250 Watt 1GHz resistor

On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 18:10:42 +0300, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:

I have used a 100 m reel of RG-58 as a dummy load for 1 GHz+ . It does
not matter if the opposite end is open or shorted :).

For higher power level, you had to unreel some few meters from the
reel to help heat transfer.

Yep. I accidentally did the same thing using coax for a dummy load
for a 900 MHz paging transmitter. The outputs of the 8 power amps at
125 watts each, are combined to produce up to 1000 watts. The site
was licensed for 4 frequencies, so the power was changing between 125
and 500 watts output.
<http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/erac1/Glenayre_Nucleus_011.JPG>
The round thing in the middle of the rack is a typical combiner. I
only had a 100 watt dummy load handy, so I figured that I could use
the coax cable to do most of the attenuation. Bad idea at that power
level.

As you mentioned, the problem with the coax dummy load was that the
heat is not distributed uniformly along the coax cable, with most of
the dissipation in the first few feet of coax. Because the
transmitter sees 50 ohms, the VSWR protection circuitry allowed full
power. The result was that the first 10 feet or so of RG-58c/u melted
and began smoking after about 1 or 2 minutes. Had I not killed the
power, I suspect the polyethylene dielectric would have caught fire.

The rest of the 500 ft roll looked undamaged, so I just cut off the
first few feet that looked melted and put the roll back into storage.
After a few odd problems with using coax from that roll, I put the
roll on a TDR to see if there were any oddities. Sure enough, the
first 50 ft was ruined, probably by having the center conductor move
off the center axis line of the coax while the dielectric was melting.
Cutting short lengths from the bad section showed that the center
conductor had indeed moved off center.



--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:23:17 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

I ordered one of these for sat uplink, this with a 24 dB dish I am eying makes about 7500 W
http://www.ebay.com/itm/221556214361
Testing will have to be somewhere in the boonies far away from me.
Sidelobes..

Wonder if I can cook in the beam.
Wonder if it can fry the sat receiver...

First you built a GPS jammer. Now, you're building a satellite uplink
jammer. Are you working on a career as an RF terrorist?

Hint: The typical 2.4GHz barbeque grill dish antenna doesn't have a
maximum tx power rating, mostly because the expected TX power levels
are so low that it wouldn't be an issue. Judging by a quick look at
the PCB balun construction near the feed dipole, I would guess(tm)
about 10 watts maximum. The usual limiting factor is when the 0.5dB
(11%) typical balun loss is sufficient to melt the balun or burn the
PCB. For 10 watts and up, think about a better feed or maybe a
waveguide horn.

Happy jamming...


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:05:43 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:38:32 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in <m0bqu4$ipu$1@news.datemas.de>:

On a sunny day (Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:23:17 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in <m0bq1h$hcl$1@news.datemas.de>:

I ordered one of these for sat uplink, this with a 24 dB dish I am eying makes about 7500 W
http://www.ebay.com/itm/221556214361
Testing will have to be somewhere in the boonies far away from me.
Sidelobes..

Wonder if I can cook in the beam.
Wonder if it can fry the sat receiver...

path attenuation = 32.45 + 20.log(2400000000) + 20.log(40000) = 312.095 dB

Correction:
its 32.45 + 20.log(MHz) + 20.log(km)

32.45 + 20.log(2400) + 20.log(40000) = 192.095 dB

So...

Working this out using the online satellite uplink budget calculator from
http://www.satsig.net/linkbugt.htm
shows we have about 14 dB C/N:
http://panteltje.com/pub/2.4GHz_geostat_sat_uplink_budget.gif
That is for a 3 MHz wide DVB-S signal,
I will be transmitting testcard or test videos.

So it seems the setup is doable!

The downlink wil be at 10 +GHz and reception with a normal 80 cm dish.
So 2 separate dishes.

Interesting!

So you are building equipment for the planned geostationary amateur
radio transponder.

Your power seems to be a bit overkill, I have seen figures about 80 W
with a modified satellite TV dish. This is a linear transponder so you
should have the ability to drop the power level, so that it does not
capture the whole transponder.

At 2.4 GHz at least bad quality RG-58 will have an attenuation about 1
dB/m, so a 100 m reel would attenuate 100 dB.
 
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:31:00 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 28 Sep 2014 18:10:42 +0300) it happened
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
1s8g2a1ripe06p0sb0uea1av24de5i8jq9@4ax.com>:

On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:19:14 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

250 Watt 50 Ohm 1GHz resistor:
http://panteltje.com/pub/250W_1_GHz_dummy_load_IMG_4563.JPG

Needed a dummy load, found this, cheap,
but look at the size, compared to the TO220 next to it!
I wonder....

Are you going to cook liquid nitrogen to get the heat out ?

I have used a 100 m reel of RG-58 as a dummy load for 1 GHz+ . It does
not matter if the opposite end is open or shorted :).

Thats is about 59 dB attenuation ...

Even if everything radiated from the open opposite end, that would
only be 0.25 mW, well below the maximum power levels allowed on the
license free 2.4 GHz band.

>It will still reflect.. 2 x 59 dB?

And the VSWR is ?

It would not trip any SWR protection circuit.
 
On a sunny day (Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:13:55 +0300) it happened
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
<q7ik2a576rpbvkctb2l9vvred24r6l1luc@4ax.com>:

On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:31:00 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 28 Sep 2014 18:10:42 +0300) it happened
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
1s8g2a1ripe06p0sb0uea1av24de5i8jq9@4ax.com>:

On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:19:14 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

250 Watt 50 Ohm 1GHz resistor:
http://panteltje.com/pub/250W_1_GHz_dummy_load_IMG_4563.JPG

Needed a dummy load, found this, cheap,
but look at the size, compared to the TO220 next to it!
I wonder....

Are you going to cook liquid nitrogen to get the heat out ?

I have used a 100 m reel of RG-58 as a dummy load for 1 GHz+ . It does
not matter if the opposite end is open or shorted :).

Thats is about 59 dB attenuation ...

Even if everything radiated from the open opposite end, that would
only be 0.25 mW, well below the maximum power levels allowed on the
license free 2.4 GHz band.

It will still reflect.. 2 x 59 dB?

And the VSWR is ?

It would not trip any SWR protection circuit.

OK, :)
Anyways I decided to mount my resistor on some old AMD Athlon cooler I think I have somewhere,
and maybe it can go in the 9 inch rack where some other stuff like the PA will go.
I will not run the full 250 W on it, so that could work, as long as the plastic from the fan is not melting.
 
On a sunny day (Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:07:38 -0700) it happened Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in <c5ej2apbuieejl6gijrk5brda82beq7f25@4ax.com>:

On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:23:17 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

I ordered one of these for sat uplink, this with a 24 dB dish I am eying makes about 7500 W
http://www.ebay.com/itm/221556214361
Testing will have to be somewhere in the boonies far away from me.
Sidelobes..

Wonder if I can cook in the beam.
Wonder if it can fry the sat receiver...

First you built a GPS jammer. Now, you're building a satellite uplink
jammer. Are you working on a career as an RF terrorist?

Well, it seems I do have a license that is also recognized by the US BTW for the 2400 to 2450 MHz band to 200 Watts.


Hint: The typical 2.4GHz barbeque grill dish antenna doesn't have a
maximum tx power rating, mostly because the expected TX power levels
are so low that it wouldn't be an issue. Judging by a quick look at
the PCB balun construction near the feed dipole, I would guess(tm)
about 10 watts maximum. The usual limiting factor is when the 0.5dB
(11%) typical balun loss is sufficient to melt the balun or burn the
PCB. For 10 watts and up, think about a better feed or maybe a
waveguide horn.

I did select a dish that can handle that power.


>Happy jamming...

Oh come of it.
Do you actually have a ham license yourself?
If not whats that repeater doing in your place?

You should read the whole thread, and not just bust in here with your all-knowing google links.
 
On a sunny day (Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:26:27 +0300) it happened
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
<6nik2ad72t6asp67d7r9p26ts0pra02sgj@4ax.com>:

On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:05:43 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:38:32 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in <m0bqu4$ipu$1@news.datemas.de>:

On a sunny day (Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:23:17 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in <m0bq1h$hcl$1@news.datemas.de>:

I ordered one of these for sat uplink, this with a 24 dB dish I am eying makes about 7500 W
http://www.ebay.com/itm/221556214361
Testing will have to be somewhere in the boonies far away from me.
Sidelobes..

Wonder if I can cook in the beam.
Wonder if it can fry the sat receiver...

path attenuation = 32.45 + 20.log(2400000000) + 20.log(40000) = 312.095 dB

Correction:
its 32.45 + 20.log(MHz) + 20.log(km)

32.45 + 20.log(2400) + 20.log(40000) = 192.095 dB

So...

Working this out using the online satellite uplink budget calculator from
http://www.satsig.net/linkbugt.htm
shows we have about 14 dB C/N:
http://panteltje.com/pub/2.4GHz_geostat_sat_uplink_budget.gif
That is for a 3 MHz wide DVB-S signal,
I will be transmitting testcard or test videos.

So it seems the setup is doable!

The downlink wil be at 10 +GHz and reception with a normal 80 cm dish.
So 2 separate dishes.

Interesting!

So you are building equipment for the planned geostationary amateur
radio transponder.

Right.
well I will use a processor cooler to cool the 250 W resistor.
Its cheaper and smaller than coax,
also coax would heat up and its impedance would change considerably I'd think.
 
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 08:54:03 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On a sunny day (Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:26:27 +0300) it happened
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
6nik2ad72t6asp67d7r9p26ts0pra02sgj@4ax.com>:

On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:05:43 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:38:32 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in <m0bqu4$ipu$1@news.datemas.de>:

On a sunny day (Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:23:17 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in <m0bq1h$hcl$1@news.datemas.de>:

I ordered one of these for sat uplink, this with a 24 dB dish I am eying makes about 7500 W
http://www.ebay.com/itm/221556214361
Testing will have to be somewhere in the boonies far away from me.
Sidelobes..

Wonder if I can cook in the beam.
Wonder if it can fry the sat receiver...

path attenuation = 32.45 + 20.log(2400000000) + 20.log(40000) = 312.095 dB

Correction:
its 32.45 + 20.log(MHz) + 20.log(km)

32.45 + 20.log(2400) + 20.log(40000) = 192.095 dB

So...

Working this out using the online satellite uplink budget calculator from
http://www.satsig.net/linkbugt.htm
shows we have about 14 dB C/N:
http://panteltje.com/pub/2.4GHz_geostat_sat_uplink_budget.gif
That is for a 3 MHz wide DVB-S signal,
I will be transmitting testcard or test videos.

So it seems the setup is doable!

The downlink wil be at 10 +GHz and reception with a normal 80 cm dish.
So 2 separate dishes.

Interesting!

So you are building equipment for the planned geostationary amateur
radio transponder.

Right.
well I will use a processor cooler to cool the 250 W resistor.
Its cheaper and smaller than coax,
also coax would heat up and its impedance would change considerably I'd think.

Since you live in the middle of Europe, why do you want to waste that
good transmitter power into a dummy load ?

With that kind of transmitter power and antenna gain, you should be
able to make daily contacts to Berlin and Paris on a more or less
daily principle using troposcatter propagation.
 
On a sunny day (Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:29:55 +0300) it happened
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
<281l2alivef7m2hq3grvo95hvdicsrsmba@4ax.com>:

Since you live in the middle of Europe, why do you want to waste that
good transmitter power into a dummy load ?

I need the dummy for testing :)
That is to prevent sending some crappy signal to the stars...


With that kind of transmitter power and antenna gain, you should be
able to make daily contacts to Berlin and Paris on a more or less
daily principle using troposcatter propagation.

There was moon bounce on 2 meter.
I dunno if they ever bounced on 13 cm.

IIRC the minimum moon bounce power used was a few milli watt,
using the radio telescope in Dwingelo Netherlands.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth-Moon-Earth_communication
3 mW!
So that should be enough ,at very low bandwidth.
But DVB-S is several MHz wide, and needs more power [1].


I have no data on the exact sensitivity and S/N of the receiver on the Quatar satellite,
also the beam is wider, and expect some interference in that band.
14 dB C/N is a good value, I record HDTV via sat with 14 dB,
although I have often wondered if the indication is correct,
so many changes in the receivers and Linux API...
http://panteltje.com/pub/18dB.gif


Maybe one day I will try some tropo scatter, lots of other projects...
Maybe in the testing phase before 2016...
The amp is in the mail...

I am not sure but I think I found a new way to test 10 GHz ATV links last night....

[1] I think you can make it as slow as you like, the Raspberry Pi DVB-S generator can now set the symbol rate on the command line.
Not even the fractional divider induced jitter seems to destroy the signal...
So you have slow scan too.
 
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 08:51:17 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Well, it seems I do have a license that is also recognized by
the US BTW for the 2400 to 2450 MHz band to 200 Watts.

Yep. I'm sure all the Wi-Fi users will be thrilled by your high
powered experiments. It's a point of contention here in the US. I
managed to convince a few people at the ARRL that it would not be a
good idea to mention that high power on 2.4GHz was legal for hams, but
not for Wi-Fi users, before the FCC. The problem is that there are
millions of Wi-Fi users versus about 700,000 hams, or which a tiny
percentage operate on 2.4GHz. Were the FCC forced to make a decision,
it would likely be against ham radio and high power.

>I did select a dish that can handle that power.

I went back through the thread and didn't see any mention of the dish
beyond the 24dBi gain, which happens to be the gain of the common
barbeque grill style dish. Anyway, it's not the dish that limits the
power. It's the balun.

Happy jamming...

Oh come off it.

Sorry. I'm not into diplomacy this week. Maybe next week.

>Do you actually have a ham license yourself?

AE6KS. It's been in my .signature since the dark ages of Usenet.
<http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=2482894>

>If not whats that repeater doing in your place?

Occupying too much space. I guess you mean the MSF5000. I have two:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/K6BJ-MSF5000/>
I tried to give it away and nobody local wanted it. The problem is
that most of the local repeaters are empty and devoid of users. I
would put it, and several others that I own, on the air if there were
users. Want both? Just pay for the crates and shipping, which I
think will be more than what they're worth.

>You should read the whole thread, and not just bust in here with your all-knowing google links.

I did. What did I miss?

There are 300 messages in sci.electronics.design every day. I don't
think anyone reads all of them. I read about 30, mostly due to lack
of time. As for the "all-knowing Google link", I like to substantiate
my claims with references and background information. I would gladly
not post links, except I don't trust my memory to get everything
correct, and I don't expect all the readers to understand everything
I'm ranting about. A few links for corroboration and background are
always helpful. If you fail to appreciate my efforts on your behalf,
you're not required to click on the links.




--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On a sunny day (Wed, 01 Oct 2014 00:01:10 -0700) it happened Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in <qe8n2altg5ij1t876cu085quqsdm88vqia@4ax.com>:

On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 08:51:17 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

Well, it seems I do have a license that is also recognized by
the US BTW for the 2400 to 2450 MHz band to 200 Watts.

Yep. I'm sure all the Wi-Fi users will be thrilled by your high
powered experiments. It's a point of contention here in the US. I
managed to convince a few people at the ARRL that it would not be a
good idea to mention that high power on 2.4GHz was legal for hams, but
not for Wi-Fi users, before the FCC. The problem is that there are
millions of Wi-Fi users versus about 700,000 hams, or which a tiny
percentage operate on 2.4GHz. Were the FCC forced to make a decision,
it would likely be against ham radio and high power.

Well actually its 2400 to 2450 at 120 W sat only, that is allowed here.
The thread mentioned my trying it in the boonies, but alas it got lost in the noise.
WiFis are mostly local, in a home and the occasional hotspot,
so with relative a lot of signal, and should not really be affected that much if at all.





I did select a dish that can handle that power.

I went back through the thread and didn't see any mention of the dish
beyond the 24dBi gain, which happens to be the gain of the common
barbeque grill style dish. Anyway, it's not the dish that limits the
power. It's the balun.

Well, now 75 W is not really that much.


Happy jamming...

Oh come off it.

Sorry. I'm not into diplomacy this week. Maybe next week.

Neither am I.


Do you actually have a ham license yourself?

AE6KS. It's been in my .signature since the dark ages of Usenet.
http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=2482894

If not whats that repeater doing in your place?

Occupying too much space. I guess you mean the MSF5000. I have two:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/K6BJ-MSF5000/
I tried to give it away and nobody local wanted it. The problem is
that most of the local repeaters are empty and devoid of users. I
would put it, and several others that I own, on the air if there were
users. Want both? Just pay for the crates and shipping, which I
think will be more than what they're worth.

Yea, well, I think the average age of hams here is way up,
OTOH I noticed some younger ones getting interested.
The coming of the cellphone sure took away some..
But there is a lot of space for research, I am very much into 'do everyting [only] once',
doing an uplink to a geosat seems fun, already made a nice 702 frame long station ID with a lot of motion and effects
last night (720x576 mpeg2), still need to think of a better sound track than a single 1 kHz tone..
composed some music many years ago, hope I can find it,
could have been on that harddisk I dropped way back then...

As to 'stuff' I have no place to put it all, already threw away some old computah projects.
The fun was in doing it, that was good, things change all the time, move on.



You should read the whole thread, and not just bust in here with your all-knowing google links.

I did. What did I miss?

That some cellphone provider has bought the part of the 10 GHz band that is used for the downlink of the Qatar sat.
Its secundary OK.

There are 300 messages in sci.electronics.design every day. I don't
think anyone reads all of them. I read about 30, mostly due to lack
of time. As for the "all-knowing Google link", I like to substantiate
my claims with references and background information. I would gladly
not post links, except I don't trust my memory to get everything
correct, and I don't expect all the readers to understand everything
I'm ranting about. A few links for corroboration and background are
always helpful. If you fail to appreciate my efforts on your behalf,
you're not required to click on the links.

Yea, OK, I do the same thing...
So my apologies.

There is plenty of spectrum.
But governments have found they can make lots of money by auctioning a few kHz,
so that makes us in a way an endangered species.
 
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 09:00:59 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

The thread mentioned my trying it in the boonies, but alas it got lost in the noise.
WiFis are mostly local, in a home and the occasional hotspot,
so with relative a lot of signal, and should not really be affected that much if at all.

I'm not suggesting that you give up and do nothing. What's missing is
what you plan to do with the 75/150 watts of RF, where you plan to
point the antenna, exactly what frequencies you plan to use, whether
you've coordinated your operation with other locals hams, and most
important, whether you've bothered to listen on the frequencies with a
receiver or spectrum analyzer. Your assumption that the common indoor
home wi-fi user is the only users on the band is probably wrong. We
have plenty of point to point links, often using exotic modulation
schemes, here in the US. Most use highly directional antenna so you
don't hear them unless you're directly in the path. There's also ham
satellite and ISS ATV operation on 2.4GHz, which you're unlikely to
hear unless you point your antenna in the right direction.
<http://www.arrl.org/band-plan>
Of course, you will have some TX output filtering to keep harmonics
down to legal levels.

>Well, now 75 W is not really that much.

Do the math. 75 watts is about 49 dBm. Your 24 dBi antenna will
increase that to 73 dBm or about 20,000 watts EIRP. Compare that to
the typical 17 dBm or 50 milliwatt access point with a unity gain
rubber duck antenna.

Of course, it's unlikely that you'll point your antenna into populated
areas just to see if what havoc you can create. You're more likely to
point it in some random direction, and let the antenna side lobes do
the damage. Looking at the idealized data sheet patterns, they're
down about -20 dB, so you'll only be doing 1/100th the damage.

>Yea, well, I think the average age of hams here is way up,

I did a very rough estimate average of the approximately 150 members
of the local radio club. About 60 as I recall.

>OTOH I noticed some younger ones getting interested.

Here, they join at any age between 12 and 16. They tend to be very
enthusiastic and learn quickly. Mostly, they're boys. At some age,
they discover girls, cars, or both, and they're gone. Oddly, they
often return to ham radio when they're much older.

>The coming of the cellphone sure took away some..

Yep. Ham radio used to be magic. You could talk to anyone in the
world without wires. Today, the world has shrunk to where anyone can
do the same with Skype. The magic is gone.

once',
doing an uplink to a geosat seems fun, already made a nice 702 frame long station ID with a lot of motion and effects
last night (720x576 mpeg2), still need to think of a better sound track than a single 1 kHz tone..
composed some music many years ago, hope I can find it,
could have been on that harddisk I dropped way back then...

Sigh. All I ask is that you check the local band plan, make an effort
to keep your signal directed, clean up any garbage that you might
produce, and listen before you transmit.

As to 'stuff' I have no place to put it all, already threw away some old computah projects.
The fun was in doing it, that was good, things change all the time, move on.

I don't quite operate in the same manner but am occasionally guilty of
emulating your methods. I just received two RTL2832U USB dongles
(NooElec) and will probably waste enormous amounts of time playing
with them, and producing nothing of value for my efforts. I bought
two as I'm sure I'll destroy one during the experience (Learn By
Destroying tm).

That some cellphone provider has bought the part of the 10 GHz band
that is used for the downlink of the Qatar sat.
Its secundary OK.

In the microwave bands, ham radio is usually 2nd or 3rd priority. For
example, 420-450 MHz repeater operating power is severely restricted
in the California central valley area due to military Pave Paws radar
interference. Every year, some enterprising dot com devices a product
that could only be profitable if they could obtain free spectrum from
hams. Otherwise, if they paid the prices that the cellular and
satellite operators were paying, the company would lose money.

There is plenty of spectrum.
But governments have found they can make lots of money by auctioning a few kHz,
so that makes us in a way an endangered species.

Yep. We lost part of the 1.2 GHz band to GPS. We lost part of 220
MHz to worthless ACSSB for United Parcel Service. On the other hand,
we picked up the WARC HF bands. It's difficult to tell what the
future will hold, but I suspect that if you give ham radio a bad name
by precipitating an interference problem, you might hasten eventually
hasten the loss of the frequencies on the basis that ham radio is part
of the problem.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On a sunny day (Wed, 01 Oct 2014 08:46:39 -0700) it happened Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in <u86o2a5g4crm7hqg8ghraniesftjmgsa0o@4ax.com>:

Well, now 75 W is not really that much.

Do the math. 75 watts is about 49 dBm. Your 24 dBi antenna will
increase that to 73 dBm or about 20,000 watts EIRP. Compare that to
the typical 17 dBm or 50 milliwatt access point with a unity gain
rubber duck antenna.

I already showed the math, did you not read it?

You were complaining about baluns, that is what I replied to.



Of course, it's unlikely that you'll point your antenna into populated
areas just to see if what havoc you can create. You're more likely to
point it in some random direction, and let the antenna side lobes do
the damage.

I mentioned that too.

Looking at the idealized data sheet patterns, they're
down about -20 dB, so you'll only be doing 1/100th the damage.

Its not all that bad, and fried birds can be tasty.



Yea, well, I think the average age of hams here is way up,

I did a very rough estimate average of the approximately 150 members
of the local radio club. About 60 as I recall.

OTOH I noticed some younger ones getting interested.

Here, they join at any age between 12 and 16. They tend to be very
enthusiastic and learn quickly. Mostly, they're boys. At some age,
they discover girls, cars, or both, and they're gone. Oddly, they
often return to ham radio when they're much older.

The coming of the cellphone sure took away some..

Yep. Ham radio used to be magic. You could talk to anyone in the
world without wires. Today, the world has shrunk to where anyone can
do the same with Skype. The magic is gone.

But there is a lot of space for research, I am very much into 'do everyting [only] once',
doing an uplink to a geosat seems fun, already made a nice 702 frame long station ID with a lot of motion and effects
last night (720x576 mpeg2), still need to think of a better sound track than a single 1 kHz tone..
composed some music many years ago, hope I can find it,
could have been on that harddisk I dropped way back then...

Sigh. All I ask is that you check the local band plan, make an effort
to keep your signal directed, clean up any garbage that you might
produce, and listen before you transmit.

As to 'stuff' I have no place to put it all, already threw away some old computah projects.
The fun was in doing it, that was good, things change all the time, move on.

I don't quite operate in the same manner but am occasionally guilty of
emulating your methods. I just received two RTL2832U USB dongles
(NooElec) and will probably waste enormous amounts of time playing
with them, and producing nothing of value for my efforts. I bought
two as I'm sure I'll destroy one during the experience (Learn By
Destroying tm).

That some cellphone provider has bought the part of the 10 GHz band
that is used for the downlink of the Qatar sat.
Its secundary OK.

In the microwave bands, ham radio is usually 2nd or 3rd priority. For
example, 420-450 MHz repeater operating power is severely restricted
in the California central valley area due to military Pave Paws radar
interference. Every year, some enterprising dot com devices a product
that could only be profitable if they could obtain free spectrum from
hams. Otherwise, if they paid the prices that the cellular and
satellite operators were paying, the company would lose money.

We have a great working coversity network.
where the transmitters are in sync via GPS,
I can reach the whole NW and NE side of the country with my porto.
http://www.coversity.nl/in.html
look a the map.
There is even an android ap that can show which repeater I am on / is active at the time.
Of course it is cheating, as data goes via cable, but it sure unites a lot of hams, it is a busy channel.

What is a problem here is internet over mains wires, if I hold my RF detector next to the mains it goes wild.
You could buy those little ethernet plug in boxes, not sure who has those in the neighborhood.
There goes your short wave.




There is plenty of spectrum.
But governments have found they can make lots of money by auctioning a few kHz,
so that makes us in a way an endangered species.

Yep. We lost part of the 1.2 GHz band to GPS. We lost part of 220
MHz to worthless ACSSB for United Parcel Service. On the other hand,
we picked up the WARC HF bands. It's difficult to tell what the
future will hold, but I suspect that if you give ham radio a bad name
by precipitating an interference problem, you might hasten eventually
hasten the loss of the frequencies on the basis that ham radio is part
of the problem.

Yes 50 MHz, 70 MHz, have not tried that (yet).

Was evaluating some uplink designs today, here is one:
All frequencies in MHz



Qatar geostationay satellite

Linear transponder
2400.050-2400.300 MHz Uplink
10489.550-10489.800 MHz Downlink

Wideband digital transponder
2401.5-2409.5 MHz Uplink
10491.0-10499.0 MHz Downlink




Universal LNB:
Rx IF LO
10700 - 11700 950 - 1950 9750
11700 - 12750 1100 - 2150 10600




Wideband:
VCO
2401.5 - 964 = 1437.5
2409.5 - 964 = 1445.5

Narrow band:
VCO
2400.05 - 964 = 1436.05
2400.300 - 964 = 1436.3

From this a Sirenza 1400-1560 VCO will do for the second mixer.

964 + 9750 = 10714
DVB-S tuner
test out
964 1441.5 - 964 = 477.5 < filtered out 3 x 8 V 20 A in series
| 1441.5 + 964 = 2405.5 24 V 17 A power
I --- 964 only | |
U2790B -------------------- X ------------------------ 2401.5 ----- bandpass --- 1 W driver amp ---- 75W Spectrian Linear RF Amplifier Board -( dish
Q --- SSB RMS42-H 473.5 2400-2410 |
quadrature ring diode |
modulator mixer UBP1505
| | :256
Sirenza VCO | prescaler
VCO Sirenza 9.3752 - 9.41211
951 - 977 VCO |
set to 964 1400 - 1500 |
set to about phase comparator --- loop filter ---> VCO2
405.5 - 964 = 1441.5 |
|9.3752 - 9.41211
FPGA ------------------ < frequency control - user
|
10 MHz
Rubidium
reference

Hope U use a real newsreader... guggle will likely fold it
:)


Maybe or maybe not, I also ordered some ceramic SAW 400MHz filters, 7.8 MHz wide on ebay, those SAWs cost next to nothing.
This method above needs no steep filters, the U2790 only produces 1 sideband, no carriers,
look up the chip.
The 473 is easily filtered out in the 2.4 GHz filter.
For this I have - or have ordered most parts,
and there is still space on the board, I had the U2790 on board and removed it, it will be back.

This is one of 3 topologies I came up with, and the first one I will test.
 
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 08:46:39 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

...snip...

I'm not suggesting that you give up and do nothing. What's missing is
what you plan to do with the 75/150 watts of RF, where you plan to
point the antenna, exactly what frequencies you plan to use, whether
you've coordinated your operation with other locals hams, and most
important, whether you've bothered to listen on the frequencies with a
receiver or spectrum analyzer. Your assumption that the common indoor
home wi-fi user is the only users on the band is probably wrong. We
have plenty of point to point links, often using exotic modulation
schemes, here in the US. Most use highly directional antenna so you
don't hear them unless you're directly in the path. There's also ham
satellite and ISS ATV operation on 2.4GHz, which you're unlikely to
hear unless you point your antenna in the right direction.
http://www.arrl.org/band-plan
Of course, you will have some TX output filtering to keep harmonics
down to legal levels.

...snip....

Around the Bay Area, I've seen two other sources, PG&E Utilities spread
spectrum communications and somewhere in the South Bay [downtown San Jose]
you have some kind of 'drying' [sterilizing?] machine that really puts out
some energy, also 'spread spectrum' looking.
 
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 10:30:05 -0700, RobertMacy
<robert.a.macy@gmail.com> wrote:

Around the Bay Area, I've seen two other sources, PG&E Utilities spread
spectrum communications and somewhere in the South Bay [downtown San Jose]
you have some kind of 'drying' [sterilizing?] machine that really puts out
some energy, also 'spread spectrum' looking.

Here's an old and incomplete list of non wi-fi users of 2.4GHz that I
threw together many years ago. Add 2.4 GHz model airplane control to
the list:
<http://wireless.navas.us/index.php?title=Wi-Fi#Interference>

The "drying" microwave source is probably a food or fruit dryer or
sterilizer. They run lots of power (up to 100KW), but are usually
fairly well shielded[1]. One that I tracked down near the Watsonville
CA airport was properly shielded but was also good at wiping out wi-fi
use over about a 1/2 mile radius. It was quickly fixed by removing a
screwdriver from a door interlock.


[1] For example:
<http://hnaimeisi.en.alibaba.com/product/716133927-218811408/industrial_Microwave_Drying_Machine_Microwave_Dryer_Fruit_Sterilizer_Machine_0086_15838028622.html>


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:41:32 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

Here's an old and incomplete list of non wi-fi users of 2.4GHz that I
threw together many years ago. Add 2.4 GHz model airplane control to
the list:
http://wireless.navas.us/index.php?title=Wi-Fi#Interference

Also add the Mariott Hotel(s) to the list of interference sources:

FCC fines Marriott $600,000 for jamming hotel Wi-Fi
<http://boingboing.net/2014/10/03/fcc-fines-marriott-for-jamming.html>
FCC Press Release:
<https://www.fcc.gov/document/marriott-pay-600k-resolve-wifi-blocking-investigation>
FCC Consent Order:
<http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db1003/DA-14-1444A1.pdf>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On a sunny day (Fri, 03 Oct 2014 16:50:38 -0700) it happened Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in <bedu2a9afhl7mt63n67d7umpalqkv2tcj5@4ax.com>:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:41:32 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:

Here's an old and incomplete list of non wi-fi users of 2.4GHz that I
threw together many years ago. Add 2.4 GHz model airplane control to
the list:
http://wireless.navas.us/index.php?title=Wi-Fi#Interference

Also add the Mariott Hotel(s) to the list of interference sources:

FCC fines Marriott $600,000 for jamming hotel Wi-Fi
http://boingboing.net/2014/10/03/fcc-fines-marriott-for-jamming.html
FCC Press Release:
https://www.fcc.gov/document/marriott-pay-600k-resolve-wifi-blocking-investigation
FCC Consent Order:
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db1003/DA-14-1444A1.pdf

In German, English translation furtehr down page.
EU want to raise the allowed maximum limit for PLC radiation by 20,000 times,
sign petition:
https://secure.avaaz.org/de/petition/An_Viviane_Reding_Vizepraesidentin_der_Europaeischen_Kommission_Stopp_fuer_PLCTechnologie_Grenzwert_von_der_EU_um_das_20_1/?aPtitib


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Sat, 04 Oct 2014 08:31:02 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

In German, English translation furtehr down page.
EU want to raise the allowed maximum limit for PLC radiation by 20,000 times,
sign petition:
https://secure.avaaz.org/de/petition/An_Viviane_Reding_Vizepraesidentin_der_Europaeischen_Kommission_Stopp_fuer_PLCTechnologie_Grenzwert_von_der_EU_um_das_20_1/?aPtitib

In the USA, it's called BPL (Broadband over Power Line).
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_over_power_lines>
We have various providers making futile attempts to make this faulty
technology work, and generally failing. Their engineers find that
transmitting into a power line antenna radiates nicely and claim
surprise when they exceed FCC Part 15 radiation limits. The topology
model for using power lines is seriously flawed as it doesn't scale.
There's no way to provide the necessary data bandwidth to a profitable
percentage of their potential customer base, when everyone is on the
same big "party line" trunk with only about 20 MHz of available RF
bandwidth.

In order to fix BPL, the only thing they can easily change is the
radiation limits. They're not going to get the utility companies to
isolate and balance the power lines. They're not going to get the FCC
to allow additional bandwidth. So, they ask for more power, which
isn't going to fix cost, topology, and radiation problems.

Hopefully, the EU will refuse to approve the power increase.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 16:34:46 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On a sunny day (Wed, 01 Oct 2014 08:46:39 -0700) it happened Jeff Liebermann
jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in <u86o2a5g4crm7hqg8ghraniesftjmgsa0o@4ax.com>:

Well, now 75 W is not really that much.

Do the math. 75 watts is about 49 dBm. Your 24 dBi antenna will
increase that to 73 dBm or about 20,000 watts EIRP. Compare that to
the typical 17 dBm or 50 milliwatt access point with a unity gain
rubber duck antenna.

I already showed the math, did you not read it?
You were complaining about baluns, that is what I replied to.

This math?

Wonder if I can cook in the beam.
Wonder if it can fry the sat receiver...
path attenuation = 32.45 + 20.log(2400000000) + 20.log(40000) = 312.095 dB
Correction:
its 32.45 + 20.log(MHz) + 20.log(km)
32.45 + 20.log(2400) + 20.log(40000) = 192.095 dB

That's the path attenuation, which doesn't have anything to do with
cooking or melting baluns. That I was ranting about this time is that
putting a 75 watt transmitter, into an undersized antenna with serious
sidelobes, in a metropolitan location, is going to create interference
for other users of the frequencies. Much depends on how much effort
you put into preventing interference. Simply claiming that it won't
happen and there's nobody nearby to complain is insufficient.

As for the balun, most baluns exhibit about 0.5dB loss. The typical
barbeque grill dish antenna has a balun between the dipole elements
and the nearby N connector. It's made for receive, so there's no
problem with an additional 0.5dB loss in the balun. However, for
transmit at 75 watts and a properly matched system, the balun will
dissipate 11% of your power or about 8 watts. 8 watts through a very
small PCB is going to burn the PCB. There's no easy way around the
loss problem if you use a balun, which is why I suggested a waveguide,
horn, cantenna, or patch feed, which eliminate the balun.

We have a great working coversity network.
where the transmitters are in sync via GPS,
I can reach the whole NW and NE side of the country with my porto.
http://www.coversity.nl/in.html
look a the map.
There is even an android ap that can show which repeater I am on / is active at the time.
Of course it is cheating, as data goes via cable, but it sure unites a lot of hams, it is a busy channel.

Very nicely done. We have various linked repeater systems. I don't
see much use for them, so I don't participate. However, one local
system that has my attention is a voter and simulcast system on
440MHz:
<http://www.wb6ece.org>

What is a problem here is internet over mains wires, if I hold my RF detector next to the mains it goes wild.
You could buy those little ethernet plug in boxes, not sure who has those in the neighborhood.
There goes your short wave.

You might try some kind of low pass filter where the power enters the
house. Maybe a big ferrite bead. It won't do anything for radiation
from the power lines, but it will keep the RF from entering the house.

He have plenty of HomePlug devices in operation. In California, there
are only a few BPL/PLC installations. Locally, the major sources of
HF RF noise are:
Solar inverter installations.
Switching power supplies and chargers.
LED lights.
Computer noise.
I have all the above in my house. When I want to operate HF, I have
to turn off almost the entire house.

Was evaluating some uplink designs today, here is one:
(...)
Hope U use a real newsreader... guggle will likely fold it
:)

Forte Agent displayed it nicely, but wrapped it into an unreadable
mess when I tried to quote it for a reply. I could put ">" symbols at
the beginning of each line, but it's too much work right now.

Nice transmitter idea. I haven't worked out the filter requirements
to prevent mixer spurs and unwanted harmonics from being transmitted.
Designing a transmitter like that is actually fairly easy. Finding
frequencies that don't create interference is difficult. You'll
probably need some bandpass filters somewhere.

The problem with satcomm (I am NOT an expert on this) is not the
transmitter. It's the receiver. The downlink is on X-band (10GHz)
which will work with TVRO Ku band components but usually requires a
wall of test equipment to get things right. This is typical:
<http://www.uhf-satcom.com/xband_hw/>

Maybe or maybe not, I also ordered some ceramic SAW 400MHz filters, 7.8 MHz wide on ebay, those SAWs cost next to nothing.
This method above needs no steep filters, the U2790 only produces 1 sideband, no carriers,
look up the chip.
The 473 is easily filtered out in the 2.4 GHz filter.
For this I have - or have ordered most parts,
and there is still space on the board, I had the U2790 on board and removed it, it will be back.

This is one of 3 topologies I came up with, and the first one I will test.

Good luck.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Sat, 04 Oct 2014 09:09:11 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Oct 2014 08:31:02 GMT, Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com
wrote:

In German, English translation furtehr down page.
EU want to raise the allowed maximum limit for PLC radiation by 20,000 times,
sign petition:
https://secure.avaaz.org/de/petition/An_Viviane_Reding_Vizepraesidentin_der_Europaeischen_Kommission_Stopp_fuer_PLCTechnologie_Grenzwert_von_der_EU_um_das_20_1/?aPtitib

In the USA, it's called BPL (Broadband over Power Line).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_over_power_lines
We have various providers making futile attempts to make this faulty
technology work, and generally failing. Their engineers find that
transmitting into a power line antenna radiates nicely and claim
surprise when they exceed FCC Part 15 radiation limits. The topology
model for using power lines is seriously flawed as it doesn't scale.
There's no way to provide the necessary data bandwidth to a profitable
percentage of their potential customer base, when everyone is on the
same big "party line" trunk with only about 20 MHz of available RF
bandwidth.

In order to fix BPL, the only thing they can easily change is the
radiation limits. They're not going to get the utility companies to
isolate and balance the power lines. They're not going to get the FCC
to allow additional bandwidth. So, they ask for more power, which
isn't going to fix cost, topology, and radiation problems.

Hopefully, the EU will refuse to approve the power increase.

In Europe and especially Germany, the power line communication (PLC)
system were created to break the telephone companies monopoly on
telephone company local loop wiring.

Since those days, the telephone companies have been forced by EU to
rent the local loop telephone wires to competing ISPs with at least
something resembling realistic building and maintenance costs. For
this reason PLC for internet providers is practically outdated in
Europe. One has to remember that even wireless applications are making
many ADSL systems obsolete.

Of course, PLC makes sense in home automation and for remote meter
reading etc. but the power (and hence radiation) levels required are
minuscule compared to ISP over PLC, especially since these services
need to carry only a few kilo bits per second.

It should be noted that the power distribution system in Europe and
the Americas are quite different. In Europe with medium voltage (MV)
to 230/400 V service, each distribution transformer typically serve
tens or hundreds customers, while in the Americas, the pig in the pole
only serves a few customer.

In Europe, some remote meter reading applications can use the LV power
lines to collect data and at the distribution transformer use e.g.
GPRS over radio waves to forward the data. In the US, having
distribution transformers at nearly every pole, you either have to use
RF at every pig or use some PLC/PLC adapters at every transformer
rated for medium voltages.

My opinion has been for at least ten years that any PLC/BPL
communication is _not_ going to cause any real threat to RF spectral
purity due to leaked radiation.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top