Showing posts with label ft-817. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ft-817. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 6, 2017

KA7OEI now QRV on 630 and 2200 meters

Figure 1:
The LF/MF transmit station, configured for 630 meter operation.
At the time this picture was taken I had not yet completed the gear and
put the various pieces in their boxes, hence the mess of clip-leaded-
together modules sitting on my workbench.  Not visible is
the low-pass filter in the power amplifier box or the thermocouple-type
RF ammeter.  The pictured 630 meter variometer has been supplanted
with a "new" one wound with 660/42 Litz wire for lower loss (see Figure 6).
Click on the image for a larger version.
It so-happened that I had a few days off around Thanksgiving and I took this time to throw together a fairly simple transmit converter for the "new" amateur LF and MF bands - notably 2200 and 630 meters.  Having had already obtained my approval from the UTC to operate on both of these bands, I was "good to go".

It took only two evenings to put together the transmit converter and power amplifier as I had the parts on hand - and none of them were particularly exotic.  While the transmit converter will be described in greater detail in a future post, the signal path for the transmitter is approximately thus:

(See the block diagram in Figure 2, below.)
  • A 5 MHz IF is used, allowing a "broadbanded" FT-817 (with TCXO) to serve as the exciter.
  • The 5+ MHz signal (about 5137 kHz for 2200 meters, 5475 for 630 meters) is mixed (using a 74HC4066) with a 5 MHz local oscillator (a 10 MHz OCXO divided-by-two) to yield frequency-stable LF/MF signals.
  • A low-power post-mixer amplifier boosts this signal to a level capable of driving the power amplifier.
  • A single-ended MOSFET-based broadband power amplifier, running on 12-30 volts, provides between 10 and 50 watts of RF at either 630 or 2200 meters.  Because the transmit converter is broadband, it is agnostic to the operating frequency meaning that one needs only use the appropriate low-pass filter to change bands.  (The 630 meter low-pass filter is always in line - another filter is added for 2200 meter operation.)  This power amplifier is designed to be driven by either the transmit converter or another device, such as a QRP Labs Ultimate 3S beacon transmitter configured for these bands.
  • The 50 ohm output of the power amplifier goes to a tapped autotransformer wound on what is probably an FT-240-61 toroidal ferrite core and is used to match the transmitter's output to input resistance of the loading coil.
  • Also in the drawing is a relay the disconnects the loading coil from the autotransformer when not transmitting.  This was necessary to prevent the transmit antenna from "sucking out" some of the receive signal being intercepted by my E-field whip and also to prevent the transmit antenna from conducting "house noise" from the transmitter onto the transmit antenna which gets coupled into the receive antenna, reducing ultimate sensitivity. Not shown in the drawing is a 100k resistor connected between the "relay" side of the variometer and ground that bleeds static when the relay is open.
  • The loading coil, placed in series, cancels out the capacitive reactance of the antenna system.  For 630 meters my antenna requires about 230uH while about 2.5mH is needed to resonate the same antenna at 2200 meters.
Figure 2:
Block diagram of the 630 and 2200 meter transmit chain.  The transmit converter is broadband, capable of operating
from below 100 kHz to at least 500 kHz which means that one need only provide appropriate matching and low-pass filters to operate on either band. Not shown is a 100k static bleed resistor on "relay" side of the variometer and ground.
Click on the image for a larger version.

When I made my first-ever transmission I had not yet constructed the variometer, but I fished around in my "box-o-inductors" and found several Litz-wound ferrite inductors that were probably rescued from some scrapped TVs or computer monitors and wiring enough of these in series I was able to achieve  resonance with about 750mA of antenna current.  On the very first WSPR transmission I managed to be "heard" by several stations (See Figure 3, below.)
Figure 3:
A screen shot (from WSPRnet.org) of the very first 630 meter WSPR transmission that I made with the badly-kludged loading coil.
Not too bad for a temporary lash-up!
On the next night, after observing a few stations engaging in JT-9 QSOs, I answered a CQ by VE7SL and he replied, giving me a signal report of -22dB while I gave him -19dB.  This was quickly followed by two other QSOs as both W7IUV and NC0B noticed the "new guy" on the band!

Over the next several days I got around to constructing the "new" variometer depicted in Figure 4 and this boosted my antenna current to about 1.25 amps - a theoretical improvement of about 4.4dB with more QSOs to follow - including 2.5 (one "partial") CW contacts on the band.  After operating for a while it became apparent that, for the most part, I could work anyone that I could "hear".

A few days later I constructed yet another variometer for 630 meters - this time using some 660/42 (e.g. 660 strands of 42 AWG) Litz wire which reduced the skin-effect losses by a significant amount and this, along with minor improvements of the ground system, decreased losses and resulted in a further increase of antenna current to a bit over 2 amps - a theoretical ERP improvement of more than 8.5dB as compared to my original configuration. The measured resistance at the input of the 630 meter Litz coil is about 13.5 ohms, implying an overall antenna system efficiency roughly 1% - but still enough to work quite a few stations with a few 10s of watts of RF.

Figure 4:
 The "Mark 1 version of the 630 meter variometer.  This device is wound
on "4 inch" ABS triple-wall sewer pipe using 22 AWG insulated hookup
wire.  Inside is "3/4-inch" ABS waste pipe (actual O.D. about 1-1/8")
that forms the rotatable portion of the variometer.  This unit has an
adjustment range of approximately 175-235 uH.
Click on the image for a larger version.
The "Q" of the antenna system+Litz wire coil is now such that if I QSY from 475.75 kHz for WSPR operations down to about 475.0 kHz for JT-9 I actually see noticeable drop in antenna current until I readjust the variometer, but if I QSY from 475 kHz down to 473 kHz for CW operation the antenna current plummets to a few hundred milliamps and I absolutely must retune!

As is the custom on both the LF and MF bands, my WSPR signal reports not the transmitter power, but rather the estimated EIRP.  I've typically been reporting 0.5 watts (+27dBm) which, assuming about 25 watts of RF power, implies an antenna efficiency of about 2% which, while in the general ballpark, may still be a bit optimistic.  With the recent changes/improvements in my system (mostly improving the grounding, radials and counterpoise network) I will have to re-analyze my estimated system efficiency.

Operation on 2200 meters:
Figure 5:
Antenna and ground system of my LF/MF TX antenna system.  The
yellow line represents the outline of the "Lazy Loop" - a horizontal HF
antenna fed with 450 ohm window line with both conductors of the
feedline being tied together and fed as a tophatted vertical on LF/MF.
The total circumference of this antenna is about 215 feet (65 meters) -
dimensions mostly dictated by the locations of trees at an average
height of roughly 30 feet (9 meters).
The red lines show the extent of my ground/radial system showing
extra wires, including sections of chain-link fences with electrically-
bonded sections and wires buried in the ground, including an
abandoned CATV line.  The roofs of both the house and garage are
metal which are ultimately tied into the ground/radial network.  There
are several ground rods near the feedpoint of the antenna to which
all of the grounds/radials are connected.
Click on the image for a larger version.

I have since wound yet another variometer (visible in Figure 6, below) - also on 4" ABS pipe - for 2200 meters.  This coil, adjustable from about 1.7-2.0mH, uses the same 22 AWG hook-up wire as my original 630 meter loading coil.  As it turned out this coil, by itself, doesn't have quite enough inductance to resonate my antenna at 137 kHz so I place the other two 630 meter coils in series with it.  As compared to the 630 meter loading coils, it is somewhat lossy, but I am able to obtain about 900mA of antenna current:  Not surprisingly, this coil runs slightly warm in operation due to the losses - but these are, no doubt, minor in comparison with the ground losses.

Update - 12 December, 2017:  After improving the ground system my antenna current is now around 1.1 amps on 2200 meters, implying an improvement of at least 1.7dB from current alone.  The actual far-field improvement, based on readings seen from monitoring stations on WSPR, appears to be in the area of 2-3dB.

The measured resistance at the input of this loading coil is about 43 ohms implying an overall antenna system efficiency of well under 0.1%.   Based on estimated antenna efficiency, I've configured WSPR to report my ERP as 50mW, which assuming a transmitter output power of about 25 watts implies an actual antenna efficiency of about 0.2% which is probably very optimistic!

Update - 5 May, 2018:  After some old-fashioned number-crunching, several antenna simulations and comparing my signal to other beacons of "known" EIRP I've revised my estimate of radiated power to be closer to 20 milliwatts, even after taking into account that I've increased my amplifier's output power to between 60 and 80 watts.  The previously-optimistic calculations assumed lower ground (and other losses - such as those due to nearby vegetation) than I originally thought that I had.

* * *

Not surprisingly, operation on 2200 meters - even at this power level - can be a bit hazardous.  With the rather low antenna capacitance the voltages on the feed are quite high - an estimated 5000-8000 peak volts!  What this means is that the feed wire has to be kept well clear of other conductors or else corona will occur, sapping transmit power, filling the room with ozone and becoming a potential fire hazard.  Fortunately, at this modest power level - and with the current-regulated power supply that I'm using - almost any sort of fault will detune the antenna system to the point that the high voltage will all but disappear and/or the power supply will go into current limiting and effectively shut down the transmitter.

Figure 6:
Left to right:  The original 630 meter variometer (seen in figure 4
wound with 22 AWG stranded wire , the new 630 meter wound with
660/42 Litz wire and the 2200 meter variometer, wound with the
same 22 AWG stranded wire and insulated with PET tape to allow it
to withstand the high voltages.  In the lower right corner is the
autotransformer wound on an FT-240 ferrite core.  With my current
(pun intended!) antenna I must put all three of these variometers in
series to resonate the system at 2200 meters.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Despite this simple arrangement I've managed to be "heard" by at least seven other stations in the western U.S. and Canada using WSPR to date, but I've not yet made any 2-way contacts.  The relative scarcity of stations that listen or transmit on 2200 meters - coupled with my rather weak signal - means that a contact will probably have to be arranged and conducted using a weak signal mode like JT-9 or QRSS.

Improvements:

There are plenty of improvements to be made, most notably getting the feed of my antenna a bit higher, laying out a few additional ground wires to further-reduce losses and improving the variometer for 2200 meters - but there are only so many things that I can do on my relatively small city lot.  This entire arrangement has so far been precariously sitting on my workbench meaning that the high RF voltages are also also nearby, just waiting to leap out at me when I reach over to tweak a variometer.

At some point I'll "remote" the matching network outside, but I need to get/build a few other items first, namely some stepper motors, control circuity, more vacuum relays and a means of remotely monitoring the antenna current.

Comment:  Despite having the feedpoint in my shack, I've not had any problems at all with transmit RF getting into computer speakers or other devices in my house.

* * * * * * * *

My recent operation, as of the date of this post, seems to be the only actively transmitting station on either 630 or 2200 meters in Utah.  I have been running WSPR on 2200 meters most of the time, occasionally switching to 630 meters in the local evenings when the activity level on that band is highest.

If you are QRV on 2200 or 630 meters and would like to arrange a CW, JT-9 or QRSS contact with me, or if you are interested in just "hearing" my signal (via your ears or with a computer+sound card) drop me a line using my callsign at arrl dot net.

Other entries on related topics found at this site:
Other web sites that have information on 630 and 2200 meters: 

This list is by no means comprehensive.  Peruse the "links" sections on the sites below for even more information.
  • NJD Technologies - link  - This web page has a wealth of information related to 630 meter operation, propagation and reports of activity, plus lists of known-active operators on both 630 and 2200 meters.  This web site also has many links to others that have credible information on LF and MF band topics.
  • W1TAG's web site - link  - John, W1TAG, has long been an experimenter and operator on the MF and LF bands.  This site has details on equipment both for operating and measuring performance at these frequencies.
  • W1VD's web site - link - Jay, W1VD, has long been an experimenter on the LF/MF bands and this page offers a lot of information on equipment for transmitting and receiving on these bands.
  • Antennas by N6LF - link - The callsign gives  you the clue that this guy likes LF/MF operation.  This page includes detailed information on LF/MF antennas and how to characterize/improve them.

[End]

This post stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

Monday, February 17, 2014

Analysis of a repeater's antenna pattern

Back in 1997 the antennas on the Utah Amateur Radio Club's 146.760 repeater were relocated and replaced - this, because the original, guyed tower on which the antennas were located was being replaced by a free-standing 120' tower.

Because the (separate) transmit and receive antennas were, at that time, over 20 years old (but still in perfect condition owing to radome placed over them when they were originally installed) we decided to start anew with the 2 meter antennas, putting the new antennas at the locations prescribed by the owner:  The receive antenna on top at the 120 foot level and the transmit antenna at the 60 foot level.  Upon installing the new antennas and running the new Heliax (tm) in a cable tray with almost nothing else in it (yet) we noted that we were the first to attach anything to the (also) brand-new ground system.  (We also noted that some hardware for part of the ground system had been installed incorrectly - which we fixed!)

While the receive antenna - being the tallest thing on the tower - worked quite well we could tell that something was amiss with the transmit antenna.  From the time that it had been installed we got reports that the signals to the north were noticeably weaker than they had been on the old tower/antenna and anecdotally, they seemed to get worse as the tower was finally built-up and more antennas, dishes and cables were gradually installed over the years.

Reading
(HEX)
SSB/CW/AM
signal strength
(dbm)
FM
signal strength
(dbm)
0 <-108 <-114.5
1 >-108.3 >-113.8
2 >-107.3 >-113.0
3 >-106.7 >-111.6
4 >-106.0 >-110.2
5 >-105.1 >-108.8
6 >-104.2 >-106.4
7 >-103.0 >-104.7
8 >-100.4 >-102.8
9 >-84 >-101.0
A >-74.5 >-99.5
B >-70.1 >-97.8
C >-58.9 >-96.8
D >-50.8 >-95.8
E >-40.8 >-94.6
F >-30.1 >-93.5
Table 1
Serial-port S-Meter readings versus signal input (as read via the serial port) on 2 meters for my FT-817 as shipped from the factory.
Not wanting to rush into these things, it wasn't until 2001 that we decided to make some scientific measurements.  One option was to drag along a signal level meter or spectrum analyzer and, every so-often, stop and make signal level measurements.  Since this method was likely to be very tedious and, in some areas may not even be very practical, I decided that there had to be a better way!

The FT-817 as a test instrument:

Not too long before this I'd bought a Yaesu FT-817 and noticed that it had the capability of reading the S-Meter via the serial port, but it had a rather useless signal strength span when it came to making meaningful measurements of real-world repeaters.

As can be seen from TABLE 1 the readings aren't entirely useful.  While each step is approximately 1 dB (more or less) the useful range goes from -114.5 to about -93.5 dBm - this entire range being generally weaker than what one might see from a local repeater.  At the same time I also made measurements of the S-meter reading when in SSB/CW/AM mode to see if that would be useful and while it covered far more range, the steps were uselessly small at the weak signal end (e.g. <1dB) but uselessly large at the high-signal end! (This indicates another, well-known problem with the FT-817's AGC, but that's another story...)

At about this same time I'd become interested in another aspect of the FT-817:  It's "soft" calibration settings.  I believed that these settings, in a special "calibration" menu, were too numerous and tedious to have someone on an assembly line adjust so I figured that there MUST be a way in which a radio was semi-automatically calibrated at the factory - and I was right!

What I found were some "undocumented" commands via the serial port - some of which obviously read from and wrote to the EEPROM - and I quickly wrote a program that would allow me to determine what memory locations were used for what:  The program would download the current EEPROM content, I would change a setting, and then the program would tell me what had changed after downloading it again.  I'd documented my findings on a web page and in the years that followed, all sorts of things followed-on from this information (e.g. "FT-817 Commander", the "SoftJump" program, various remote meters for FT-817 signal strength, ALC, SWR and transmit power - just to name a few).
 
Reading
(HEX)
FM
Signal
Strength
(dbm)
Reading
(HEX)
FM
Signal
Strength
(dbm)
0 <-110.7 8 -94.2
1 -108.9 9 -91.5
2 -106.2 A -89.2
3 -104.2 B -87.2
4 -102.3 C -85.2
5 -100.6 D -82.1
6 -98.9 E -78.1
7 -96.7 F >-75.7
Table 2
Serial-port S-Meter readings versus signal input using FM mode (as read via the serial port) after the described recalibration of the FM-S1 and FM-FS parameters. 
In  this early stage there were two "Soft Calibrate" (and now, EEPROM) settings that most interested me:  The ones that corresponded with S-Meter calibration, namely #9 - "FM-S1" and #10 - "FM-FS" which, I correctly surmised, related to the settings for the S1 and Full-Scale readings.  Through experimentation by using a calibrated signal generator and observing the readings on the serial port I determined that the original settings badly shortchanged the dynamic range of the FM S-meter and simply by readjusting these two settings could provide a wider and more useful FM S-Meter range as TABLE 2 demonstrates.

Now the meter was useful over a range of more than 30 dB and it still had reasonable resolution - between 2-3dB per step, but I still had a problem:  The usable range - from about -108 dBm to about -80dBm was still too low for the expected signal strength of typical, local repeaters which could vary from about -50 to -80 dBm at the receiver's input terminal.

Fortunately, I knew of another setting or two within the radio that proved to be useful - Calibration menu # 5 "VHFRXG".  This setting adjusted the bias of a PIN diode in the FT-817's IF and I found that it could usefully add at least 30 dB of attenuation, extending the S-meter to signals stronger that -50dBm!

What was more, I found that this setting - because it was done in the IF - was the same for every band (using the corresponding calibration points for HF, 6 meters and UHF) and it turned out to be consistent (within a 2-3dB) over a very wide temperature range (e.g. "Hot Car" to "Deep Freeze").  I found three more values for the "xxxRXG" parameter that adjusted the gain by approximately 10 dB (and precisely measured that amount of attenuation) and was ready to go!
 
Reading
(HEX)
VHFRXG
99
VHFRXG
57
VHFRXG
49
VHFRXG
43
0 <-110.7 <-98.5 <-88.1 <-78.7
1 -108.9 -96.8 -86.7 -77.7
9 -91.5 -79.5 -69.6 -60.4
D -82.1 -70.5 -60.2 -50.9
E -78.1 -66.3 -56.5 -46.9
F >-75.7 >-63.8 >-53.6 >-44.5
Average 
Difference 
(db)
 - 12.0 22.0 31.1
Table 3
Sample values of the VHFRXG parameter (soft calibration menu item #5) versus the signal input level.  The bottom row shows the average difference between the "unattenuated" reading (VHFRXG = 99) versus the reading obtained with differing amounts of "attenuation".
Note:  The above values are for my FT-817.  Every '817 will be different, requiring individual calibration to assure accuracy.

Putting it all together:

I could now get down to the business of writing a program that would take all of this data and make sense out of it.

What I had now were lots of bits of information that I could use to analyze the problem related to the repeater's transmit coverage:
  • Using the FT-817, I could now read the signal level arriving at its antenna terminal.
  • Knowing the type of antenna and amount of coax, I could make an estimate of antenna gain and other losses to correct the signal level reading.
  • The GPS location of the repeater was known from previous on-site measurements.
  • The repeater's transmit antenna gain and losses (coax, cavity, etc.) were known.
  • Using a portable GPS receiver connected to the computer, I knew MY location via the NMEA strings emitted by a GPS receiver and fed to the computer.  The laptop that I was using had only one serial port so I used a relay controlled by the handshake line two switch between the FT-817 and the GPS receiver every 30 seconds or so to record the location.
  • Knowing my location with respect to that of the repeater, I could calculate the distance between my antenna and the repeater's antenna as well as the bearings to/from the two antennas.
  • Using fairly simple formulas, I could calculate the free-space path loss between my current location and the repeater antenna.
  • Knowing the transmit antenna gain and loss parameters, my own receiver's antenna gain and loss parameters and the amount of expected path loss, I could could calculate how much signal I should (theoretically!) expect from the repeater.
  • Since I was able to directly measure my received signal strength, I could calculate the "Excess Path Loss" - that is, the difference between the predicted signal level and the actual signal level.  This value could vary from being negative, indicating a higher signal level than expected, to positive, indicating greater path loss than expected.  Both a "real-time" and a "sliding average" reading were made available, the latter smoothing out short-term variations in signal level due to Fresnel effects, uncertainty in measurements and the effects of nearby obstructions such as buildings and vehicles.
  • Since it was a computer, this was done automatically and the results saved to a text file for later analysis.  This included time stamps and all of the raw data as well as the "cooked" data such as excess path loss, bearing to/from the site, etc.
  • The program also allowed brief text notes to be inserted in the file permitting one to take notes about local obstacles that might skew readings, etc.
What this meant was that while I drove a path that circumnavigated the 146.760 repeater, my passenger could look at the computer's screen which was providing a real-time display of the calculated parameters.  The biggest advantage was that we could be zooming down the highway, taking readings very frequently.  With the real-time display we could also take a different route if we suspected that some local obstructions excessively skewed the readings.

So, during April 2001 - after testing the program on a few other local repeaters and finding that the readings agreed within a few dB of theoretical - Gordon, K7HFV and myself took a day-long drive, circumnavigating the 146.76 repeater.  While much of this was via paved roads there was a significant segment consisting of high-clearance four-wheel drive dirt and gravel roads that took more time to traverse than the rest of the trip put together!

Having made the trip "behind" Lake Mountain to the west we were coming close to closing the circle when, while driving along the highway, Gordon started reading out "additional path loss" numbers like "-10... -15... -25... -35... -25... -15... -10..."  While in full, line-of-sight view of the transmit antenna we had passed through a 30+ dB deep null in the transmit pattern while traveling a fairly short distance!  Not sure of what we just saw, I did a legal U-turn and re-traced the path going the other way - and then back again, each time seeing the same numbers go by on the display on three occasions!

Figure 1: 
The measured antenna pattern (the shaded circle near the center) and the calculated coverage of the 146.760 repeater based on this pattern and actual terrain data.
Click on the image for a larger version.
We now had our answer as to how severe the null was - and the results may be seen in Figure 1.  After analyzing the logged data I was able to determine the approximate antenna pattern and input this data into the "RadioMobile" program by VE2DBE.  As expected, it showed a rather deep null almost exactly straight north, encompassing a significant portion of the Salt Lake valley and communities to the north.

What to do about the null?

Even though we've known about this problem for some time now, the big question is "What to do about it?"  On this site, the receive antenna is just that:  A receive-only antenna, and we cannot transmit from that location - which, being on the top of the tower, is free of this null.  At the level of the transmit antenna we have the problem of there being very limited options as to where and how we may mount our antenna to avoid the mechanical obstacles.  We have some ideas in mind, but we are still considering the options!

A slightly more in-depth version of this article may be found here (link).

For more information about the FT-817's inner workings, visit the KA7OEI FT-817 pages (link)


Update:

In the fall of 2014 a "fill" antenna was added to (hopefully) minimize the null caused by the "tower clutter".  While anecdotal evidence indicates that this has improved coverage in the "null zone", at the time of this update (3/15) we have yet to re-do at least part of the circumnavigation to quantify the effect of this change.

[End]

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com