Loading... |
Reply to author |
Edit post |
Move post |
Delete this post |
Delete this post and replies |
Change post date |
Print post |
Permalink |
Raw mail |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik N Basilier" <[hidden email]> To: "Ignacy" <[hidden email]> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 11:09 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noise Blanker Observations? >I agree that the K3 NB, like any other Noise Blanker I have used, works >mostly on impulse noise. Indeed, the general design (at least in most >radios) is to briefly block reception for the short duration of a noise >pulse, which means that if the noise power is there constantly it can't be >blanked out. Adjustments are helpful in matching the blanking duration to >the width of noise pulses. The K3 seems to provide two dimensions of NB >adjustment; I don't know what they do, but experimentation is helpful when >dealing with a particular noise source. > > I have a few blocks of older single-family housing north of me, > essentially a forest of power-line-related noise sources. (I have spent > much time locating these with a portable AM receiver and working with the > power company for repairs, but new sources pop up constantly.) Taken > together, these act more like a continuous source of radiation than as an > impulse noise source. Using a Noise Blanker helps but only marginally. The > K3's Noise Reduction is much more effective because it removes noise > continuously, but you have to experiment with settings and the audio is > negatively impacted. I have just purchased a BHI audio noise reduction > module to see if that works any better. I haven't hooked it up yet. > > Ignacy, you caught my interest with your comment on the MFJ-1026. Several > months ago I got an MFJ-1025, which is the same unit minus the short > antenna on top of the box. (The circuit board inside is the same; it has > the point of connection for the short antenna, should you want it, and > apparently also the amplifier for the short antenna. Since most people > seem to find that a large noise pickup antenna is needed, it makes sense > not to pay the extra $$ for the 1026 model.) For anyone not familiar with > this kind of unit, the idea is that you feed your regular receive (or > RX/TX) antenna though the box to the TRX, and you also feed a separate > receive antenna to the box. The box matches the two received noise signals > in amplitude (using two potentiometers on the front panel) and also > adjusts the phase of the two noise signals for cancellation (using one > potentiometer and one pushbutton). > Since the phasing of the noise signal is different for individual noise > sources, in general only one noise source can be phased out at any given > time. > (Alternatively, a single amateur or broadcase signal can also be phased > out, but less effectively because the constantly changing ionosphere > affects phase.) Here is my experience with this unit so far. It is not at > all effective against the power line noise on 20 using my R5 vertical as > the noise pick-up and my horizontal beam as the main antenna. This makes > sense with so many individual power noise sources. It was very effective > against funny noises on particular frequencies, and even on multiple such > signals. However, most such signals recently went away when we replaced > the TV set in the living room. My WI-FI access point/router doesn't seem > to create noise, but I would guess that the MFJ unit may help in cases > where you have noise from WI-FI. Someone has said that it is better to > have the same polarization for the noise antenna and the main antenna, and > I want to try that in the future. Maybe I will find some improvement > w.r.t. the power line noise, maybe not. The power line noise is much worse > on 40 than on 20, but I haven't been able to try the MFJ on 40 for lack of > a noise pickup antenna. I have tried a 10 ft wire, and I have tried the R5 > with a tuner. Neither provides enough noise signal for the MFJ unit to > work with. My plan is to put up a 40 m dipole under the eaves of the house > for noise pickup duty. At this point I don't have high hopes that it will > enable the MFJ to help with the power line noise, though. > > 73, > Erik K7TV > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ignacy" <[hidden email]> > To: <[hidden email]> > Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 10:02 AM > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noise Blanker Observations? > > >> >>>From time to time I have a very strong powerline or other impulse noise >>>or >> noises. K3 sometimes takes care of it sometimes not. I general, I have a >> feeling that NB is IC-7000 is a bit better although K3 does well with >> some >> types of noise that IC7000 cannot bite with the DSP NB. >> >> NB takes care of short impulse noises from a single location very well. >> When >> the noise is from multiple locations or of a very complex type, NB does >> not >> do much. In such a case, a device like MFJ-1026 does wonders; you will >> need >> a second antenna. >> >> Ignacy >> > ... [show rest of quote] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |