Foundations Of Amateur Radio

Foundations of Amateur Radio There is a perception in the community that the hobby of amateur radio is an expensive way to have fun. While it's entirely possible to spend thousands of dollars on equipment, in much the same way that it's possible if your preferred hobby is golf, getting started does not have to require that you start planting money trees. Lots of fun can be had using cheap amateur radio transceivers that are used all around the world. If you do start with such a radio, the chances are good that you'll come across amateurs who make disparaging remarks about the lack of compliance of such radios. When I say compliance, I'm talking about specific measurements specified by the International Telecommunications Union, the ITU. When you transmit on a specific frequency, there are rules about how much that signal is allowed to be unintended, or to use the official term, spurious emissions. Specifically, the signal you transmit has to meet the requirements for the mode you're using and it must also

Foundations of Amateur Radio Amateur radio is an activity enjoyed by many people around the world. How many exactly is cause for debate. The most recent official figure we have is from the IARU, the International Amateur Radio Union. In 2020 it counted over 3 million people, but an article written a year later puts that figure at 1.75 million. In Australia there's a common narrative that the total amateur population is in undeniable decline, some think that it's on a stark decline. Interested in hard data, for years I've been collecting information around the amateur population in Australia and I can report that across the nine years that I have data for the total variation is within two percent and it's not a straight line down either. There was a dip in 2020, potentially associated with training and callsign allocation being moved from the Wireless Institute of Australia to the Australian Maritime College, something which is going to change again shortly when amateur licensing in Australia will revert to

Foundations of Amateur Radio For years I've been hosting a weekly net called F-troop. It's a one hour opportunity for new and returning amateurs to get together and share their questions, and sometimes answers, about anything and everything amateur radio, with side trips into astronomy, electronics, circuit boards, testing gear and whatever else takes our fancy on the day. The net runs for an hour every Saturday morning starting at midnight UTC, which for some is a time when they're fast asleep, though truth be told, several of our regulars are night owls. In VK6 where I am, midnight UTC is a more reasonable 8am, unless we have another referendum when we can decide if we want daylight saving, or not. So far we've had four of those, yes, really, in 1975, 1984, 1992, and 2009, and each time daylight saving or summer time was rejected. All I'm saying is that the chances are good that midnight UTC is going to be 8am in VK6 for a while yet. Anyway, that time of the morning affords me the luxury of getting out o

Foundations of Amateur Radio During the week I started a new project. If you know me at all, this is not unusual. Having worked in the IT industry for nearly 40 years it's also not unusual that projects have a way of surprising you and this project was no different. Recently I've been talking about antennas, a topic close to the heart of many amateurs and one that garners a lot of opinion and in my experience, much less in the way of facts, so being a firm believer of facts, I set out to add some of those to the discussion. After having described that the environment is not often discussed in the context of antenna behaviour, coupled with the personal experience that it has by far the biggest influence, I set out to discover if I could use my computing skills to simulate this problem to build a picture that would speak a thousand words. Prompted by a friend who shared with me a link to an opinion that stated that dipole antennas didn't have 2.15 dBi gain, but in fact, apparently, had 8.5 dBi gain, I was en

Foundations of Amateur Radio Let's compare the same antenna in different locations... Over the years I've spent many hours building and testing antennas. I've talked about this and discussed how there is essentially an infinite variety of antennas that can exist. To give you a sense of this, picture a basic dipole antenna, two bits of wire, same length, connected to a feed-point. We're doing this experiment in space, so we're not concerned with trees or rope, or the ground for that matter, more on those shortly. We can make this dipole straight, or we can make it into a V-shape, or bend over the edges, or make each side into a half-circle and join them, or make them into a spiral, or kink the wires, or bend them over, or any number of variations. Every time you change something, the antenna radiation pattern changes and the antenna behaves differently. While at its heart the antenna might still be considered a dipole, essentially a change in radiation pattern effectively means a different antenna. In thos

Foundations of Amateur Radio All antennas have a radiation pattern that charts on a sphere where it radiates more and where it radiates less than the theoretical isotropic radiator. This comparison is expressed as dBi antenna gain. There is a fundamental concept in antenna design called "reciprocity". Essentially it means that transmit and receive behaviour of an antenna is identical. In other words, the radiation pattern of an antenna applies for both transmitting and receiving of signals. Unfortunately, this does not mean that if two stations are communicating and one can hear the other, the reverse is also true. Let me explain why. Let's set the scene. Imagine two stations, me, VK6FLAB at Lake Monger, in Perth, Western Australia and Charles NK8O in the Lake of the Ozarks state park within the Ozark Mountains in central Missouri. We're both on the 10m HF band and in this story I've finally managed to learn Morse code and I'm "talking" to Charles, mind you, Charles apparently does have a microphone, so p

Foundations of Amateur Radio After recently talking about noise, today I want to discuss gain, specifically antenna gain. When you say that your antenna has 18 dBi gain, what does that mean? This entire discussion starts with an isotropic radiator or antenna. It's often described as the perfect antenna, but rarely is there any description on how that actually works, so I'd like to start there. Before we dig in too much, it's worth remembering that an isotropic antenna is a thought experiment, it cannot physically exist, but it's a useful tool for comparing antennas. Antennas have a physical size. There's often a direct relationship between the size of the antenna and the frequencies for which it works best. A lower frequency means a longer wavelength and corresponding large antenna to handle that radio frequency. In contrast, an isotropic antenna is infinitesimally small and responds equally well for all frequencies. Similarly, unlike an actual antenna, an isotropic antenna is symmetric in all directions

Foundations of Amateur Radio Today I'd like to talk about noise, but before I do, I need to cover some ground. Recently I explored the idea that, on their own, neither antenna, nor coax, made a big difference in the potential for a contact when compared to the impact of path loss between two stations. I went on to point out that you'd be unlikely to even notice the difference in normal communications. Only when you're working at the margins, when the signal is barely detectable, would adding a single dB here or there make any potential difference. In saying that, I skipped over one detail, noise. Noise is by definition an unwanted signal that arrives together with a wanted signal at the receiver. In HF communications, noise comes from many sources, the galaxy, our atmosphere, and man-made noise from things like electrical switches, motors, alternator circuits, inverters and computers. The example I used was my 10 dBm beacon being reported by an Antarctic station. My signal report was about 5 dB above the

Foundations of Amateur Radio Recently I explained some of the reasons why I've shifted to using dBm to discuss power. You might recall that 1 Watt is defined as 1,000 mW and that's represented by 30 dBm. 10 Watts is 40 dBm, 400 Watts, the maximum power output in Australia is 56 dBm and 1,500 Watts, the maximum in the USA, is just under 62 dBm. My favourite power level, 5 Watts, is 37 dBm. I mentioned that using dBm allows us to create a continuous scale between the transmitted power and the received signal. On HF, an S9 report is defined as -73 dBm. Between each S-point lies 6 dB, so an S8 signal is -79 dBm, S7 is -85 dBm and so-on to S0, which is -127 dBm. Said differently, to increase the received signal by one S-point you need to quadruple the power output. Now, let's consider a contact with a 100 Watt station, 50 dBm. Let's imagine that the receiver reports an S8 signal. That means that between a transmitter output of 50 dBm and the received signal at -79 dBm, there's a loss of 129 dB. If we dial the p

Foundations of Amateur Radio The other day I went looking for a software defined radio or SDR for HF. This happened because all such devices on my desk are rated at higher frequencies and I've still not managed to fix the broken SMA board connector on the transverter I purchased over a year and a half ago. In case you're wondering, the design has two SMA connectors attached at either end of a printed circuit board, also known as a PCB. The board slides into a metal case and both connectors are tightened to either side of the case, which causes the problem when the circuit board is slightly shorter than the case and the nuts pull the connector apart, causing the device to fail. Replacing the SMA board connectors would be relatively simple, but they appear hard to come by and the micro SMA connectors that a friend purchased to help, changed the task into finding adaptors, which I've not managed to solve yet. I'm detailing this all for a purpose, trust me. Anyway, the hunt for an SDR for HF lead me to a pro

Foundations of Amateur Radio If you've been following my amateur radio journey, you'll have likely noticed that I've been straying from the fold. The words I use for power have been changing. I've reduced references to Watt and increased use of the term decibel. Initially this was incidental, recently it's been more of a deliberate decision and I'd like to explain how this came to be. It starts with representing really big and really small numbers. Let's start big. On 14 September, 2015 the first direct observation of gravitational waves was made when a pair of black holes with a combined estimated weight of 65 solar masses merged. The signal was named GW150914, combining "Gravitational Wave" and the observation date to immortalise the event. Following the collision, it was estimated that the radiated energy from the resulting gravitational waves was 50 times the combined power output of all the light from all the stars in the observable universe. As a number in Watts, that's 36 followed by 48 zeros. If

Foundations of Amateur Radio Between decibels and milliwatts ... As you might recall, I've been working towards using a cheap $20 RTL-SDR dongle to measure the second and third harmonic of a handheld radio in an attempt to discover how realistic that is as a solution when compared to using professional equipment like a Hewlett Packard 8920A RF Communications Test Set. I spent quite some time discussing how to protect the receiver against the transmitter output and described a methodology to calculate just how much attenuation might be needed and what level of power handling. With that information in-hand, for reference, I used two 30 dB attenuators, one capable of handling 10 Watts and one capable of handling 2 Watts. In case you're wondering, it's not the dummy load with variable attenuation that I was discussing recently. I ended up using a simple command-line tool, rtl-power, something which I've discussed before. You can use it to measure power output between a set of frequencies. In my case I measure

Foundations of Amateur Radio Over the weekend a friend of mine convinced me to help plant some trees. Mind you, I was told that this was going to be a blue tree painting day. The Blue Tree Project is now a global awareness campaign that paints dead trees blue to spread the message that "it's OK to not be OK", and help break down the stigma that's still largely attached to mental health. In the process, I learnt that my physical stamina is not what it once was and my current appetite for bending over and shovelling dirt is, let's call it, muted. After the digging and the sausage sizzle under the branches of an actual blue tree, there was some opportunity for playing radio, something I haven't done in much too long. I wasn't sure when I last got into the fresh air to actually listen, but I must confess, the coax cable that I picked up out of my shed had been hanging there for several years. The location where we planned to play was in a rural setting, right next to a dam, which surprisingly actually had wat

Foundations of Amateur Radio Before we start I should give you fair warning. There are many moving parts in what I'm about to discuss and there's lots of numbers coming. Don't stress too much about the exact numbers. In essence, what I'm attempting is to explore how we can reduce the power output from a transmitter in such a way that it doesn't blow up a receiver whilst making sure that the signal is strong enough that we can actually measure it. With that in mind, recently I discussed the idea of adding a series of attenuators to a transmitter to reduce the power output by a known amount so you could connect it to a receiver and use that to measure output power at various frequencies. One hurdle to overcome is the need to handle enough power in order to stop magic smoke from escaping. None of my attenuators are capable of handling more than 1 or 2 Watts of power, so I cannot use any of them as the first in line. As it happens, a good friend of mine, Glynn VK6PAW, dropped off a device that allows you to di

Foundations of Amateur Radio Recently I had the opportunity to use a piece of professional equipment to measure the so-called unwanted or spurious emissions that a transceiver might produce. In describing this I finished off with the idea that you could use a $20 RTL-SDR dongle to do these measurements in your own shack. I did point out that you should use enough attenuation to prevent the white smoke from escaping from your dongle, but it left a question, how much attenuation is enough? An RTL-SDR dongle is a USB powered device originally designed to act as a Digital TV and FM radio receiver. It's normally fitted with an antenna plugged into a socket on the side. I'll refer to it more generically as a receiver because much of what we're about to explore is applicable for other devices too. Using your transceiver, or transmitter, as a signal source isn't the same as tuning to a broadcast station, unless you move it some distance away, as-in meters or even kilometres away, depending on how much power you're

Foundations of Amateur Radio At a recent local HAMfest we set-up a table to measure second and third harmonic emissions from any handheld radio that came our way. The process was fun and we learnt lots and in due course we plan to publish a report on our findings. When we received a handheld, we would disconnect the antenna, and replace it with a short length of coax and connect it to a spectrum analyser. We would then trigger the Push To Talk, or PTT button and measure several things. We'd record the actual frequency and how many Watts that the transmitter was producing and then record the power level in dBm for the base frequency, double that frequency and triple that frequency. In other words, we'd record the base, second and third harmonics. This resulted in a list of numbers. Frequency and power in Watts are obvious, but the three dBm numbers caused confusion for many visitors. The most perplexing appeared to be that we were producing negative dBm numbers, and truth be told, some positive ones as well

Foundations of Amateur Radio There's nothing quite as satisfying as the click of a well designed piece of equipment. It's something that tickles the brain and done well it makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck. If time was on my side and I wasn't going somewhere else with this, I'd now regale you with research on the phenomenon, I'd explore the community of people building mechanical keyboards and those who restore equipment to their former glory, instead I'm encouraging you to dig whilst I talk about the second and third harmonics. This is about amateur radio after all. Over the years there has been a steady stream of commentary around the quality of handheld radios. Some suggest that the cheaper the radio, the worse it is. Given that these kinds of radios are often the very first purchase for an aspiring amateur it would be useful to have a go at exploring this. When a radio is designed the aim is for it to transmit exactly where it's intended to and only there. Any transmission that's not w

Foundations of Amateur Radio If you walk into your radio shack and switch on a light, the result is instantaneous, one moment it's dark, the next it's not. What if I told you that as immediate as it appears, there is actually a small delay between you closing the circuit and the light coming on. Likely the distance between your switch and your light is less than say 10 meters, so the delay is likely to be less than 33 nanoseconds, not something you'd notice unless you're out to measure it. What if your light switch is 3,200 km away? That's the length of the first transatlantic telegraph cable in 1858. Let's start with the notion that between the action of closing a switch, or applying a voltage at one end of the cable and it being seen at the other end takes time. If we ignore the wire for a moment, pretending that both ends are separated by vacuum, then the delay between the two ends is just over 10 milliseconds because that's how long it takes travelling at the speed of light. One of the effects of using

Foundations of Amateur Radio The first official telegram to pass between two continents was a letter of congratulations from Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom to President of the United States James Buchanan on 16 August 1858. The text is captured in the collection of the US Library of Congress. It's a low resolution image of a photo of a wood engraving. Based on me counting the characters, the text from the Queen to the President is about 650 characters. IEEE reports it as 98 words, where my count gives 103 words or 95 words, depending on how you count the address. Due to a misunderstanding between the operators at either end of the 3,200 km long cable, the message took 16 hours to transmit and 67 minutes to repeat back. If you use the shortest duration, the effective speed is just over one and a half Words Per Minute or WPM. That's not fast in comparison with speeds we use today. Until 2003, the ITU expected that emergency and meteorological messages should not exceed 16 WPM, that a second class operat

Foundations of Amateur Radio Morse code is a way for people to send information across long distances. The code we use today, made from dit and dah elements is nothing like the code demonstrated and attributed to Samuel Morse in 1837. Over years and with assistance from Professor of Chemistry Leonard Gail and Physicist Joseph Henry, then Professor of Literature, Samuel Morse, and mechanically minded Alfred Vail developed an electrical telegraph system that automatically moved a paper tape and used an electromagnet to pull a stylus into the paper and a spring to retract it, marking the paper with lines. The original system was only intended to transmit numbers, and combined with a dictionary, the operator could decode the message. The telegraph was able to send zig-zag and straight lines, transmitting the message "Successful experiment with telegraph September 4 1837". The system was enhanced to include letters, making it much more versatile. On the 6th of January 1838, across 4.8 km of wire, strung across a