OT: the value of "accurate measures" for ham radio

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OT: the value of "accurate measures" for ham radio

DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL
For the life of me, I don't understand the apparent "need" (not just
on the Elecraft reflector) for hams who want (demand) that their ham
radio gear be so incredibly accurate (not to be confused with
precise).  Other than, "it should be able to be more accurate," how
does this impact our operations?

I don't have a Bird watt meter or 'scope.  I have an off-the-shelf
Diamond SX200 watt meter that is probably 25 years old.  Here is what
I found:

0.5 watts on the K3 = 0.7 watts on the SX200 (5 watt scale, with 0.1
"ticks" below 1 watts)
5.0 watts on the K3 = 4.9 watts on the SX200 (5 watt scale)
20 watts on the K3 = 19.5 watts on the SX200 (20 watt scale)
50 watts on the K3 = 50 watts on the SX200 (200 watt scale)
100 watts on the K3 = "just over" 90 watts on the SX200 (200 watt scale).

This looks "good enough" for me.  Of what value is more accuracy?  I
honestly can't see any for ham radio operations.  I don't know which
of my two devices is more accurate, but I don't care.  If want to run
QRP at 1 watt or 5 watts, I'm right in there.  If I am driving an
external amp, do I care what the driving power really is?  I don't
think so.  As for 100 watts vs 90 watts, I don't know which one is
right (probably neither), but so what.  The guy on the other end of
the QSO will never tell (or even measure) the difference between 90
and 100 watts.  Does any of this actually matter?

If it does matter, please let me know why...I'd really like to know!

Thanks,
de Doug KR2Q
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT: the value of "accurate measures" for ham radio

P.B. Christensen
> For the life of me, I don't understand the apparent "need" (not just
> on the Elecraft reflector) for hams who want (demand) that their ham
> radio gear be so incredibly accurate (not to be confused with
> precise).

Doug, the issue is not attaining lab-grade accuracy with the K3.  The issue
is in understanding why some of us running out of calibration range in
approximately the same amounts.  As Greg just addressed, it's on their
priority list.

The other issue relates to my previous post: It would be nice to have a
better understanding of the RF Level Calibration procedure so we know the
alignment has been conducted correctly.

73,

Paul, W9AC

 

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT: the value of "accurate measures" for ham radio

Stewart Baker
Succinctly put Paul. Anyway it's on the list.

73
Stewart G3RXQ
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 13:13:10 -0400, Paul Christensen wrote:
>> For the life of me, I don't understand the apparent "need" (not
just
>> on the Elecraft reflector) for hams who want (demand) that
their ham
>> radio gear be so incredibly accurate (not to be confused with
>> precise).
>>
> Doug, the issue is not attaining lab-grade accuracy with the K3.
 The issue
> is in understanding why some of us running out of calibration
range in
> approximately the same amounts.  As Greg just addressed, it's on
their
> priority list.
>
> The other issue relates to my previous post: It would be nice to
have a
> better understanding of the RF Level Calibration procedure so we
know the

> alignment has been conducted correctly.
>
> 73,
>
> Paul, W9AC
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Post to: [hidden email]
> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com


_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: OT: the value of "accurate measures" for ham radio

Greg - AB7R
In reply to this post by P.B. Christensen
Performing the TX Gain calibration is setting the gain constants for the MCU
by each band.  Once for the LPA at 5W and once for the KPA3 at 50W.  When
doing the calibration if you do not get an error message such as ERR TXG,
then you're good.  If there's a problem, you will see that error message.

73
Greg
AB7R


-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Paul Christensen
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 10:13 AM
To: DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: the value of "accurate measures" for ham
radio


> For the life of me, I don't understand the apparent "need" (not just
> on the Elecraft reflector) for hams who want (demand) that their ham
> radio gear be so incredibly accurate (not to be confused with
> precise).

Doug, the issue is not attaining lab-grade accuracy with the K3.  The issue
is in understanding why some of us running out of calibration range in
approximately the same amounts.  As Greg just addressed, it's on their
priority list.

The other issue relates to my previous post: It would be nice to have a
better understanding of the RF Level Calibration procedure so we know the
alignment has been conducted correctly.

73,

Paul, W9AC



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1331 - Release Date: 3/16/2008
10:34 AM

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1331 - Release Date: 3/16/2008
10:34 AM

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT: the value of "accurate measures" for ham radio

gm3sek
In reply to this post by DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL
DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:

>I don't have a Bird watt meter or 'scope.  I have an off-the-shelf
>Diamond SX200 watt meter that is probably 25 years old.  Here is what I
>found:
>
>0.5 watts on the K3 = 0.7 watts on the SX200 (5 watt scale, with 0.1
>"ticks" below 1 watts)
>5.0 watts on the K3 = 4.9 watts on the SX200 (5 watt scale)
>20 watts on the K3 = 19.5 watts on the SX200 (20 watt scale)
>50 watts on the K3 = 50 watts on the SX200 (200 watt scale)
>100 watts on the K3 = "just over" 90 watts on the SX200 (200 watt
>scale).
>
>This looks "good enough" for me.  Of what value is more accuracy?  I
>honestly can't see any for ham radio operations.  I don't know which of
>my two devices is more accurate, but I don't care.  If want to run QRP
>at 1 watt or 5 watts, I'm right in there.  If I am driving an external
>amp, do I care what the driving power really is?  I don't think so.  As
>for 100 watts vs 90 watts, I don't know which one is right (probably
>neither), but so what.  The guy on the other end of the QSO will never
>tell (or even measure) the difference between 90 and 100 watts.  Does
>any of this actually matter?

Yes. If you decide that you want to see 100W on the lowest-reading
meter, that can lead you into overdriving your transmitter. In that case
the rest of us *will* be able to tell the difference - in IMD.

(I know that you personally wouldn't fall into that trap, Doug... but
some people definitely do. It's called Fully Clockwise Syndrome.)


--

73 from Ian GM3SEK
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com