[amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE

Jeff Yanko wb3jfs at cox.net
Fri Oct 2 23:26:38 PDT 2009


Could very well be.

73,

Jeff  WB3JFS


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary "Joe" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield at hotmail.com>
To: "'Jeff Yanko'" <wb3jfs at cox.net>; "'Charles Suprin'" <hamaa1vs at gmail.com>
Cc: "'Joe'" <nss at mwt.net>; "'AMSAT-BB'" <amsat-bb at AMSAT.Org>
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 6:27 PM
Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE


> We are missing the easy answer.  He had diplexer that was off spec.  It
> happens.
>
> 73,
> Joe kk0sd
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amsat-bb-bounces at AMSAT.Org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces at AMSAT.Org] On
> Behalf Of Jeff Yanko
> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 4:28 PM
> To: Charles Suprin
> Cc: Joe; AMSAT-BB; Gary "Joe" Mayfield
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
>
> Hi Charles and the group,
>
> FB on the numbers.  Interesting to say the least and thanks for taking the
> time to look further into this topic.
>
> Questions?  I have a few after looking at these numbers and performing 
> more
> observations.
>
> First, are you testing just the diplexer and not the diplexer and the
> antenna combined?  This could result in an overall number and not just the
> diplexer alone.  How could there be a large discrepency between 
> preliminary
> reports, 2.65dB and .5dB now.  Could be equipment calibration, human 
> error,
> etc. from previously tested, or attempted testing of the device.  I don't
> believe any improvements have been made to the Arrow diplexer, but who
> knows?
>
> Second, I switched back to the Arrow diplexer and made another comparison
> with the Comet diplexer.  Again, no comparison, the Comet outperformed. 
> Why
> would this happen if the two are pretty close to one another in numbers.
> The Comet has .25db loss at VHF and .26 at UHF.
>
> Third, with the Arrow diplexer I wouldn't begin to receive the birds until
> almost 3 minutes after AOS, with the Comet diplexer a minute to 1.5 
> minutes
> after AOS.  Yes, watch calibrated to WWV and multiple times of acquiring 
> the
> birds. I've tried both setups with the HT and D710 and they both show the
> same results respectively, Arrow diplexer vs. Comet diplexer.  The antenna
> and coax remain the same, the difference, the diplexer.  May not be test 
> lab
> quality but something is proving itself. What is it?
>
> Finally, is it just my Arrow diplexer?  Doesn't appear to be shorted or 
> any
> defects to it.  Actually looks great and assembled very well.  I've
> encountered others saying the same thing.  However, a very noticable
> difference to the overall performance.
>
>
> 73,
>
> Jeff  WB3JFS
>
>
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Charles Suprin
>  To: Jeff Yanko
>  Cc: Joe ; Gary "Joe" Mayfield ; AMSAT-BB
>  Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 1:09 PM
>  Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - 
> UPDATE
>
>
>  Howdy Jeff,
>
>  Someone asked and here we go.  A file attachment follows.
>
>  Actually the diplexer looks pretty good.  Less than half a db of loss at
> VHF and around half a dB at UHF.  I checked the calibration and that was
> within tenth of a dB over the entire range.
>
>  Any questions.
>
>  Charles
>  AA1VS
>
>
>  On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Jeff Yanko <wb3jfs at cox.net> wrote:
>
>    Hi Joe and all,
>
>    I doubt if the Arrow diplexer has 20dB of loss.  If it did, we'd never
>    receive a signal!  :)
>
>    I believe somebody here on the -bb will be performing a test on the
> Arrow
>    diplexer using a vector/network analyzer.  It will be interesting to 
> say
> the
>    least.  There were preliminary reports saying the device had a loss
> anywhere
>    from 2.65 to 2.80dB.  That's close enough to 3dB which is technically
> half
>    power loss.  Add the loss of a short piece of coax and it will 
> certainly
> be
>    pushed over the 3dB line.
>
>    If I recall correctly, cross polarity is also a 3dB loss.  I have
> noticed
>    that when I rotate the antenna I might get a stronger downlink but I
> never
>    lose it when I rotate it back.  Before, when I would do that it would
> drop
>    once I rotated in either direction from the peak signal.  Basically 
> what
> is
>    going on is the lossy device is removed and replaced with a more
> efficient
>    one, that extra net gain you just boosted now shows how the system on
> the
>    antenna side of the diplexer is truly performing.
>
>    I don't have an antenna analysis program to perform a test, but what
> does a
>    7 element 440 yagi pattern look like and what is its overall gain?
>
>    What we need to do is break down the antenna configuration into 3
> segments,
>    see what their losses and gains are then combine them for the overall
>    figure.  The 3 segment would be the antenna, the diplexer and the coax.
>    Each one will be tested individually to give an accurate number for
> each.
>
>
>
>    73,
>
>
>    Jeff  WB3JFS
>    ----- Original Message -----
>
>    From: "Joe" <nss at mwt.net>
>    To: "Gary "Joe" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield at hotmail.com>
>    Cc: "'AMSAT-BB'" <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
>    Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 6:42 PM
>    Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
>
>
>
>    > as in the texts below,  there is something else going on here.
>    >
>    > That Diplexor can not be all that bad. two reasons.
>    >
>    > How many db down is the front to side of that antenna?
>    >
>    > and I can not imaging someone would sell a diplexor that has greater
>    > than 20 db of losses.
>    >
>    > because of the statement that how criticalpolarity was with the
>    > original, and now the antenna has to be nearly 90 degrees cross
>    > polarized to make it drop out  uhh
>    >
>    > that close to 30 db,
>    >
>    > at least 20,,
>    >
>    > something else is going on here
>    >
>    > Gary "Joe" Mayfield wrote:
>    >
>    >>>
>    >>>Another issue I came across was how wide the beamwidth is of the
> Arrow
>    >>>Antenna between the Arrow diplexer and the new diplexer.  I was
> wondering
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>if
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>>this was going to happen and it did.  The reason that this happened
> was
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>with
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>>the old diplexer, the signal attenuated so much that you had to be
>    >>>pointed
>    >>>right smack dab on the bird, a few degrees off and you lost the
> signal.
>    >>>Now, with the new diplexer, you can point the beam in the general
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>direction
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>>and still copy the bird.  In most cases I had to turn the beam 90
> degrees
>    >>>before I completely lost the downlink!  Twisting the antenna to make
>    >>>polarization changes makes absolutely no difference now.  This also
>    >>>attributes to the fact that now I'm copying the entire pass without
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>dropouts
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>>or fades.  Makes sense.  What I've regained over the lossy diplexer
> makes
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>up
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>>for any polarization differences, etc. for a better copiable signal.
>    >>>
>    >>>Next weekend I will have to try more passes and get a feel of how
> much
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>this
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>>system has changed.
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>>73,
>    >>>
>    >>>Jeff  WB3JFS
>    >>>Las Vegas, NV
>    >>>DM26
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>>_______________________________________________
>    >>>Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
> author.
>    >>>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>    >>>program!
>    >>>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>>
>    >>
>    >>_______________________________________________
>    >>Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
> author.
>    >>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
>    >>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>_______________________________________________
>    >>Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
> author.
>    >>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
>    >>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>
>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>No virus found in this incoming message.
>    >>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>    >>Version: 8.5.416 / Virus Database: 270.13.113/2395 - Release Date:
>    >>09/25/09 17:52:00
>    >>
>    >>
>    >>
>    > _______________________________________________
>    > Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
> author.
>    > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
>    > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>    >
>
>
>    _______________________________________________
>    Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the 
> author.
>    Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
>    Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
> 




More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list