June 2007 - Eagle (INACTIVE) - mailman.amsat.org

10.7 MHz Spur
by Juan Rivera 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

John, I found the source of the 10.7 MHz spur. It's being generated inside the receiver itself. This is the first spur I have found that is not caused by switching power supplies. The origin appears to be in the 10 MHz reference area. I turned off and unplugged the SDR-IQ and fed the IF output from the 70 cm Receiver to my TS-2000. The spur is still there. Next I connected the RF input to my sniffer loop and moved it around the PCB surface. I get the strongest signal near the long trace between the two Freq inputs to U4 and U9, the two phased-locked loops. 73, Juan

2 5

70 cm Receiver Spur Source Found
by Juan Rivera 30 Jun '07

30 Jun '07

All, The source of the spurs in the 70 cm prototype receiver is the CAN-Do module. This is the receiver IF output as designed (powered from pins 39 and 40 of the CAN-Do Module) This is the receiver running off of a separate power source (bypassing the CAN-Do Module +13 volt output on pins 39 and 40) This is the same configuration as above, but with the CAN-Do module shut down >From the above it appears that: 1. The CAN-Do module is the source of all the spurs that I see 2. None of the spurs are being generated by the receiver's internal power supplies 3. Some, but not all, of the noise is entering the receiver via the switched +13 volt CAN-Do output on pins 39 and 40 4. The remainder of the noise could be entering the receiver on other CAN-Do pins, or being radiated to receiver components or traces in close proximity See my log for all the intermediate steps I took to reach these conclusions. Remaining RF issues: 1. Phase noise 2. Microphonics 73, Juan WA6HTP

11 42

Mocule Connectors
by rjansson＠cfl.rr.com 30 Jun '07

30 Jun '07

John & Juan: Your EMI problems certainly do present considerable difficulties. Your suggestions of placing connectors on multiple faces of a module run counter to the whole module mounting plan for Eagle. The modules are mounted with only about 1.5mm clearance at the flanges and only about 16mm clearance on the sides. The "rear end" of the module is also difficult as there is just not that much space for cabling and connector access. Mechanical designers in the past have been raked over the coals for not providing sufficient connector access. The curren plan allows about 100mm (I don't have the drawings with me at the moment) of space between facing columns of modules for the cabling and connector access. This is a plan that is pretty basic to the whole wiring plan for Eagle, and it is a result of a lot of experience with P3D. While the basic module design for Eagle, unlike P3D, does not provide for the stacking of modules, a small CAN module placed on top of the URx, could be considered. Wiring to this sub-module would be by means of jumper leads from its connector face into the URx. I caution that there currently is not planned for much space above the rows of modules as the current spaceframe plan has the modules placed fairly closely under the solar panels. This concept is part of the need to keep the mass moment of inertia, Izz, high. This is NOT just a desirable feature, but a necessary, MUST need for the spin stability of the spacecraft. So any top-mounted sub-module would have to not be very thick. All of these issues arise from the practical considerations of the overall mission of the spacecraft. Unfortunately for the EMI and other "local" issues, we cannot design the spaceframe only for EMI, but must solve other mission requirements, too. I am not trying to be unmovable on the design if the URx, but I am trying to explain how we can have a successful mission. '73, Dick, KD1K

2 4

Re: 70 cm Receiver IF Spurs - Problem Solved
by Juan Rivera 29 Jun '07

29 Jun '07

Chuck, I don't want to tear into the CAN-Do module. I feel like it is a loaner and not mine to modify. It would be interesting to disconnect the switch and the current monitor from the CAN-Do power input and move it to those user pins as you suggest. That might just work, but I also know they don't want to have multiple versions of the module floating around and this would be one. We also can't loose sight of the radiated noise from that inductor. I can see signs of EMI if it gets within 2 inches of the sensitive areas of the receiver. 73, Juan 73, Juan -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Green [mailto:greencl@mindspring.com] Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 9:18 AM To: juan-rivera(a)sbcglobal.net Subject: Re: [eagle] 70 cm Receiver IF Spurs - Problem Solved Hi Juan, I am impressed with your testing and analysis. I find it curious that you were unable to filter the power from the CAN-Do! . But switching noise is notorious for being difficult to filter. So maybe that is something to just forget. But in a total system (satellite) it may not be possible to forget. We may need to find a way to filter the power for sensitive modules even if not using power from the CAN-Do! ; in which case, such a filter may also filter the noise from the CAN-Do! . If your analysis is correct, and it certainly seems to be, then it would also seem possible to remove the switch from the CAN-Do! (not just bypass it) and rout your clean power source through the CAN-Do! current measurement circuit thus saving having to do this in the module. Great work! And thanks. Chuck Juan Rivera wrote: > Hi Chuck, > > Bad news I'm afraid. See my report for details... I've sent out a link to > the group. > > 73, > > Juan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Green [mailto:greencl@mindspring.com] > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 8:57 AM > To: juan-rivera(a)sbcglobal.net > Cc: eagle(a)amsat.org; David Smith; Dave Black (Work); Dave Black (Home); > Samsonoff@Mac. Com; Juan.Rivera (Work) > Subject: Re: [eagle] 70 cm Receiver IF Spurs - Problem Solved > > Hi Juan, > > This is fantastic! > > Please try one more experiment. Pass the module current through the > current measuring circuit on the CAN-Do! while bypassing the switch > transistor (you could just short across the switch transistor) and see > if the problem reappears. > > If you end up having to use the user pins, you will need to add current > measuring circuitry to your module. While this is no big deal, its one > more thing you might not have to do. > > Chuck > > Juan Rivera wrote: > >> All, >> >> >> >> The 70 cm Receiver spur problem has been solved. Click here >> >> > <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/CAN-Do_Noise_Troubleshoo > ting.htm> > >> for details. >> >> >> >> 73, >> >> >> >> Juan >> >> WA6HTP >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA >> Eagle(a)amsat.org >> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/eagle >> >> > > > >

5 12

IMD, Phase Noise, a New Spur, and EMI suggestions
by Juan Rivera 29 Jun '07

29 Jun '07

All, I've started a new log here <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/IMD+Phase_Noise.htm> . I've repeated some preliminary phase noise tests using a simulated PAVE PAWS signal, along with a simulated Ham uplink signal. In the process of looking at those signals with the SDR-IQ I discovered another spur directly in the middle of the IF. I don't know the exact source but it is generated inside the receiver, and definitely not from the CAN-Do module. I've also come to one general conclusion that I would like to bring up for discussion... I believe all switching power supplies on Eagle should be running at frequencies as high as possible - around 1 MHz would be a good ball park. That would put most spurs outside the passband of the payloads, and make EMI filtering much easier. The 5 kHz CAN-Do switching power supply needs to be completely redesigned in my opinion. I believe that if it is not cleaned up the impact will be devastating, and the full scope will likely not be known until integration and test when it is too late to do anything about it. Having said all that, I also believe that we need to come up with EMI standards for everything on Eagle. Specifically we need: 1) A definition of the noise amplitude and spectral content to be expected from the Eagle power distribution point 2) A repeatable way to reproduce that noisy DC source in our labs for testing 3) A simple and effective way to test to the spec that we create I think the way to make this work is to create a noise source that consists of several representative switching power supplies that are intended to be flown on Eagle. The exact makeup of this test fixture would be specified in the EMI requirements. Then, all payloads would need to be designed to operate without impairment while powered by this noisy power source. The EMI requirement would also spell out exactly what constituted impairment. They also need to keep conducted noise leaving the payload down to some specified level. More on that in a minute... Here's a possible layout for a noise source: The one ohm resistors account for lead resistance and allow the three switching power supplies to all modulate the power bus, along with whatever conducted EMI comes back from the devise under test (your payload.) It would be easy to crank out three or four of these noise sources for distribution to groups that need them. That way everyone would be testing using the same conducted EMI. The gold standards for EMI are MIL-STD-461 and -462. They break EMI into four categories: * CS - Conducted Susceptibility (the 70 cm Receiver suffers from this) * RS - Radiated Susceptibility (the 70 cm Receiver suffers from this) * CE - Conducted Emissions (The CAN-Do Module is guilty of this) * RE - Radiated Emissions (The CAN-Do Module is guilty of this) This noise source would provide a way to test for compliance with our CS requirement. RS and RE can be dealt with by shielding. That leaves CE. We'd need a way to insure that noise coming out of a payload is within spec. We'd need another test fixture for this. I hope this stimulated some discussion. I'm eager to hear what you all think... 73, Juan - WA6HTP

5 6

Symposium -- call for papers and misc Eagle issues
by Jim Sanford 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

Team: The second call for Symposium papers has been issued. As I said a while back, it is EXTREMELY important that Eagle have a lot to say and show at Symposium. Each TEAM should publish SOMETHING. I'd prefer team leads to present, but anyone on the team is fine with me. Or, if you have something to present, but can't make it, I'll do it, or get someone to. (This is a last resort, I want the presentations to be about what YOU are doing, not me. But I'd rather get the info out....) Please get your abstracts in to Dan NOW, so he can start planning. To that end, Tom Clark, has agreed to write, have peer reviewed and PUBLISH IN THE PROCEEDINGS the collected thoughts regarding phased array. (Thanks, Tom!!!) Other specifics: We have advertised the ACP as a key part of Eagle, the PRIMARY payload in the eyes of some. Yet, we've said little about it, since publishing the minutes of the San Diego meeting, which was held a year ago. Now is the time. We need to say a LOT about ACP: modulation schemes, digital protocols, multiplexing techniques, link budgets (in terms of how many watts I need on uplink, how big an antenna, and how good a preamp) etc. Yes, much of that can be gleaned from the SD meeting, but much is not yet defined. It's time to define it, and publish what is at least our current thinking. At least one ACP presentation needs to be for the general user, who is not a digital communications geek. We need to convince him what ACP will do, the benefits to HIM, and why he should buy the equipment when we make it available. Think of this one as a sales pitch. THIS IS IMPORTANT. Similarly, we need to publish some RESULTS from the power system experiments. Juan Rivera has agreed to something on all the efforts and results of the project Oscar team with the U-band RX. Juan, you and I have corresponded about which topic, I sent you suggestions, please choos and send in the abstract soonest. Writing the paper can come as it evolves. etc. etc. Guys, this is important, please make the commitment and take a few minutes to do the abstract. Dan needs it for planning, and Patti and Kevin need it for purposes of marketing Symposium. They are working hard on local educational connections, but that can only go so far without at least a list of content. Other: I apologize for my low profile lately. The last two weeks have been brutal at work, included a long trip to VA (spoke at a retirement, went to a wedding, and happened to be in town when my grandson was born 5 weeks early), a 27 hour power outage (now have a 5500 watt generator) and I did take time out for Field Day. I'm going to continue to be low profile, as I leave in an hour or so for a meeting in DC which will be gruelling. Back here Sunday, probably a day or so to recover, then back in the saddle. Despite all this, I have managed to provide answers Juan needed to continue working, and have corresponded with a couple of others. Thanks for all your efforts. We are a few short months from Symposium, please make the push.to publish. This is an opportunity we must fully exploit. Thanks & 73, Jim wb4gcs(a)amsta.org PS Grandson is fine, just tiny. He may even leave hospital this week. A few photos at www.wb4gcs.org jas

3 2

70 cm baseband data from 70 cm Receiver
by Juan Rivera 20 Jun '07

20 Jun '07

All, I'm not trying to beat this to death but I want to make sure I fully understand what I'm looking at here... I spent some time this evening looking at the spectrum between the 10.7 MHz IF output and zero Hertz. I did this because I believe it may be a significant area of interest since the receiver will feed an analog to digital converter. The A/D converter is not a tuned stage so it will digitize baseband noise along with the IF signal. I've been told that the impact of noise in the baseband is to reduce the dynamic range in the digital domain. I'd appreciate an explanation since I am woefully ignorant in this area. I posted my results in the usual area. Just scroll down till you come to today's date. 73, Juan

2 1

TeamSpeak security issue
by Alan Bloom 19 Jun '07

19 Jun '07

In an 8-hour period I have received five of these messages, which means that someone (always with the same IP address) has tried to guess my TeamSpeak password 25 times today. Anyone else seeing this? Alan -----Forwarded Message----- > From: TeamSpeak <forum(a)goteamspeak.com> > To: n1al(a)cds1.net > Subject: Account on TeamSpeak locked out > Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 03:44:48 +0000 > > > Dear alan_bloom, > > Your account on TeamSpeak has been locked because someone has > tried to log into the account with the wrong password more than > 5 times. You will be able to attempt to log in again in another > 15 minutes. > > The person trying to log into your account had the following > IP address: 70.86.138.114 > > Don't forget that the password is case sensitive. Forgotten your > password? Use the link below: > http://forum.goteamspeak.com/login.php?do=lostpw > > All the best, > TeamSpeak >

1 0

CAN-Do noise abatement plan and questions
by Juan Rivera 19 Jun '07

19 Jun '07

Good morning Stephen, I do have a few questions. Thanks for asking! 1) What if the CAN-Do module suffers a failure that causes a current overload? Is it protected by a fuse? The next generation receiver should continue to function as long as it has power. An overload in either unit should not cause the other to fail. 2) Do you have any information of previous efforts to reduce CAN-Do noise by either shielding the module or replacing the inductor with a shielded version? 3) Do you have a shielded inductor that I could swap for the existing one if that proved necessary? 4) Have you designed a circuit that would allow temperature to be determined inside the receiver PCB itself, and not just on the CAN-Do module? This will be important, especially if the receiver is split into two separate enclosures. My plan is to desolder the CAN-Do module from the receiver PCB today and move the receiver PCB to the enclosure's rear set of mounts. This will put about 2-inches of space between the two. I'll make up two interconnecting cables - one just long enough to attach the two while in the case, and one that is a foot or two long, assuming that I can find the parts I need and don't have to solder the cable to the two units. I can use that long cable to try some troubleshooting. I'll use that CAN-Do's noisy inductor as the noise source and move it around over the receiver to see what affect it has. Perhaps I can find the area that is the most susceptible to noise that way. I think the next receiver could use the entire available board space to: 1) Put distance between the two modules 2) Further isolate the CAN-Do module with a shield if necessary 3) Add power supply input filtering and input current overload protection 4) Include CAN-Do data line filtering if that turns out to be necessary 5) Add a temperature sensor in the vicinity of the SAW filters, and another on the second PCB if it gets split into two sections One last question. How do I reduce the heartbeat timing below three seconds? I couldn't find any way to do that using the net controller. I'd like to confirm that the jump in frequency I see in the CAN-Do module's 5 kHz noise every three seconds goes away. 73, Juan _____ From: smmoraco(a)gmail.com [mailto:smmoraco@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Moraco Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:21 PM To: Juan Rivera; Juan Rivera Cc: Jim Sanford; Bdale Garbee Subject: late to tonight's meeting Juan, Sorry I missed your presentation/discussion tonight. Any questions/issues for me re: CAN Do! ? Regards, Stephen -- kc0ftq(a)amsat.org

11 22

CAN-Do Power Supply Instability
by Juan Rivera 18 Jun '07

18 Jun '07

All, I dug into the CAN-Do circuitry today. The CAN-Do module uses a Maxim max1836 switching down-converter. I found the following quote in the spec sheet, "Commonly, instability is caused by excessive noise on the feedback signal or ground due to poor layout or improper component selection. When seen, instability typically manifests itself as 'motorboating,' which is characterized by grouped switching pulses with large gaps and excessive low-frequency output ripple during no-load or light-load conditions." It reminded me of the waveform I captured earlier from CAN-Do inductor, L3. (See the waterfall display below.) Those are definitely grouped pulses with large gaps. Notice also that there is tremendous splatter over a large bandwidth that can just be seen as faint horizontal lines. I'd like to propose an alternative - Move the switching down-converters out to the power distribution and management area and feed DC to the payloads at an appropriate voltage so switching power supplies can be removed from all analog payloads. This would go a long way towards cleaning up what is shaping up to be a nasty situation. It's just not good design practice to bundle switching supplies with low-level analog signals. 73, Juan

2 1

70 cm Eagle Receiver - Final Spur Report (at least for today...)
by Juan Rivera 18 Jun '07

18 Jun '07

All, I've completed my testing and analysis of the spurs that appeared in the IF output of the 70 cm Eagle Receiver prototype. I believe I know the source and the cause of all of them and how they can be eliminated or rendered harmless. Click HERE <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/Spur_Suppression.htm> to read my report. 73, Juan WA6HTP

5 8

CAN-Do noise problem is proving to be a difficult one to fix
by Juan Rivera 18 Jun '07

18 Jun '07

All, Please see my write-up here <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/CAN-Do_Noise_Troubleshoo ting.htm> . The CAN-Do noise is not lending itself to an easy cure. I think this whole subject of RFI/EMI needs to be looked at closely. Every payload will be affected by noise on its inputs and can affect other payloads by creating noise that is propagated back out from within its module chassis. With the current scheme, of having a CAN-Do module located in the same case as the main payload, there are several issues that need immediate attention: 1) The CAN-Do module provides dirty power - both the +13 VDC output and the ground are noisy 2) The CAN-Do's switching power supply inductor, L3, radiates noise that can affect sensitive circuits several inches away. Both of these factors are adversely impacting the 70 cm breadboard receiver in the form of 5 kHz spurs on the IF output. As I mentions earlier, Rather than work to clean up the CAN-Do module immediately, we should focus on making the receiver function In the presence of this noise. This approach will result in a more robust design. The CAN-Do module needs to be cleaned up, but for now it acts as a great real-world noise generator. I'm currently out of ideas. I'd like to hear what you all have to say. 73, Juan WA6HTP

3 4

Preliminary CAN-Do EMI Findings and Suggestions to Mitigate in the 70 cm Receiver
by Juan Rivera 18 Jun '07

18 Jun '07

All, I've completed a preliminary evaluation of the CAN-Do RFI problem. Please see my log for details by clicking here <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/CAN-Do_Noise_Troubleshoo ting.htm> . Preliminary Findings... 1. The spurs seen in the receiver IF enter the receiver in two ways o As radiation from the CAN-Do inductor o Via CAN-Do module switched +14 VDC power on pins 39 and 40 2. I/O line filtering appears to be unnecessary 3. The switched power from the CAN-Do module pins 39 and 40 must be filtered 4. The CAN-Do module will either have to be kept physically separated from any sensitive components, redesigned, shielded or a combination of the three. 5. Moving the Can-Do module 2-1/4" forward of its normal location on the receiver PCB lowers the EMI level below the noise floor. Suggestions... * Create a full size PCB for the next generation receiver and shift the RF components to the back of the board (away from the CAN-Do module.) * Add DC input filtering to the receiver 73, Juan WA6HTP

5 9

AO-51 received signal strength survey
by Andrew Glasbrenner 17 Jun '07

17 Jun '07

Gentlemen, Gould and I are planning on running a survey with the SQRX on AO-51 during the V/S session at the end of the month. In the past I have created signal strength maps for the earth that show the RF levels seen at the satellite. Would this be useful for any planning for Eagle or P3E? We were thinking we could listen at L band or in the proposed Mode B uplink window. 73, Drew KO4MA

1 0

Power Grounds
by Bill Tynan 17 Jun '07

17 Jun '07

Juan Rivers wrote in part: I've been thinking about DC power distribution in general. Can someone explain the plan for Eagle to me? In aircraft, at least in the one I am familiar with, they do not use the chassis as a return. All DC power is treated the same way as AC power and distributed from a common point as a twisted pair to minimize common mode noise. Great care is taken to eliminate ground loops by insuring that the ground returns are back through the twisted pair to the source and not through a sneak path to the frame. I agree. This is the way it was in the missile business when I worked on Tomahawk, Standard Missile and Talos from the 50s thru 1988. 73, Bill Tynan, W3XO Now back on the Eagle list. Thanks Jim & Paul.

1 0

Cool Model
by Dick Jansson-rr 17 Jun '07

17 Jun '07

Bob: I have done some experimental work with a satellite in the eclipse mode of cooling using the currently active P3E files. The results are a little bit tongue in cheek, but I shall report them nonetheless as these results may help the Eagle team. The reason for my caution is that some of the results are a bit uncertain in my mind, but useful to others. The P3E model had the sun "turned off" for a 2 hour period and pretty well powered down save for a command receiver, a beacon transmitter, and the IHU. The geometry of these modules, and their placement in the P3E spaceframe, bears no resemblance to the Eagle modules, which certainly is a point of caution. The results of these analyses, one with propellant (a very substantial thermal mass) and one without the propellant. I shall report two temperatures, one for the model with propellant and the other without the propellant. Solar panels really get chilly, as expected, as do the internal equipment panels. So here goes, all temperatures in degrees Celsius: Solar Panels: -45.7/-51.6 Equipment Panels : -22.6/-29.5 Top & Bottom Panels: -30.0/-36.6 Central Cylinder: -10.7/-26.7 L Receiver: 0.0/-2.0 U-V Transmitter: -12.2/-14.2 I shall not report the IHU temperatures as I don't believe them and have not yet been able to understand them. The LRx was dissipating 2.0W while mounted on top of a box dissipating 0.4W, the U-V Tx dissipating only 2.0W, with a total dissipation of only 6.2W. The power dissipation is modest but so to is the P3E battery energy. What these numbers tell me is that there is hope that the Eagle equipment would not even see -20°C, but I feel that -30°C should be used as a bottom limit number. This caution is based on the fact that the Eagle geometry is not nearly as closely packed as is P3E. Dick Jansson, KD1K <mailto:kd1k@amsat.org> kd1k(a)amsat.org <mailto:kd1k@arrl.net> kd1k(a)arrl.net ---------------------------

1 0

70 cm Receiver IF Spurs - Problem Solved
by Juan Rivera 16 Jun '07

16 Jun '07

All, The 70 cm Receiver spur problem has been solved. Click here <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/CAN-Do_Noise_Troubleshoo ting.htm> for details. 73, Juan WA6HTP

3 2

latest 70 cm Receiver test results
by Juan Rivera 15 Jun '07

15 Jun '07

All, I've posted my latest 70 cm Receiver test results here <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/CAN-Do_Noise_Troubleshoo ting.htm> . I'd been guilty of tunnel vision. See my log for new details. 73, Juan WA6HTP

1 0

Preliminary Findings - CAN-Do Module Noise
by Juan Rivera 14 Jun '07

14 Jun '07

All, Please see the usual location for my preliminary CAN-Do noise test results - Look for CAN-Do Noise Troubleshooting in the Eagle Receiver page, or go to my web at http://www.juanr.com and drill down in the menu, through ham radio, to AMSAT Eagle, to CAN-Do Noise Troubleshooting. It's about 100F in my shack at the moment so I'll trust you to find the preliminary report there so I can clear out of here and cool off. I intend to dig into this in much more detail once it cools off... 73, Juan WA6HTP

1 0

Apologies, status
by Robert McGwier 13 Jun '07

13 Jun '07

Until a) The Flex 5000 comes out, b) June 27 arrives and my summer project starts at work, c) Linux version of Tac32 works and clock steering algorithms in CNS II clocks are perfected for my work needs I do not have a life. I am going to bed at 3 AM and waking at 6 AM and commuting to Austin every weekend. Do not expect much from me, i.e., I do not have time for hour+ long TS meetings until probably the middle of July. At that time, I want to make a major push on getting the ACP and Linear experiments revisited after a year's work and analysis. I suggest we plan on some activity associated with that. The critical mass right now is in California and I have the approval to get some space out there for RF congregation that I need to close the loop on when the dust settles on some of these activities. I expect to attend a Suitsat2 meeting for a day in early July but there will be little else from me for a month. The SDX is working well in software. Howard is doing a great job. Lyle wants to begin work on the SDX hardware by fall. Marc Franco has his paper published and we can begin implementation of the VHF transmitter and the EER part of the SDX in earnest as soon as we have an exemplar from Marc or get his designs and recreate them. Next, we paid the huge freight to the State Department for our ITAR issues after we listened to Harold Price, our attorney's, etc. For those who are not U.S. citizens and members of this group, you will, as individuals or through sister societies, need to enter into Technical Assistance Agreements with us, even if you are Canadian, British, German, etc. (All the usual suspects). This is not as painful as it may seem since we are going to do the boiler plate but it must be done. Bob -- AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair "If you're going to be crazy, you have to get paid for it or else you're going to be locked up." Hunter S. Thompson

1 0

TeamSpeak conference for 12 June 2007
by Jim Sanford 11 Jun '07

11 Jun '07

Team: For some reason, although I can edit the EaglePedia page of team speak conferences to include the agenda for tomorrow night, when I save the changes, they don't take. (Dave Hartzell, please help! Additional request for improvement sepcor.) It's time to resurrect the monthly TeamSpeak conferences. I know why we missed May, I don't remember missing April.. The conference will be tomorrow night, 12 June 2007, at 2100 EDT, 1800 PDT, and 0100 ZULU. Therefore, here's my proposed agenda for tomorrow night: 1. UHF RX update -- Juan Rivera 2. S2 RX update -- Bill Ress 3. AMSAT Symposium planning -- me 4. Work Breakdown Structure -- Gould Smith and me. 5. (If present) V-band TX, Marc Franco 6. (If present) SDX, N4HY 7. (If present) ACP, N2MJI/K3IO 8. Whatever ELSE you want to discuss. Thanks & 73, Jim wb4gcs(a)amsat.org

3 3

Phased Array Prototyping -- help wanted
by Tom Clark, K3IO 11 Jun '07

11 Jun '07

1 0

Concerning Jim Sanford!
by Tom Clark, K3IO 11 Jun '07

11 Jun '07

1 0

2007 Symposium -- call for papers
by Jim Sanford 10 Jun '07

10 Jun '07

Team: The first call for papers for the 2007 AMSAT Symposium has gone out, the second will go out shortly. Here's how I see it: This is a BIG year for Eagle. We need to have much to say and demonstrate. I expect to demonstrate: U-RX S2-RX V-TX SDX IHU anything else that comes together. I expect to see presentations from each and every team lead. We need to show the membership what we're DOING and reap the benefits therefrom (hint, hint). Specifically, I think we should present papers on: Project management and status (I am willing to present 45 minutes; I'd much rather talk for 45 SECONDS outlining what YOU will present -- you're doing the work!) U-RX S2-RX IHU/CAN-Do! V-TX SDX The LAB (with LOTS of photos!) Structure redesign Power systems Antennas ACP Orbit analysis/prediction/control Propulsion requirements I'd like to see each of you submit an abstract in the next week or so, and then a paper. If you can't be present to personally present the paper, let's get it published anyway, and give me the chance to find someone to present it for you. Matt, Phil, Bob: We REALLY need to publish something about the ACP. The last public pronouncement is the minutes of the San Diego meeting almost a year ago. Yet, the ACP is a (to some, THE) major Eagle payload. But all we've published is some musings on the phased array antennas. Matt, you talked about a "generic" digital package at Portland, it's time to at least articulate the things we're thinking about. Eagle should dominate the Symposium to the point that the ultimate arbiters of presentations say, "Enough!!" If you have questions or need guidance, please contact me. Again, it is very important that the Eagle team have a large presence at Symposium this year. Some would say it's not necessary, since we're on EaglePedia. I disagree: decades ago, in a Public Speaking course, I learned that, "You've got to tell them, and tell them, and tell them again.) days ago, in a recruiting/retention seminar, a marketing expert told me that you've got to tell them SEVEN, I say again, SEVEN, times. EaglePedia is only one. So, let's think about what we're doing, what we're planning to do, and what we've accomplished. Then let's write it down. By the way, much of what I have in mind here is information you need to send me anyway for my update to the Board of Directors, so this really isn't that hard. Please prepare something. Submit abstracts to Dan Schultz, and copy to me so I know what to expect. Thanks & 73, Jim wb4gcs(a)amsat.org

1 0

New 70 cm Receiver Test Results
by Juan Rivera 10 Jun '07

10 Jun '07

Re: 70 cm Prototype Receiver Testing John, and group, I set up my shop this evening to take a look at the microphonic issue that I had noticed before Dayton. I decided to use my new SDR-IQ software defined radio instead of my HP 8566B spectrum analyzer. The SDR-IQ has a lower noise floor, is quiet, and doesn't heat up my shack. Of course it tops out at 30 MHz and the 8566B goes up to 22 GHz. But for this application all I needed was something to look at the IF output at 10.7 MHz. Before I got to the microphonics I noticed spurs and phase noise that I had not previously seen with the 8566B - a classic case of going to drain the swamp and then ending up fighting alligators... I've posted screen shots and test details on EaglePedia's 70 cm receiver page. Click here <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/Testing_Resumed.htm> for a link to that top level page. Then go down to the Project Status area and open up Troubleshooting <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/Testing_Resumed.htm> Resumes. I wouldn't get discouraged. This is why we built the prototype in the first place - to find all the little flaws that need attention. More to follow in a few days... P.S. I add new material to the end of these logs so if you've already read the earlier posting just scroll down to the new material at the end. I always try to note the date and time I last modified the log at the top so you can see if there is anything new since your last visit. 73, Juan WA6HTP

7 23

Re: New 70 cm Receiver Test Results
by Juan Rivera 08 Jun '07

08 Jun '07

Re: 70 cm Prototype Receiver Testing 08 June, 07 John, and group, The spurs I mentioned yesterday are caused by the power supply. Follow the links below for details... 73, Juan WA6HTP Click --> <http://www.juanr.com/pages/hobbies/ham_radio/Eagle/Testing_Resumed.htm> ere's 70 cm Receiver testing to read latest log P.S. I add new material to the end of these logs so if you've already read the earlier posting just scroll down to the new material at the end. I always try to note the date and time I last modified the log at the top so you can see if there is anything new since your last visit.

1 0

Re: Broadband amplifier paper for symposium
by Daniel Schultz 06 Jun '07

06 Jun '07

> Here is an abstract of a paper submitted to the October symposium, I thought > it might be of interest to the group. > > Dan Schultz N8FGV

5 5

Florida AMSAT net is looking for guest speakers
by Andrew Glasbrenner 04 Jun '07

04 Jun '07

If you have an AMSAT topic that is near and dear to your heart, we would be happy to provide a forum for you to tell our members about it. The Florida AMSAT net is actively seeking guest speakers for our Thursday night net. Our net covers about 1/2 of the area of Florida or better, and has up to 40 participants per net, including international checkins via echolink. We have a very reliable echolink connection, so you may present your topic from your hi-speed internet linked computer, or possibly use a local rf system to connect. We are also working on providing reverse autopatch capabilities. We have had one previous guest speaker, Bob WB4APR, immediately after the deployment of RAFT and ANDE. That net was talked about for months, and we would like to begin a tradition of interesting and relevant guest speakers. Please contact myself or any of the three other net controls listed in the cc: if you'd like to participate as a guest speaker. 73, Drew KO4MA

2 1

Hello from WA6HTP
by Juan Rivera 01 Jun '07

01 Jun '07

Hello to the wider AMSAT/Eagle community, This is my first posting to the AMSAT/Eagle mailer. For those of you who don't know me, I'm the team leader for the 70 cm Receiver construction and testing group. Out team on the west coast is constructing and testing the first prototype receiver. It recently returned from its trip to the Dayton Hamvention. While it was gone I took the opportunity to catch my breath and I purchased an inexpensive software defined radio. It's called the SDR-IQ and I've written a brief report which you can access via my web site <http://www.juanr.com/> or via the Eagle <http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/eagle/EaglePedia/index.php/U-Band_Receiver> Receiver page. On the Eagle Receiver page you'll find quite a few logs detailing our progress so far. The SDR-IQ write up is at the top of the list. 73, Juan WA6HTP

2 1