Why storms interfere with telecommunications?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interference that storms and other atmospheric conditions have on telecommunications, particularly focusing on radio frequency interference (RFI) and the factors that contribute to signal degradation. Participants explore various sources of interference, the role of the ionosphere, and specific effects of weather phenomena on different communication technologies.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants identify atmospheric interference, particularly from electrical storms, as a significant source of radio interference.
  • Others outline four main sources of radio interference, including atmospheric interference, solar and cosmic interference, precipitation static, and fading due to disturbances in the propagation medium.
  • A participant elaborates on the ionosphere's role in radio propagation and its interaction with lightning-induced perturbations.
  • Another participant discusses the impact of rain and water vapor on signal path loss, particularly for microwave frequencies, emphasizing the importance of accounting for these factors in communication link designs.
  • Questions arise about the effects of dust and strong winds on telecommunications, with some suggesting that strong winds alone may not significantly interfere with signals.
  • Participants inquire about the factors determining the range of walkie-talkies, discussing frequency choice, modulation systems, and the influence of terrain and power levels on communication range.
  • There is a discussion on how lower frequencies experience less absorption from water vapor, while higher frequencies, particularly in the microwave range, are more affected.
  • Concerns are raised about the trade-offs between power levels in walkie-talkies and the potential for interference with other users.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the specific mechanisms of interference and the factors affecting telecommunications. There is no consensus on the extent of the impact of various atmospheric conditions, and multiple competing perspectives on the role of different factors remain present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their discussions, such as the dependence on specific atmospheric conditions, the complexity of interference mechanisms, and the variability of communication technologies. Some points remain unresolved, particularly regarding the influence of various particles and weather phenomena on telecommunications.

Charles123
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
I am not referring to solar winds, just normal adverse atmospheric conditions.
Thank you
Regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Radio interference from natural causes can come from at least four sources:

1. Atmospheric interference; electrical storms.
2. Solar and cosmic interference; eruptions on the sun and other stars.
3. Precipitation static from charged particles in the atmosphere. Particles may be rain, sleet, snow, sand, and smoke or dust. Dry particles produce greater charges than wet ones.
4. Fading from disturbances in the medium through which radio waves are propagated.

These interferences appear in electronic equipment as audible noise or errors in the output of some terminal equipments. Atmospheric interference is “wideband”, but the higher the frequency, the less noise interference.

You may visit this NASA site to discover experiments you can do to observe these disturbances:

“Lightning strikes produce radio frequency interference over a broad range of frequencies. Interference from lightning discharges can be heard long distances from the storms that generate them. Because of this, RFI from lightning is very common, especially during prime thunderstorm season in your region of the World. Many services, such as news organizations, governmental agencies, and commercial ventures have data communications links that use the high-frequency (shortwave) portion of the radio spectrum.”
http://radiojove.gsfc.nasa.gov/observing/rfi_samples.htm
 
Thank you for your answer! Can you develop the 4th point?
Regards
 
Here are a few sentences from the Wiki page on “Ionosphere”. Be sure to check out the “See Also” section for more.

“The ionosphere is a part of the upper atmosphere, from about 85 km to 600 km altitude, comprising portions of the mesosphere, thermosphere and exosphere, distinguished because it is ionized by solar radiation. It plays an important part in atmospheric electricity and forms the inner edge of the magnetosphere. It has practical importance because, among other functions, it influences radio propagation to distant places on the Earth.”
“Lightning can cause ionospheric perturbations in the D-region in one of two ways. The first is through VLF (Very Low Frequency) radio waves launched into the magnetosphere. These so-called "whistler" mode waves can interact with radiation belt particles and cause them to precipitate onto the ionosphere, adding ionization to the D-region. These disturbances are called "lightning-induced electron precipitation" (LEP) events. Additional ionization can also occur from direct heating/ionization as a result of huge motions of charge in lightning strikes. These events are called Early/Fast.”
“DX communication, popular among amateur radio enthusiasts, is a term given to communication over great distances. Thanks to the property of ionized atmospheric gases to refract high frequency (HF, or shortwave) radio waves, the ionosphere can be utilized to "bounce" a transmitted signal down to ground.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionosphere
 
Charles123 said:
Thank you for your answer! Can you develop the 4th point?
Regards

something that Bobbywhy didnt comment on in his expansion of point 4

and much more closer to the ground than the ionosphere is, and more directly stormy weather related

That is fading of the signal due directly to increased pathloss caused by absorption of radio signals by rain and increased presence of water vapour in general

This pathloss effect is primarily on the microwave frequencies 1000 MHz (1GHz) and up, which don't use the ionosphere anyway.
Designers of microwave links between say hilltop sites have to take pathloss due to moisture into their "link budgets". If they haven't taken their pathloss calculations correctly or just haven't taken into account very high pathlosses due to extreme weather

I should also comment that, because satellite comms also use microwave frequencies, they are also very susceptable to dropout during extreme weather

Dave
 
davenn, thank you for your answer.
So the "disturbances in the medium through which radio waves are propagated" are related to liquid water and water vapor. What about other particles, dust? I would therefore presume that simply very strong winds (by it self) have no reason to interfere with telecommunications. Is this right?´
Taking this opportunity let me also ask about what determines the range of a walkie-talkie?
Regards
 
Charles123 said:
Taking this opportunity let me also ask about what determines the range of a walkie-talkie?
Regards
The answer to this involves many different variables. Walkie talkie systems are designed for close range and to avoid putting out too much interference for other users. The frequency you choose depends upon the required application. Also, the modulation system may be a factor. Basically, you have to use 'approved', off the shelf, units to comply with the regulations.
The wavelength of many 'walkie talkies' is round about 2m (150MHz VHF) and the best propagation is more or less 'line of sight' because this wavelength will not diffract much around obstacles or over the horizon / hills. We are talking in terms of a couple of Watts of transmitter power (hand held), I assume. For two units at ground level, the range will be only a few km over water (no obstacles) but the horizon gets further way as you elevate your antenna, between tall ship's masts or high hills, the range can extend to several tens of km (for fixed installations with powers of up to 25W). The inverse square law applies so increasing the power by a factor of 10 would increase 'free-space' range by √(10) but there's not a lot of point in using such high powers at ground height. A yacht mast is good value for increasing comms range.
The sensitivity of the receiver and the noise generated at its input can be relevant but there is always interference to contend with and that can't be eliminated except with a directive antenna or possibly filtering (to the possible detriment of the wanted signal too).
Despite all this, you can end up with lousy range sometimes where there is some badly placed obstacle and unbelievably long range on other occasions (briefly) when atmospheric conditions can support very long range propagation in layers of cold air.

Other walkie talkie systems use around 450MHz. They are very short range and tend to work well inside buildings where the waves tend to rattle around well between steel frames (same as with mobile telephones) - much better than VHF systems.
I found this link, which is quite informative.
 
Thank you for your answer.
Beside line of sight and obstacles, what else contributes to weaken the signal? Some kind of lower atmosphere absorption? Water vapor is a factor?
 
Water vapour has little effect until you get up to microwave. The attenuation of the space wave is largely 'beam spreading' at these lower frequencies.
 
  • #10
So low walkietalkie ranges are mainly due to low power and therefore high noise to signal ratio?
 
  • #11
They are 'type approved' which limits the max power. That is being good neighbourly. But, in most circs, their range is limited by terrain. If you used 100W power, the range would not usually increase by much but occasional interference OUT would spoil it for everyone else.
There are many parameters involved and it's a compromise.
The limited range does help with security, actually.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K