Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOV UPDATE

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOV UPDATE
From: "Graham" <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 22:22:06 -0000
References: <021420082154.26694.47B4B8AF000ED3D10000684622155863949C9D01CD05@comcast.net> <000b01c86f6d$8dbf6bf0$0d00000a@AGB> <01d301c86fba$5d7f4080$0301a8c0@g3kev> <000d01c86fd3$b60ac1c0$412d7ad5@w4o8m9> <00be01c8701c$5a2616e0$0d00000a@AGB> <006901c87029$d20dd0f0$0301a8c0@g3kev>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]


Graham.
With that small antenna you might be lucky if it is 0.1% efficient,
therefore to get 1w erp you need 1Kw less 2.6db ie 555 watts to the antenna
feed point.
If you are using a linear pa at 50% eff you would need a DC input of 1.110
Kwatts or a class D at 70% eff 793 watts.
This is a rough estimate, other factors need consideration as explained
before.
You probably know all about the subject anyway.
To measure the far field properly an airborne platform is necessary to get a
clear run and avoid obstructions like buildings and trees etc. This is the
procedure used professionally. If you have a friend in the RAF this might
help

mal/g3kev



____________________________________________________________



I was typing 'fields' into google and can across this , nicely framed by the boys

from Liverpool



http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywg-PdeGVL0



'A friend in the RAF' ,  Guess that's a new take on 'Aerial' measurements,



http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rJX03LcmNpU



1.1 Kw dc input may  be be 'pushing' things a little too far  hihi



G ..
















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