Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Bird\s+wattmeter\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Bird\s+wattmeter\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 11:58:55 -0400; Has anyone measured the current thru the meter movement on the bird 43 wattmeter? It is a 30 microamp full scale, so it says on the meter face. I have two very old ones that read low on power. I chec; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00042.html (8,521 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Helge Skram" <helge.skram@c2i.net>; Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 20:51:44 +0200; I have several Bird 43 meters and the current thru the meter shall be 30 microamp for full scale. If movement is less, the meter will measure lower than correct. If it is sligthly off you can correct; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00043.html (10,171 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: Peter Chadwick <g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 12:12:05 +0200 (CEST); Gary have you checked the total meter resistance? In mine, it's surprisingly high - around 1350 ohms. Depending what sort of resistor they use in the meter, that could have drifted. 73 Peter G3RZP __; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00049.html (7,422 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Harold Mandel" <hmandel@barantelecom.com>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 06:32:52 -0400; However, do not see their display results as gospel. If you need to know the actual power, use a digital RF Power Meter like the kind that is discussed herein made by Array Solutions (PowerMaster). T; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00050.html (9,185 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: Steve Thompson <g8gsq@eltac.co.uk>; Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 11:46:02 +0100; I think the 1350 ohms Peter measured is the movement itself - the spec. is 1400 ohms, 30uA. I don't think there's any extra resistors in there. I forget who started the thread, but how far off fsd is; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00052.html (7,329 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Harold Mandel" <hmandel@barantelecom.com>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 09:40:03 -0400; Tom's reply to the PowerMaster wattmeter drove me to inquire as to the calibration science behind them, and below is the listed response: " As shown in Table 2, the PowerMaster is quite accurate over; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00058.html (10,028 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 13:12:41 -0400; Harold, What is missing from all the "information" given below (besides the source) is what the calibration reference standard is and what its tolerance of that standard is. Without that key piece of; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00059.html (12,462 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: Steve Thompson <g8gsq@eltac.co.uk>; Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 19:01:39 +0100; If I remember correctly, it's +/-5% of fsd at any reading - so a reading at 50% fsd has an error of +/-10% and so on. As you say, immaterial in the context of radio links, maybe not always immaterial; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00060.html (8,223 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Harold Mandel" <hmandel@barantelecom.com>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 14:38:30 -0400; Dear Tom, As my first posting in the above topic mentioned, the Bird wattmeter is good for observing trends. Tune it up, watch for the most smoke, be happy. There ain't any precision, Tom. The averag; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00061.html (13,821 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 16:42:26 -0400; Hi Peter, I saw somewhere that the meter resistance is supposed to be 1400 ohms. The ones I have measure 1399, 1406 and 1393 ohms. The 1399 ohm meter reads about 10% low with 30 microamps thru it. Th; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00063.html (9,087 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 16:58:24 -0400; While I appreciate your input, let's be sure we are all on the same page here. Just because a meter has a digital readout dial doesn't make it any more accurate than a regular analogue type meter. Al; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00064.html (12,240 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 17:02:26 -0400; The one 43 meter movement that I opened up had a 200 ohm resistor in series with the movement. That particular meter reads way low, 20 to 30% low and doesn't seem to have a sticking problem. It was r; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00065.html (9,645 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: <sccook1@cox.net>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 15:15:58 -0700; My watt meter is a dead nutts on the dial. I talks into the mike-re-phone and puts the fire to the wire. If ya knows how to tune 'em right -- a par of 500 zulus will flat boogie -- guts, feathers 'n; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00066.html (15,172 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 19:49:48 -0400; It was a normal practice at Prime Instruments to place a fixed resistor in series with a movement to get the movement resistance into tolerance. While full scale sensitivity can easily be adjusted b; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00067.html (10,387 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Ed" <elh54@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 00:18:12 -0500; If Bird is so darn Bad an inaccurate, why has it been the gold standard all my adult life and still is the one EVERYONE else compares themselves to? My BS meter is pegging. Ed-KV5I -- Original Messag; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00068.html (12,103 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 08:36:55 -0400; We have to be careful to not read all the hyperbole and leap to conclusions that are a stretch. The powermaster is a good meter, and the advertised accuracy is certainly comparable to some of Bird's; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00069.html (12,448 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 17:41:36 -0400; Hi Tom, In this case with the bird 43 meter all of the meter movements are 30 microamp movements and I would guess that all of the slugs are designed to put out 30 microamps at full scale into the st; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00070.html (13,752 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Helge Skram" <helge.skram@c2i.net>; Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 00:14:14 +0200; Hi All agreed. I put out the same arguments, maybe only in reply to Tom. Yes it's difficult to measure power accurately. Made quite a struggle measuring high power at 1296MHz. The Bird 400-1000MHz 50; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00071.html (13,782 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: Steve Thompson <g8gsq@eltac.co.uk>; Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 08:36:30 +0100; Things can become gold standards because they are truly good, or because of weight of numbers, folklore and peer pressure. Bird 43 etc are good at what they do - inline measurement, wide frequency ra; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00073.html (8,653 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] Bird wattmeter (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 05:27:14 -0400; Ed, RF power is very difficult to measure with great precision. We all like to think out favorite meter can tell us the absolute power perfectly but they really can't. I'm afraid the Powermaster, wh; /archives//html/Amps/2007-05/msg00074.html (10,120 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]