returning a Wemos D1 Mini to Factory Firmware (AT). The D1 uses the same ESP8266 chips as my Shiald, so this morning, nothing to lose, adjusted the script and gave it a shot. Going back to the setup in the pic (with DIP switches tweaked as Claus suggests) it worked! (Tip – along the way of flashing, I had to press the Shiald’s reset button a couple of times).


So far so pleasing – I thought I might have bricked the board.

(See also ESP8266 Wifi With Arduino Uno and Nano)

After this I’d tried with the Shiald mounted on top of the Arduino in a good few configurations with various different software utilities, haven’t yet got everything talking to everything else, but this does feel like progress.

Issues Raised and a Cunning Plan

Sooo… these Shialds have been rather thieves of time, but it’s all learning, innit.

These bits of play have forced me into reading up on the Arduinos a bit more. For this project, a key factor is the ADC sample rate. It seems that the maximum achievable for a single ADC is around 9kHz (with 10 bit precision). That should be plenty for the seismic sensor. The radio sensor is another matter. I’d like to be able to cover up to say 20kHz, which means a sampling rate of at least 40kHz. I’m still thinking about this one, but one option would be to use an ADC shield – these ones from Mayhew Labs look plenty – though getting the fast data along to WiFi could well be an issue (intermediate baud rates). If necessary, some local processing could be a workaround. I have been intending to present the radio data to the neural network(s) as spectrograms so maybe eg. running an FFT on the Arduino may be feasible.

Along similar lines, I may have a Cunning Plan, that is to shift some of the processing from digital to analog. This is likely to need a fair amount of research & experimentation, but the practical circuitry could be very straightforward. It seems at least plausible that the earthquake precursors are going to occur largely in particular frequency regions. The Arduino has 6 analog inputs. So imagine the radio receiver being followed by 6 bandpass filters, each tuned around where precursors may be expected. A simple diode & (leaky) capacitor peak level detector for each of these could provide a very crude spectrogram, at a rate the Arduino could easily handle. Op amp BP filters are straightforward and cheap, so an extra $5 on the analog side might save $40 and a oad more work afterward.

Regarding the research – a key source is (of course) Renato Romero’s, notably the OPERA project – although that does seem to focus at the low end of potential frequencies.

Revisiting Hum Filters

Skip to filter circuits:

I’m in a relatively noisy environment when it comes to mains hum having overhead power lines nearby. So any ELF/VLF receiver I put together will have to deal with this.

To get an idea of what kind of filtering I might need I simply put a jack plug with bare terminals into the mic in of a laptop, held on to it to make myself an antenna, and recorded for half a minute using Audacity. Here’s a snippet of the resulting waveform:


Yup, that is one well-distorted sine wave. Reminds me of the waveform going to bulbs from triac-based dimmers, though haven’t any in the house.

More usefully, here’s the spectrum plot (Audacity rocks!) :


There’s a clear peak at 50Hz. Next highest is at 150Hz, the 3rd harmonic. It’s around 12dB down, which (assuming it’s the voltage ratio being shown, ie. 20*log10(V2/V1)) is 1/4 of the voltage. Next comes 100Hz, the 2nd harmonic, about 30dB down, about 1/32 of the voltage (from ratio = 10^(dB/20)).

(I’m in Italy where like most of the world the mains AC frequency is 50Hz. In the Americas it tends to be 60Hz).

So I reckon I definitely need to cut the 50Hz as much as possible, probably 150Hz too.

Digital filters are relatively straightforward to implement in software, but here there’s a snag. The incoming signal is analog, so will need to go through an ADC. The ELF/VLF signal of interest is likely to be of very small amplitude compared to the mains hum. So using say a 16-bit ADC, capturing the whole signal at maximum resolution, it’s conceivable that the interesting signal only occupies a couple of bits, or maybe even be below a single bit. So really the filtering has to happen in the analog chain, before the ADC. Experimentation will be needed, but I imagine a setup like this will be required:


There are a few options for the kind of receiver to use, essentially coil-based (magnetic component of the radio wave) or antenna (electrical component), the nature of the early circuitry and pre-amp will be dependent on this. But the main role of the pre-amp is to boost the signal well above the noise floor of subsequent stages (using low-noise components). At a first guess, something in the region of x10 – x100 should be adequate.

Next comes the filter(s). Now the fortunate thing here is that the ELF/VLF frequency ranges I’m considering, say 5Hz-20kHz are pretty much the audio frequency ranges and are thus within the scope of standard audio components. Well, 5Hz is below the nominal 20Hz-20kHz figures given for audio, but the key thing is that at the high end, it’s nowhere near anything requiring exotic components. Even the humble 741 op-amp (dating from 1968) has a unity-gain bandwidth around 1MHz. For the TL071 family, a reasonable low-cost default these days it’s 3MHz.

One option for filtering the mains hum out would be to use a high pass filter and only look at the higher end of VLF (conversely, a low pass filter and go for ELF). But notch (band stop) filters can be pretty straightforward, so it should be productive to target just the 50Hz (and maybe 150Hz).

(A more exotic approach would be to use something like an analog bucket brigade line device as used in many analog phaser & flanger audio effects boxes, with its delay fixed at the period of the fundamental 50Hz. Mixing this inverted with the input signal non-inverted will cause cancellation at the fundamental and all it’s harmonics, ie. a comb filter. But not only does that seem overkill here, it will in effect degrade the signal of interest).

There are a few alternatives for notch filters. While they can be built from passive components, there are significant benefits to using active components, especially in terms of controlling the parameters. For these reasons and circuit simplicity, op-amps are a good choice over discrete components.

There are three leading candidate circuit topologies, as follows.

Active Twin-T Notch

This classic passive circuit is the starting point.


The notch frequency is given by fc = 1 / (2 pi R C)

This assumes a low impedance source for Vin and a high impedance connected to Vo, which can easily be achieved using op-amp buffers. One drawback of this setup is that its selectivity, the slope of the sides of the notch, is fairly poor. This can be significantly increased by using op-amps to bootstrap the T :


The notch frequency is determined as for the grounded T above, only this time the Q/selectivity can be varied, according to the values of R4 and R5.

But a troublesome problem remains: all 6 components on which the frequency depends have to have precise values to place the notch where required. Any variation is likely to lead to a sloppy notch, of low Q. While 1% tolerance resistors are the norm these days, capacitors tend to have tolerances more like 5 or 10%.  One option is to use reasonably well-matched capacitors (from the same batch) and vary the resistors. But this still leave 3 variables, with some level of interdependence.

(I’ve actually got this one on a breadboard at the moment. For a one-off circuit it isn’t unreasonable to use resistors a little below the calculated values in series with pots, and once fine tuned replaced with fixed values).

Bainter Notch

This is quite a nifty circuit (and new to me). The main benefits are described in the title of Bainter’s own description : Active filter has stable notch, and response can be regulated. Notch depth depends on gain and not (passive) component values.


I’ve yet to play with this one, but it certainly shows promise. A downside is that the component values calculation is rather unwieldy. Another ref. is this TI doc: Bandstop filters and the Bainter topology.

State Variable Filter

The State Variable topology is very versatile, offering high- and low-pass outputs as well as bandpass. By mixing the high- and low-pass outputs or the input with the bandpass output, a notch can be achieved. Crucially the gain, center frequency, and Q may be adjusted separately. A bonus compared to the Twin-T is that the frequency is determined by just 2 resistors and 2 capacitors. A few days ago I stumbled on a tweaked version of the standard topology which offers a few advantages. I won’t go into details here, it’s all described in the source of this diagram – Three-op-amp state-variable filter perfects the notch.


Once I’ve played with the Twin-T a bit more, I’ll have a go with this one. I have a good feeling about it.


Human Impact on Radio Nature

I’ve stumbled on two pieces of info related to this in the past couple of days so reckon it’s worth making a note.

The first is NASA’s Van Allen Probes Spot Man-Made Barrier Shrouding Earth, actually about high-powered VLF transmitters for ground-submarine comms,  probably affecting the near-space environment. “A number of experiments and observations have figured out that, under the right conditions, radio communications signals in the VLF frequency range can in fact affect the properties of the high-energy radiation environment around the Earth”. The main reference paper is on a pay-for site, so little detail is at hand.

The second is Why I Quit Natural Radio, a post by a Radio Nature enthusiast who’s been monitoring ELV/VLF for decades, noting a massive drop off in the ‘interesting’ natural signals he receives. He suggests the cause may be the rise in the use of mobile phones, associated UHF/microwave emissions (‘Cellular frequencies‘) affecting the magnetosphere and/or ionosphere thus impacting VLF propagation. A term he’s coined is rather disturbing ‘electromagnetic smog’.

He also refers to HAARP, a research system (and favourite of conspiracy theorists) that has historically blasted the ionosphere with high power HF. According to official sources it hasn’t been used for a long time. I have my doubts that relatively brief, localised high-energy signals like these would have any lasting impact – similar events might well occur in nature, and these natural systems tend to be very resilient.


Candidate Neural Network Architecture : PredNet

While I sketched out a provisional idea of how I reckoned the network could look, I’m doing what I can to avoid reinventing the wheel. As it happens there’s a Deep Learning problem with implemented solutions that I believe is close enough to the earthquake prediction problem to make a good starting point : predicting the next frame(s) in a video. You train the network on a load of sample video data, then at runtime give it a short sequence and let it figure out what happens next.

This may seem a bit random, but I think I have good justification. The kind of videos people have been working with are things like human movement or motion of a car. (Well, I’ve seen one notable, fun, exception : Adversarial Video Generation is applied to the activities of Mrs. Pac-Man). In other words, a projection of objects obeying what is essentially Newtonian physics. Presumably seismic events follow the same kind of model. As mention in my last post, I’m currently planning on using online data that places seismic events on a map – providing the following: event time, latitude, longitude, depth and magnitude. The video prediction nets generally operate over time on x, y with R, G, B for colour. Quite a similar shape of data.

So I had a little trawl of what was out there.  There are a surprisingly wide variety of strategies, but one in particular caught my eye : PredNet. This is described in the paper Deep Predictive Coding Networks for Video Prediction and Unsupervised Learning (William Lotter, Gabriel Kreiman & David Cox from Harvard) and has supporting code etc. on GitHub. Several things about it appealed to me. It’s quite an elegant conceptual structure, which translates in practice into a mix of convnets/RNNs, not too far from what I anticipated needing for this application. This (from the paper) might give you an idea:


Another plus from my point of view was that the demo code is written using Keras on Tensorflow, exactly what I was intending to use.

Yesterday I had a go at getting it running.  Right away I hit a snag: I’ve got this laptop set up for Tensorflow etc. on Python 3, but the code uses, which uses Python 2. I didn’t want to risk messing up my current setup (took ages to get working) so had a go at setting up a Docker container – Tensorflow has an image. Day-long story short, something wasn’t quite right. I suspect the issues I had related to nvidia-docker, needed to run on GPUs.

Earlier today I decided to have a look at what would be needed to get the PredNet code Python3-friendly. Running (Kitti is the demo data set) led straight to an error in Nothing to lose, had a look. “Hickle is a HDF5 based clone of Pickle, with a twist. Instead of serializing to a pickle file, Hickle dumps to a HDF5 file.“. There is a note saying there’s Python3 support in progress, but the cause of the error turned out to be –

if isinstance(f, file):

file isn’t a thing in Python3. But was only passing a filename to this, via, so I just commented out the lines associated with the isinstance. (I guess I should fix it properly, feed back to Hickle’s developer.)

It worked! Well, at least for I’ve got it running in the background as I type. This laptop only has a very wimpy GPU (GeForce 920M) and it took a couple of tweaks to prevent near-immediate out of memory errors:

export TF_CUDNN_WORKSPACE_LIMIT_IN_MB=100, line 35
batch_size = 2 #was 4

It’s taken about an hour to get to epoch 2/150, but I did renice Python way down so I could get on with other things.

Seismic Data

I’ve also spent a couple of hours on the (seismic) data-collecting code. I’d foolishly started coding around this using Javascript/node, simply because it was the last language I’d done anything similar with. I’ve got very close to having it gather & filter blocks of from the INGV service and dump to (csv) file. But I reckon I’ll just ditch that and recode it in Python, so I can dump to HDF5 directly – it does seem a popular format around the Deep Learning community.

Radio Data

Yes, that to think about too.

My gut feeling is that applying Deep Learning to the seismic data alone is likely to be somewhat useful for predictions. From what I’ve read, the current approaches being taken (in Italy at least) are effectively along these lines, leaning towards traditional statistical techniques. No doubt some folks are applying Deep Learning to the problem. But I’m hoping that bringing in radio precursors will make a major difference in prediction accuracy.

So far I have in mind generating spectrograms from the VLF/ELF signals. Which gives a series of images…sound familiar? However, I suspect that there won’t be quantitatively all that much information coming from this source (though qualitatively, I’m assuming vital).  As a provisional plan I’m thinking of pushing it through a few convnet/pooling layers to get the dimensionality way down, then adding that data as another input to the  PredNet.

Epoch 3/150 – woo-hoo!


It was taking way too long for my patience, so I changed the parameters a bit more:

nb_epoch = 50 # was 150
batch_size = 2 # was 4
samples_per_epoch = 250 # was 500
N_seq_val = 100 # number of sequences to use for validation

It took ~20 hours to train. For, it has produced some results, but also exited with an error code. Am a bit too tired to look into it now, but am very pleased to get a bunch of these:





Morse Code Practice Key

Recently I’ve been trying to fill in some of the massive holes in my knowledge about radio. For this reason I’d quite like to have a go at the radio amateur license exams. No idea how to go about it though, the geographic complications. I suppose I might stand a chance with the Italian version, as long as I could take a dictionary with me. Anyone know anything about this?

Anyhow, even though it’s rather anachronistic (and no longer a requirement for the exams), the radio amateur sites all have some mention of Morse Code. I’ve always wanted to learn it, I guess from watching too many spy films. There are loads of things I should be doing, but yesterday’s procrastination was making this gadget. Good fun.


Hardware Delusions

The key front end sensors I wish to build for this project are an ELF/VLF radio receiver and a seismometer. The frequency ranges of interest here are < 20kHz,  in other words, in the audio range (and probably extending a little lower).

As it happens, in a past life I studied audio frequency electronics, transducers, signals and systems, DSP and so on formally for 3 years, have written articles on (nonlinear) analog electronics for a magazine, and probably more significantly have been an electronic music hobbyist for around 40 years. In short, I consider myself something of an expert in the field. The word for this is hubris.

I started planning the sensors like a bull at a gate. On the seismic side, I hadn’t really thought things through very well. On the radio side – I’d only really skimmed Radio Nature, and my knowledge of radio reception is minimal. Since then, the flaws in my ideas have poured out.

Seismic Errors

I’ve got a design for seismic signal sensors roughed out. While a magnet & coil is a more traditional way of detecting audio frequency deflections, I thought it would be neater somehow to use semiconductor Hall Effect devices. A standard design for a proximity detector is one of these components (which are housed much like transistors) backed by a magnet. When a something like a piece of iron passes by, the magnetic flux varies and hence the output of the device (linear output devices are available).

So for my seismometer, the moving part will be a steel ball bearing on a spring, hanging in a jar of oil (for damping). There will be 3 sensors located in the x, y & z directions (N-S, E-W, up-down) relative to this.

One potential complication with this setup had occurred to me. For a (relatively) linear response, the ball bearing would have to move in line with the face of the sensor. Obviously, in practice, most of the time the movement will be off-axis. However, my thinking went, there should still be enough information coming from all 3 sensors in combination to potential determine the deflection of the ball bearing. The data produced by these sensors will ultimately go into a neural network system, and they’re good at figuring out peculiar relationships.

But I’d missed another potential source of problems, it only came to me a couple of days ago. There is likely to be significant, pretty complex, interaction between the ball bearing and all 3 magnets. Whether or not this additional complication will be such that that the directional seismic information is totally obfuscated remains to be seen. I plan to experiment, maybe I’ll need 3 independent sensors…


A little learning is a dang’rous thing. The danger I faced was wasting time & money in building a VLF receiver that simply couldn’t work.

I’d only skimmed the material, but something about the use of a coil as a receiver appealed to me. But the designs I’d seen were all pretty big, say around 1m in diameter. Hmm, thinks I, why not shrink that down to say 30cm and just boost the gain of the receiver circuit. It was only after I’d wound such a coil and picked up nothing but hum & noise that I got around to reading a little more.

It turns out there are two related issues involved: the way a small (relative to wavelength) loop antenna works isn’t exactly intuitive, and also its output is very low. It’s frequency-dependent, but the level of the desired signal is at a similar order of magnitude as the thermal noise generated by the loop, less than that of many op amps. The good Signore Romero, author of Radio Nature, has a practical discussion of this in his description of A Minimal ELF Loop Receiver. (Being at the low end of the frequency range of interest make this rather a worst-case scenario, but the points still apply). Basically there’s a good reason for having a big coil.

Another possible design flaw coming from my lack of learning is that I initially thought it would make sense to have coils in the x, y & z dimensions. As it turns out, because VLF signals are propagated as ground waves (between the surface of the planet and the ionosphere), pretty much all a coil in the horizontal plane will pick up is local noise such as mains hum. But I’m not yet discarding the inclusion of such a loop. Given the kind of neural net processing I have in mind, a signal that is comprised of little more than local noise may well be useful (in effect subtract this from the other signals).

But even having said all this, a loop antenna may still be of no use for me here – Noise Annoys. Renato has an image that nicely sums up the potential problem:


Right now I don’t have the funds to build a loop antenna of any description (big coils use a lot of wire!) but as and when I can, I’ll probably be looking at something along the lines of Renato et al’s IdealLoop (the image above comes from that page).

I do have the components to put together some kind of little portable whip antenna (electric field) receiver, I think I’ll have a look at that next, particularly to try and get an idea of how the noise levels vary in this locale.

I’ve also got one linear Hall effect sensor, so I can have a play around with that to try and get some idea of my seismometer design’s viability.