Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] Dummy Loads & Wattmeters

To: Steve Katz <stevek@jmr.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] Dummy Loads & Wattmeters
From: "Dr. David Kirkby" <david.kirkby@onetel.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:21:47 +0000
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Steve Katz wrote:
> Yep, there is.  An accurate power measurement with the model 43 is P(actual) 
> = Pf (indicated) - Pr (indicated).  

There is no such thing as an accurate power measurement with a Bird 43.

As an 'industrial placement' during an electrical and electronic engineering 
degree, I worked in a National Standards Laboratory. I worked in a department 
which calibrated tons of Bird 43's. So many failed the +/- 5% of FSD that some 
big users would send them in marked saying +/- 10% of FSD was considered 
acceptable. Most, but certainly not all the Bird 43's, passed the +/- 10% of 
FSD 
test.

I had my own 43, bought a brand new slug for it, took it into the lab and found 
it was out of spec. Aspen Electronics, who were the distributors in the UK, 
adjusted it for me (took them about 5 minutes) so it was accurate at 432 MHz - 
the only frequency I cared about. I checked it again, and it was within 5% of 
FSD. (I forget how accurate it was at that point).

43's are fine to give you a rough idea of what the power output is, but into a 
50 Ohm resistive load, I would not consider them better than +/- 10 or 15% of 
FSD.

To my knowledge, which might be outdated now as this was 20 years ago, the most 
accurate (but least practical) method of measuring RF power is the water 
calorimeter. That was (probably still is) a primary standard.

More practical, and within the realms of amateur budgets, would be calibrated 
directional couplers, attenuators and a lab-grade meter with sensor. Mount the 
attenuators on the coupler, get it tested as a complete set, then never remove 
them.

Thinking about it, if one wanted to, building a water calorimeter using tap 
water is probably not that hard for a ham. The only thing is, the measurement 
takes ages to stabilise, so unless you have a system to keep the RF power input 
constant, it would be a waste of time. I doubt the inpurities in tap water 
would 
change the specific heat capacity of the water much, but I'm sure information 
about that sort of thing can be found on the web.

Another semi-practical method of measuring RF output power of an amp would be 
to 
measurer the temperature rise of the air exiting the tubes. First run the tubes 
with no RF input, so you can know the temperature rise with a specific known 
dissipation (say 500 W), then run the amp, and see the temperature rise. If the 
DC input power is measured too, it would be possible to approximately calculate 
the RF output power. I doubt it would be very accurate, as there are numerous 
sources of error, but it should be a lot better than a Bird 43.

I can't really think why a ham needs to know RF power very accurately. In which 
case, Bird 43's are fine.

Dave


_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>