There has been mention that the source is a current source, and depending
upon the length of the control cable, the current would increase, etc. This
couldn't be correct, since the load (motor), cable resistance, and source
are all in series - so the current would be the same everywhere. What may
be happening is that the voltage increases in an attempt to keep the current
constant. Perhaps the supply "senses" the voltage output and shuts down if
it exceeds a predetermined maximum voltage.
73,
riki, K7NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
towertalk-request@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 6:07 AM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 35
Send TowerTalk mailing list submissions to
towertalk@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
towertalk-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
towertalk-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TowerTalk digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: SteppIR problem (K4SAV)
2. Re: SteppIR problem (Roger (K8RI))
3. Re: SteppIR problem (K4SAV)
4. Re: SteppIR cable (Joe Subich, W4TV)
5. Fw: SteppIR problem (Ron Todd)
6. Re: SteppIR problem (W5LT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 00:23:29 -0500
From: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID: <466CDC51.3010805@charter.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Dick Green wrote:
>I remember reading on the SteppIR reflector about the driver chips being
>current sources and how this makes the cable length irrelevant, except for
>added capacitance. I understand that added capacitance messes up the pulse
>waveform, but I don't understand how increased resistance doesn't matter.
>
>OK, so the chips increase the current in the face of a higher resistance,
>and the load sees the same current. Fine. But the chips have to get the
>extra power from somewhere, and that's the power supply. If the resistance
>is high enough to cause the current draw to exceed the capacity of the
>supply, the first symptom is likely to be a voltage drop. I would be
willing
>to bet that the controller's CPU can't tolerate less than a certain supply
>voltage, so it crashes.
>
>
>
An interesting observation. One can easily make the mistake of saying
that the current to the motor is regulated so the supply current doesn't
change due to the extra resistance, because the motor current doesn't
change, but this is not exactly true, as you are alluding to.
Think of the load as an RL network. The pulses delivered to this load
are both width and frequency modulated, in other words they change to
provide a fixed amount of average current to the motor. So for an
increased resistance the pulse width has to be wider than that for a
lower resistance. This is because the rise time to this network will be
slower. Looking back at the power supply this requires more average
current from the supply because of these wider pulses. (The rep rate of
these pulses also changes but that's just another detail.) However the
peak current required from the supply is the same in both cases, because
the regulator IC shuts the current off when it reaches a preset value.
It is this max peak value that is independent of the amount of
resistance, not the average current from the supply.
That does raise the question of what the power supply's capability is,
in terms of peak and average current capability. It is possible that
the power supply filter cap can deliver the high peaks but that the
supply itself cannot sustain the higher average current required.
Jerry, K4SAV
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 01:57:45 -0400
From: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
To: "K4SAV" <RadioIR@charter.net>, <towertalk@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <001a01c7abed$951293d0$6400a8c0@shop32>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
> Roger (K8RI) wrote:
>
>>>I'm not at all familiar with the SteppIR design, but I've
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Nor am I, but I have many years working with process control and
>>positioners
>>prior to moving into computer science.
>>Which brings up my question: How does the system know the motors have
>>moved
>>the tape/elements to the proper length? Hopefully they don't just count
>>the
>>pulses to the motors.
>>
>>Roger (K8RI)
>>
>>
> Yes, that is exactly how it works. It does have a recalibrate function
> which drives the elements back into the housing and oversteps the pulses
> so that it is now sure where the antenna is.
When it came to accuracy we always had problems with that type of system
when things didn't work right. IOW when the system recalibrates it starts
out accurate, but if there is anything that hinders the steps, be it enough
drag to prevent the motor from fully stepping, not enough current, and in
some rare instances misshapen or even dropped pulses. The more pulsese to
get to the target position that larger the potential error. I reiterate
that this was only when things didn't work right and in the chemical
industry we had some strong safety issues with maintaining accuracy so we
used output signals much like you find on the large C-Band satellite dish
positioners or even on modern radio VFOs. We used magnetic, but they can be
optical or even mechanical switches to verify we were really/accurately
getting to the positions we expected. Of course this added complexity and
cost to the system but we *almost* always knew where the positioners were
setting.
73
Roger (K8RI)
>
> Jerry
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 01:42:43 -0500
From: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID: <466CEEE3.8020000@charter.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Roger (K8RI) wrote:
> When it came to accuracy we always had problems with that type of
> system when things didn't work right. IOW when the system
> recalibrates it starts out accurate, but if there is anything that
> hinders the steps, be it enough drag to prevent the motor from fully
> stepping, not enough current, and in some rare instances misshapen or
> even dropped pulses. The more pulsese to get to the target position
> that larger the potential error. I reiterate that this was only when
> things didn't work right and in the chemical industry we had some
> strong safety issues with maintaining accuracy so we used output
> signals much like you find on the large C-Band satellite dish
> positioners or even on modern radio VFOs. We used magnetic, but they
> can be optical or even mechanical switches to verify we were
> really/accurately getting to the positions we expected. Of course this
> added complexity and cost to the system but we *almost* always knew
> where the positioners were setting.
>
> 73
> Roger (K8RI)
>
> I agree with what you said. Most systems require some kind of
> feedback to be assured of position. In this case the only feedback
> you have is an SWR indication. That's not conclusive but it is
> something. Retracting the elements for the night is a good practice
> both from a lightning standpoint and a calibration point. Feedback of
> position would make resolving problems much simpler. I guess there is
> a trade-off to be made between added complexity and cost, versus the
> number and frequency of occurrence of possible failures. In this
> system there is very little friction and mass to be moved, and the
> only sever failure mode I can think of is an obstruction occurring
> with the tapes moving outward.
>
> Jerry, K4SAV
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:45:01 -0400
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR cable
To: "'shack'" <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net>, <towertalk@contesting.com>
Cc: ah6fc@yahoo.com
Message-ID: <003001c7abf4$0b613b80$0280a8c0@laptop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mike,
I would bet that the switching supply is shutting down because
of a highly capacitive load and very high current peaks.
The stepper motors operate on square wave drive. The controller
is feeding 8 pairs of wire all with capacitance and all in
parallel as far as the power supply is concerned.
A 500 foot control cable is certainly long enough to act as a
transmission line since we have an "RF" control signal. I do
not know what the pulse frequency so I can't guess what kind of
impedance transformation might be happening.
If it were me, I would replace the switching supply with a
simple analog/linear supply using a 24 volt transformer,
a 5 Amp bridge rectifier and 2000 uF of filter capacitance.
With no electronic shutdown/foldback one could confirm that
the problem is higher than expected peak currents causing
the switching supply to shut down.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of shack
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 11:12 PM
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR cable
>
>
> I still think it is the length of the cable. Has anyone tried
> to measure
> current and voltage when under load e.g. when all four elements are
> being adjusted? I think there is a voltage drop, which is why the
> controller malfunctions.
>
> Wire has resistance and a lot of wire has more resistance which has to
> be overcome.
>
> Have the Steppir folk actually tried driving a four element with 500
> feet plus of wire?
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> Several mentions were made that it was related to the 500 feet of
> control
> cable, but SteppIR's engineers say the longer cable would
> actually help
> reduce the load, so cable length has been ruled out.
>
> I dont know how the longer cable would help.
> I would look at the size of the cable. SteppIR makes two size, one for
> short runs and one for long runs.
>
> GL K4WZ Ron
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 06:50:45 -0400
From: "Ron Todd" <ron@k4wz.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Fw: SteppIR problem
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <008601c7ac16$5d417f60$6401a8c0@YOUR4E95180E2B>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
> Easier said than done. The controller uses a 25 pin connector. He would
> have to cut the cable and then solder up a connector.
The connector on the tower is not soldered. It is little screws that can be
tested right at the driven element.
But if he cannot climb the tower at the bottom of the tower will devide
problem in half.....
Ron K4wz
>
> I have a 300 ft run of cable in Colorado and have had no issues at all.
>
> I assume they use a better power supply than the 33v one that I have.
> Then
> again the box would have to account for that added voltage. I would be
> curious to know just how much or little voltage is at the motors.
>
> It might be worth it to unsolder the directors off the connector and see
> if
> it works with 2 elements or unsolder all but the Driven.
>
> I know there have been a bunch of posts on this. I guess nobody tried
> running out the elements through the 500 ft of cable while on the ground?
>
> I assume the cable does not have any kinks or hard turns in it and all the
> motors have been tested for the proper readings?
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of NPAlex@aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 10:34 PM
> To: towertalk@contesting.com; 489278.4976.qm@web51609.mail.re2.yahoo.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
>
> Bill,
> Given that you have a 500 ft run, the first thing I would do is take the
> controller out to the base of the tower where the cable length is more
> typical and
> see if all works well then. If so, run heavier wire from the shack to the
> tower base and that should solve the problem.
>
> But you have to find out if the antenna and its motors/ controller work
> when
>
> "locally" connected before just changing out parts.
>
> Norm W4QN
>
> ==============================================================
>
> In a message dated 6/10/2007 5:14:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> towertalk-request@contesting.com writes:
> Message-ID: <489278.4976.qm@web51609.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Greetings to all Tower Talkers,
>
> A very wise man and fellow TT (K7LXC) suggested I post
> my challenge here to the group...maybe somebody will
> have a new idea that I've not explored.
>
> Last week we put up a new 4L SteppIR with a 40/30
> dipole. The antenna is approximately 500 feet from
> the shack. SteppIR control line is used, continously
> without any accessories inserted, running through 3
> inch conduit (not that that makes any difference).
> Prior to lifting it in the air I found that a problem
> existed. When attempts were made to change bands or
> even frequency on the same band, the control box went
> dead. Simultaneously, as the box died, the "on"
> indicator light on the pwr supply went out. A second
> later the pwr light came back on; the led "lights" on
> the control box flashed once but the box remained off.
> The box could be turned back on, but the same
> sequence occurred if a band/freq change was attempted.
>
>
> Immediately all of the wiring and continuity was
> checked with the antenna...all ok. Spoke with Jerry
> at SteppIR and we proceeded to change first control
> box....before I realized the pwr supply was
> faltering....no change.
>
> The next step was to attempt to run each motor
> individually and in groups. Each motor ran
> individually without problem. Adding the 2nd and 3rd
> motor caused no problems....the yagi functioned fine.
> The addition of the 4th motor (didn't matter which
> sequence), consistently killed the antenna. On
> occassion it would all seem to work for a couple of
> band changes but never more than 1 or 2 minutes - with
> all 4 motors running. So, with up to 3 motors
> running...all ok, with all 4, no go. However, this is
> a 4 element yagi. After speaking again with Jerry, I
> was reassured that the problem was simply a power
> supply and all will work fine....thus the long
> scheduled antenna raising event went forward as
> scheduled. Needless-to-say, the replacement power
> supply did not correct the problem.
>
> Prior to erecting the yagi I extended the elements to
> 14150 so it can be used as a monobander...but that
> will only bring temporary happiness. A power supply
> (3rd) was "hand picked" by the SteppIR engineers,
> sent, and tested this morning. Basically the same
> problem. It did seem to work briefly then shut
> down....exactly the same as before.
>
> So, I'm looking for ideas that have been overlooked.
> Yes, I should have listened to my gut, rather than the
> "experts" and canceled the raising until all problems
> were fixed, but that can't be undone. If this beast
> must be lowered, I'm a bit reluctant to put it back up
> after this experience. Yes, all antennas have
> problems but it would be less $$ to replace it at the
> time of lowering rather then taking down, bring the
> crane back and forth, etc.
>
> Sorry for the long-windedness of this but any and all
> thoughts are appreciated!
>
>
>
>
> ************************************** See what's free at
> http://www.aol.com.
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 07:06:16 -0500
From: "W5LT" <W5LT@tx.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <027801c7ac20$e9f61ce0$bde256a0$@rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dick makes some good points.
Cable capacitance and shunt capacitance of supressors will both increase the
transient (and over-all average) current drawn from the power supply.
A previous similar problem of motors "missing" steps (ie antenna frequently
tuned to higher than intended frequencies), was traced to extra capacitance
at the in-line supressor.
Bob, W5LT
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Green [mailto:wc1m@msn.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 10:22 PM
To: 'W5LT'; towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
I remember reading on the SteppIR reflector about the driver chips being
current sources and how this makes the cable length irrelevant, except for
added capacitance. I understand that added capacitance messes up the pulse
waveform, but I don't understand how increased resistance doesn't matter.
OK, so the chips increase the current in the face of a higher resistance,
and the load sees the same current. Fine. But the chips have to get the
extra power from somewhere, and that's the power supply. If the resistance
is high enough to cause the current draw to exceed the capacity of the
supply, the first symptom is likely to be a voltage drop. I would be willing
to bet that the controller's CPU can't tolerate less than a certain supply
voltage, so it crashes.
I saw exactly this symptom with a switching power supply feeding my Tec-Tec
Orion. The pins in the power connector at the radio got deformed, presenting
an increased resistance to the power supply. When I transmitted, the bad
connection caused a lot more current to be drawn from the supply, the
voltage dropped, and the Orion's CPU crashed.
The mystery is that apparently SteppIR believes a 500' cable run is OK. If
they've tested that length successfully, then I would be suspicious about
the cable. Perhaps it's got more resistance than it should? It might not
take much. Is the motor winding resistance + expected cable loss within
spec? I don't recall offhand, but my 300' length has resistances in the
range of 23-26 ohms (can't remember exactly, but can measure again if it
will help.) About 20 ohms of that is the motor winding. If the resistance of
the 500-foot cable is even a few ohms higher, the current draw may be
exceeding the capacity of the supply.
Can you describe the cable run? Is it interrupted anywhere between the
controller and the antenna? If so, I would worry about high-resistance
junctions. It's also possible that there's been damage to the cable. I
wouldn't worry so much about water in the conduit as damage to the cable
when it was pulled. All kinds of things can happen when you pull cable --
excessive stretch, sharp bends, damage from adjacent cables (especially
hardline), etc. The damage should show up in the resistance measurements.
I think Bob's analysis and suggestions below are on target, but before you
start experimenting with alternate power supplies, check the cable
resistance and clear the test with SteppIR. You don't want to void your
warranty.
73, Dick WC1M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: W5LT [mailto:W5LT@tx.rr.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 10:20 PM
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
>
> Bill:
> I too have been following your exploits, both here and on the SteppIR
> reflector.
> I still believe the issue is related to the power supply. As Mike M.
> pointed
> out, the motor drive is via current sources, thus the length of cable
> is of
> secondary consideration. Howwever, the symptoms you describe point to a
> current limiting effect in the power supply its self. That is, the
> system
> runs fine with less than 4 motors running, kick in all four and the
> symptoms
> show up, and the symptoms suggest a drop in the supply voltage (lights
> flicker, controller shuts down, etc.).
> Can you get a power supply capable of delivering more current, perhaps
> two
> 12V regulated supplies hooked in series?
> Also, you might try to actually measure the voltage and/or current
> being
> delivered by the power supply under load.
> If the voltage remains fairly constant when all four motors are driven,
> then
> it is not the problem.
>
> Bob, W5LT
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dick Green [mailto:wc1m@msn.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 5:05 PM
> To: 'James C. Garland'; towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
>
> Bill,
>
> I've been following your exploits on the SteppIR reflector, too.
>
> Jim's suggestions are excellent, and I would do all of the tests he
> recommends. They're easy to do.
>
> Do you have a copy of SteppIR's Yagi Troubleshooting Guide? If not, you
> can
> download it from the SteppIR site. It has all the wiring checks,
> resistances, etc. You should check the resistance across each pair, and
> you
> should make sure there's no continuity with the shield.
>
> But I suspect there isn't a wiring problem. I think that would have
> shown up
> when you did the individual and group motor tests. For example, if one
> of
> the wires was shorted to ground, one of the individual motors would
> have
> caused problems. But do those resistance checks anyway.
>
> If Jim's tests don't reveal the problem, you could try connecting an
> ammeter
> in series with the power supply output to see how much current is being
> drawn by the SteppIR controller at idle and when running the antenna.
> The
> supply has max output of 2A, so it shouldn't be close to that. The
> spike may
> be too fast to see, so you might want to borrow a logging multimeter or
> a
> storage scope.
>
> If you can get AC out to your tower, and if you can interrupt the
> control
> line, then you definitely should test with the controller at the tower.
> That
> would eliminate the long control line.
>
> If none of the above reveals the cause, then I'd discuss the problem
> with
> SteppIR again. If they feel the cable length is causing too much
> current to
> be drawn from the power supply, and it's safe to supply more current to
> the
> controller, you could try a bench supply with variable voltage of at
> least
> 33VDC and current limited output up to, say, 3A or so. But I wouldn't
> do
> anything like that without clearance from SteppIR.
>
> If it's not a problem with the cable being too long or the input
> voltage to
> the power supply, then it would have to be some sort of motor problem
> that's
> marginal enough not to cause a big current draw by itself, but added to
> the
> three other motors pushes the power supply over the edge. That's
> probably
> the worst-case scenario (other than miswiring at the antenna), because
> you'll have to take the antenna down to fix it.
>
> Been there, done that!
>
> 73, Dick WC1M
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James C. Garland [mailto:4cx250b@muohio.edu]
> > Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 5:13 PM
> > To: towertalk@contesting.com
> > Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
> >
> > Bill, that's quite an interesting mystery! Evidently, you're
> > overloading the
> > power supply and it's shutting down, so I agree with Jerry's
> > assessment.
> > However, from what I understand, the stepper motors are current
> driven,
> > not
> > voltage driven. That means that even a short circuit in a pair of
> wires
> > to
> > one of the stepper motor windings shouldn't overload the power
> supply.
> > And
> > if you've checked all the resistances between pairs and they'r okay,
> > and if
> > there's no resistance across pairs, then that pretty much rules out
> any
> > problem with the antenna. If there was an antenna problem, then the
> > shutdown
> > would occur always when the same motor was energized. But that's not
> > what
> > you're seeing.
> >
> > Did you check to make sure there's no resistance between any of the
> > control
> > cable pairs and the control cable shield?
> >
> > Have you checked your AC line voltage? Your symptom could be
> explained
> > if
> > the voltage is too low. Also, by any chance is your power supply
> > plugged
> > into a GFI, UPS, or surge-protected circuit? One simple test would be
> > to
> > measure your AC line voltage when you power up the controller and see
> > if the
> > voltage sags. Also, if the power supply is plugged into an outlet
> > strip,
> > then you could try changing it: it might be a faulty surge suprressor
> > or
> > switch in the outlet switch with some resistance that's dropping your
> > line
> > voltage.
> >
> > Let us know what you learn, and good luck!
> >
> > Jim W8ZR
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
> > [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Carnett
> > Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:42 AM
> > To: towertalk@contesting.com
> > Subject: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem
> >
> > Greetings to all Tower Talkers,
> >
> > A very wise man and fellow TT (K7LXC) suggested I post
> > my challenge here to the group...maybe somebody will
> > have a new idea that I've not explored.
> >
> > Last week we put up a new 4L SteppIR with a 40/30
> > dipole. The antenna is approximately 500 feet from
> > the shack. SteppIR control line is used, continously
> > without any accessories inserted, running through 3
> > inch conduit (not that that makes any difference).
> > Prior to lifting it in the air I found that a problem
> > existed. When attempts were made to change bands or
> > even frequency on the same band, the control box went
> > dead. Simultaneously, as the box died, the "on"
> > indicator light on the pwr supply went out. A second
> > later the pwr light came back on; the led "lights" on
> > the control box flashed once but the box remained off.
> > The box could be turned back on, but the same
> > sequence occurred if a band/freq change was attempted.
> >
> >
> > Immediately all of the wiring and continuity was
> > checked with the antenna...all ok. Spoke with Jerry
> > at SteppIR and we proceeded to change first control
> > box....before I realized the pwr supply was
> > faltering....no change.
> >
> > The next step was to attempt to run each motor
> > individually and in groups. Each motor ran
> > individually without problem. Adding the 2nd and 3rd
> > motor caused no problems....the yagi functioned fine.
> > The addition of the 4th motor (didn't matter which
> > sequence), consistently killed the antenna. On
> > occassion it would all seem to work for a couple of
> > band changes but never more than 1 or 2 minutes - with
> > all 4 motors running. So, with up to 3 motors
> > running...all ok, with all 4, no go. However, this is
> > a 4 element yagi. After speaking again with Jerry, I
> > was reassured that the problem was simply a power
> > supply and all will work fine....thus the long
> > scheduled antenna raising event went forward as
> > scheduled. Needless-to-say, the replacement power
> > supply did not correct the problem.
> >
> > Prior to erecting the yagi I extended the elements to
> > 14150 so it can be used as a monobander...but that
> > will only bring temporary happiness. A power supply
> > (3rd) was "hand picked" by the SteppIR engineers,
> > sent, and tested this morning. Basically the same
> > problem. It did seem to work briefly then shut
> > down....exactly the same as before.
> >
> > So, I'm looking for ideas that have been overlooked.
> > Yes, I should have listened to my gut, rather than the
> > "experts" and canceled the raising until all problems
> > were fixed, but that can't be undone. If this beast
> > must be lowered, I'm a bit reluctant to put it back up
> > after this experience. Yes, all antennas have
> > problems but it would be less $$ to replace it at the
> > time of lowering rather then taking down, bring the
> > crane back and forth, etc.
> >
> > Sorry for the long-windedness of this but any and all
> > thoughts are appreciated!
> >
> >
> >
> > 73, Bill
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > _____
> > ________
> > Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your
> story.
> > Play
> > Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
> > http://sims.yahoo.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TowerTalk mailing list
> > TowerTalk@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> >
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
End of TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 35
*****************************************
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|