----- Original Message -----From: Louis McFadinTo: Robert McGwierCc: K3IO@verizon.net ; AMSAT EagleSent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 14:36 UTCSubject: [eagle] Re: Another idea on phased array configurationBob,I am very worried about this huge requirement for power. I am concerned that we are making a satellite that that AMSAT will not be able to afford.We also need to resolve the question of how much power needs to be supplied during the worst case eclipse scenario. This has a major impact on the amount of energy storage is required.Another question is whether we are going to stay with the requirement of being sun angle neutral. These are all drivers for the size of the spacecraft and the structure.
Lou McFadinW5DID
On Apr 27, 2007, at 3:30 PM, Robert McGwier wrote:
Bill Ress wrote:Bob,I don't think we'll find a device on the current marketplace that willsuit our efficiency needs. But, if we're willing to develop (fund) aprogram to design and build a Class E, 1 watt, 5.7 GHz amplifiermodule, we might get to 70 and maybe 90% efficiency. I have seen Class EX Band amplifiers with 60 to 70%. The design, including the choice ofactive device(s) must start with the goal of being Class E since severalinteresting parameters are in play. You just can't take a Class Camplifier and "push" it into the switching mode. Perhaps a Class Camplifier might be enough.I am listening and more than willing to consider anything that gets thejob done with a reasonable budget.But it's a very interesting design challenge - to be sure!! When do westart??But, lets assume that we build amplifiers with 100% efficiency. 36 or 43elements still requires 36 to 43 watts input. What has me concerned isthat the current satellite structure design calls for 6 solar panelswith, what I guess is about 25 watts per panel. That appears to beconsistent with the 100 watts power generation stated in the currentEagle Functional Requirements.Are we still working with 100 watts or did I miss something??What we are working with is "whatever we can get away with" so long asit meets the communications systems goals as stated in our workingdocument from the San Diego meeting of last summer. That is the systemwe want to design and the concept we wish to support. If this involvesus working on our own amplifier design, and not using monolithic designsfrom Hittite, etc., so be it. The efficiency translates directly tomultiple scenario big wins for us. Class E for this is completelyacceptable.Regards...Bill - N6GHzRobert McGwier wrote:The Hittites were interesting, they had potential, but they are notreally efficient enough. We will find better parts.Bob73'sBobN4HY--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 orelse you're going to be locked up." Hunter S. Thompson_______________________________________________Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
_______________________________________________
Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
Eagle@amsat.org
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/eagle