As I posted earlier field measurement is not an accurate method of determining power. I seriously doubt an administration permit such a technique unless it was very dumbed down and produced very 'safe' results or in other words less power than could otherwise be achieved.
On 2/21/12 2:54 PM, Tod Olson wrote: > Joe, et. al > > I am quite certain that there will need to be different sense antennas for > 160m and 630m. I would not be surprised if we did not also need bandpass > filters for each of the bands as well. > > As I recall there were several circuits in QST using a single analog > Devices unit to measure RF input levels. I think that it have several > decades of measurement and the output was on a log scale. Since the input > of those circuits was broadband something would need to be altered to make > it usable on 160m and/or 630m for measuring rf at those specific > frequencies. > > There is a device called a Helmholtz pair that might be used on low > frequencies to help with calibration. > > See → www.ets-lindgren.com/page/?i=6402M > > I have been advised by Dave Bowker, K1FK, that such a device might be > constructed for quite low cost. > > > > Thanks for the suggestions Joe. > > Tree, if this is going over the edge let me know. It was not my intention > to subvert the TopBand reflector. > > Tod, K0TO > > > > > > > On 2/21/12 10:26 AM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" <li...@subich.com> wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 19:04 -0700, Tod - ID wrote: >>> >>> The important thing is to have a way to assure that when someone >>> measured the same field at the same point with the same type of >>> measurement device they would get the same measurement result. >>> That would allow us to compare measurements between different >>> people even if we did not know the absolute field strength value. >> I think simple, repeatable and accurate are a difficult triad. What >> you are talking about is an accurate Field Intensity Meter (FIM) and >> getting stable calibrations with home constructed equipment is not >> going to be easy - let along easy to duplicate. The closest solution >> is to use standard antennas (not simple whips) and calibrate them >> against broadcast signals at known locations and known field strengths. >> >> This will still require separate antennas for 160 and 630 meters and >> separate calibration sources on the appropriate ends of the standard >> broadcast band (due to the antennas). >> >> 73, >> >> ... Joe, W4TV >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > _______________________________________________ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK