|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
TW1 Remote
Alan Applegate (K0BG)
on
January 12, 2006
View comments about this article!
I recently purchased a new HiQ580RT which required a way to measuring the Standing Wave Ratio remotely. There are a lot of ways to measure SWR, but when you're mobile, the options diminish, and using the notoriously inaccurate build in ones isn't an option either. Fortunately, several different companies manufacture remote SWR bridges so you don't have to run coax hither and yon if your radio is remotely mounted. I don't know about your installation, but I had problems finding a place to mount the head of my Icom, much less finding space for a 4 inch square meter. Well, it turns out you don't have to, thanks to LDG Electronic's TW1 talking wattmeter as shown in the left photo.
 There is a review of it in the November 2005 issue of QST starting on page 77. It runs on a nominal 13.8 VDC, and draw less than 90 uA on standby so a power switch isn't needed. You should properly fuse it however.
There is something special about the TW1, and if you've read the review you would know that it not only talks, it squeals. Well, actually it's a tone you hear which changes in pitch (steady or pulsing) to indicate SWR. This function makes resetting a remotely tuned mobile antenna a simple chore that doesn't require you to take your eyes off of the road. This single feature makes it worth the $129 it retails for.
Although it isn't designed to be remoted, it turns out it can be. A close look at the SWR push button will show you that it is a DPDT, which would indicate remoting the SWR function would be difficult. However, after talking with the folks at LDG, I (they) came up with a solution.
The diagram (upper right) depicts the SWR switch from the top front side. Connecting a SPST N/O push button to these two pins will cause the TW1 to report the SWR. Closing the switch for 3 seconds will cause the TW1 to go into the tone mode. It will stay there until RF is removed for about 30 seconds, at which time it goes back to its original programmed mode. If you want it to switch immediately, just push the button again. It can speak in German and Spanish, in addition to English, and has both verbose and terse modes. There's even a VHF model of it.
I've been using the remote controlled TW1 for about 6 weeks now, and it has worked perfectly. It's immune to RF, which most automatic controllers are not, especially if you run high power. In any case, you should RF bypass the wiring to your remote push button with .01 caps. Depending on the remote switch or button you use, it may be necessary to install a .22 uF or .47 uF cap across the internal switch to avoid contact bounce issues (not shown in the photo). Be advised, modifications like this may nullify the warranty.
The photo above left shows the TW1 mounted atop my SG500 amplifier's protective aluminum cover. This cover is spaced 5/8 inch above the amplifier allowing airflow while keeping foreign objects from dropping through the ventilation holes. Although mounted in the trunk, the TW1 has adequate volume to be easily heard even at highway speeds. Is there a drawback? Yes... I didn't think of it first!
Alan Applegate, K0BG
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by K3AN on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I really wish the editors would require product reviews be posted in the "Reviews" section of this site. What's next, a hamfest announcement in the "DX Cluster Spots" section?
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by KZ1X on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
" I really wish the editors would require product reviews be posted in the "Reviews" section of this site. "
I agree, in general.
However, since this posting wasn't made by an LDG employee or owner, and, it involved modifying a commercial product so that the thing would do something 'new' and useful ... if this was a print medium, this posting would probably have shown up in a "Hints and Kinks" area ... so, I'd say this location here is as good as any.
I know, it's a fine line.
This site has hands-off type editing, which allows the content, overall, to be more useful than average. There are plenty of heavily-edited ham websites that are moribund and boring, and others that exist solely as a 24x7 gripefest for malcontents.
eHam.net is neither. I'm inclined to allow the occasional transgression-of-spirit in favor of the larger benefit.
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by K0BG on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Bill, I didn't mean this to be a product review; that's already been done.
Adding a remote control makes the TW1 just that much more useful, my enthusiasm notwithstanding. BTW, I have no affiliation with LDG. I bought and paid for mine just like every one else.
Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
PS: Sorry about the link problem in the article. That happened after I posted it.
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by VO1NO on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't see this as an equipment review at all. It is a modification of an existing piece of equipment that greatly increases its utility to Amateurs who operate mobile. Well done Alan!
73
Al
VO1NO / VE3
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by W9PMZ on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"However, since this posting wasn't made by an LDG employee or owner, and, it involved modifying a commercial product so that the thing would do something 'new' and useful ... if this was a print medium, this posting would probably have shown up in a "Hints and Kinks" area ... so, I'd say this location here is as good as any. "
There is a forum for mods...........
"http://www.eham.net/forums/ModsAndRepairs"
73,
Carl - W9PMZ
|
|   |
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by K9NYO on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Alan: thanks for a useful idea for mobile hamming. I've been looking for something just like this, and I probably wouldn't have gone looking for it in the product reviews.
73 DE K9NYO
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by KB9CRY on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Aw, you guys are just depressed because you miss those real thought provoking articles like:
"Have N Connectors made Life Better?"
or
"What's Your Most Embarassing Moment When Operating Field Day in Your Shorts?"
or
"Did the Memory Keyer Signal the End of CW?"
Phil
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by W0FM on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Once again, I enjoyed the article Alan. Ham radio at its best!
FWIW, I, personally, would never have found this helpful idea if it had been in the "Mods and Repairs" forum. Sometimes we just need to let our anal article boundaries blur a bit.
Nice job!
Terry, WØFM
|
|   |
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by N9XCR on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Great article, Alan!
I don't understand why some people have nothing better to do that sit there complaining. Life is too short. I wouldn't have looked for this in this Product Reviews section. That would be just plain stupid. This is a modification. Someone said there is a modding forum. I agree that it is an appropriate location for the article, but what's wrong with showcasing the article on the front page?
73,
Chris N9XCR
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by K6AER on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I like Alan’s article and it adds a new dimension to the aspect of mobile operation. Any aid that keeps the drivers eyes on the road is a safety upgrade. To put this idea in the fourm would most likely be lost to the many hams that don’t have time to explore E-Hams many subset reviews and postings.
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by W9PMZ on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
All in all a very nice article Alan.
Thanks for sharing your experience.
73,
Carl - W9PMZ
|
|   |
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by AB0RE on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I was giving the TW1 some consideration until the ARRL published a review of it in November 2005 QST. (Can be viewed at http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr0511.pdf if you are an ARRL member).
In the review it appeared the TW1 was considerably inaccurate. At 5W, it measured anywhere from 4.6 - 6.5W, depending on the band. At 100W, it measured anywhere from 63-104W, depending on the band. And at 1000W, it measured anywhere from 852-1236W, again depending on the band (all measurements were taken applying a CW signal). That's 25-35% inaccurate at the extremes!
I'm curious if your results of the TW1 are similar. I didn't notice any reviews of the TW1 in the wattmeter section of "reviews".
73,
Dan / ab0re
|
|   |
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by N0MUD on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Alan very nice article, keep of the good work. Keep up informing us HAMS as to new and very useable ideas. I know I learned something new and as the others have said I wouldn't have found this article any place else. So I as a fellow HAM have no problems where you placed this article.
Good Work,
Mike
NØmud
|
|   |
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by W5UV on January 13, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thanks Alan. Nice article. I have visited your web site often in the past to pick up tips for mobile installations, etc and appreciate the information you have provided to us all. I agree that this SWR meter sure makes it easier (and safer)to operate mobile but I'm curious why you would opt for this over some of the screwdriver tuner units available?? I am pretty sure the HiQ and most newer screwdriver type antennas are now equipped with the appropriate relays to enable these. I know I used them running the Icom 706MkIIG, the Yaesu FT-100D and the Kenwood TS-2000 into a screwdriver and they make mobile opertions practically automatic. Again, thanks for the great info.
73, Dennis W5UV
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by NS6Y_ on January 13, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yet more fuel for my arguement that we're just entering a new Golden Age of ham radio. SWR/Wattmeters are just one of the areas that have been stagnant for decades, and suddenly there are automatic meters, talking meters, and USA made kit meters, of course the Ever Excellent Elecraft offerings being the leaders in excellence.
Am I the only one who's noticed this new wave in ham radio is small startup co's in the USA? Why is there no recognition of this?
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by W9PMZ on January 13, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"In the review it appeared the TW1 was considerably inaccurate. At 5W, it measured anywhere from 4.6 - 6.5W, depending on the band. At 100W, it measured anywhere from 63-104W, depending on the band. And at 1000W, it measured anywhere from 852-1236W, again depending on the band (all measurements were taken applying a CW signal). That's 25-35% inaccurate at the extremes! "
What the ARRL Article said was:
"The TW-1 works very well indeed. Table
3 provides a comparison between readings
of the TW-1 and the ARRL Laboratory calibrated
Bird wattmeter with an accuracy of
±5%. The TW-1 is not quite a laboratory
standard device, but it’s right up there with
other general purpose meters we’ve examined
and more accurate than many."
Measuring power to a high degree of certainty is a complex task. There are a number of factors that have to be considered in the accuracy of the measurement, the systematic error of the instrumentation and the mismatch error.
The systematic error is of course specified on the instument, in the case of 5% at 14MHz and 10% at band edges, vs. 5% for a Bird Watt Meter.
But also consider the uncertainty of the measurement. When power is measured it is a vector to an end point and that end point represents the power. In an ideal world there is no mismatch loss. Since the world is not ideal, the mismatch loss is a rotating vector about the end point of the true power. And what is then indicated for the power reading is the resultant vector. Only knowing the angle and the mismatch loss will allow us to arrive at the correct power reading.
An illustration of this, using a DC example, say for example you have a 10V battery connected to (2) 10,000 Ohm resistors in series. From Ohms Law we know that the voltage across each resistor is 5V. So we ask a student to obtain a voltmeter and measure the voltage across each resistor and he measures 3.33V across each resistor and scratch his head because the accuracy of his meter is 5% the measurement should have been no worse than 4.75V to 5.25V +/- the accuracy of the resistors. It turns out that he used a voltmeter whose input impedance was 10,000 Ohms.
In the case of the LDG Meter, it's probably mismatch error that is coming into play at the edges where the specified accuracy is 10% which amplifies the error of the measurement, especially if there is a mismatch to the source.
I think that these problems are brought on by digitalitis (having meters with digital displays, now talking meters). I've seen people who believe that if the instrument says 14.3456932 whatevers, then that has to be the answer.
Again, the ARRL stated:
"but it’s right up there with
other general purpose meters we’ve examined
and more accurate than many".
Unless you are going to go to great extremes to insure the accuracy of your power meter reading, and spend a lot of big bucks to do so, it seems that this insturment is a good investment.
73,
Carl - W9PMZ
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by K0BG on January 13, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dennis, W5UV, I didn't have your e-mail address, so I hope you see this.
I bought two different automatic "screwdriver" controllers. One used RF, the other the turns counter. This after my friend Dick Knol, PA3DUV, told me his experiences with them in general, and one of the units specifically.
The RF one, never worked period! I returned it, and received another one. It worked, but the SWR was all over the place, and required "trimming" which more of less would require some sort of metering arrangement. It never failed due to RF, but I didn't give it a chance to. The owner of the company is already upset with me, so I'll let it go away with no names involved.
The other one was MFJ's newest push button wonder. Barefoot, it worked well once I played with the torque adjustment, and in the process I burned one of the resistors. Other than the fact it returned the antenna to a parking position each time (lowest freq), it appeared to work fine. One tuned, the SWR was always the same, and I give it credit it stopped dead on the preprogrammed spots. But....
Once I started using the amp it worked exactly twice (about the same experience Dick had). What ever happened internally, blew the top off the CPU, and blew the fuse. All of the leads were well bypassed. In fact, the TW1 has worked flawlessly under the same conditions.
Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
|
|   |
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by N0AH on January 13, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I assume the main use is for a mobile screwdriver antenna and helps to be more safe on the road. If this is the main point, don't you still have to get the antenna close to a decent SWR to transmit? ( SWR protection relay etc.....) I'm not sure how this is safe for a mobile set up as you'll still have to look in the rear-view mirror to get close to your frequency's turn level before you can tramsmit to hear your SWR reading. Sounds like a good idea for a fine tuning device. But perhaps a lot more practical for indoor applications on antennas that don't have such high Q attributes. Nice article- well presented
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by K0BG on January 13, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To answer your question Pablo, you don't have to look in the rear view. When you change bands, you know which way you're going, so it's just a manner of up or down on the switch. The TW1 does a beep-beep which gets lower in frequency as you get closer to resonance (lower SWR), and then changes to a steady tone which gets lower. I've QSY'd enough between 20 and 17, I know just about how long to hold the switch. So 9 times out of 10, I hit it dead on. When changing from 20 to 40 or 75 takes a little longer. I'm not as adept at that change, but I can do it with less than 10 seconds of carrier (give or take 10 watts).
Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
|
|   |
|
RE: TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by WA6CDE on January 14, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Alan...
thanks again for all the info... I think its a good article and well placed... most comments are probably from people who have never worked mobile and/or driven while they had to change bands... as anyone knows it only takes a second for you to look away and then back into a accident... so anything to help...
But,.... what about the auto tuners... I have the icom and with the AH-4.. its a one button tuning thing. We also get a tone to indicate when the radio is ready to go and a light that also makes it positve at night.
Surly the others manufactures of screwdriver/other brands of antennas also have the same thing. SGC has the autotuners also... which will work on just about any antenna.
I guess what I am asking here is why a SWR meter when most people who already go mobile have elected for the auto turner combos. I know your antenna is also the auto tuner type... do you really need this on board also??
And... I hope you go into the Battery, placement, IR drop on cable and fuses and contactors in a follow up article. We had some great times hashing that out...
(For those that were not their... we got into the heavy duty theroi of different types of batts, car alternator and placement of mobile power centers. A lot of good info came forth as we discussed these itmes of interest)
I hope that Alan will do a follow up as I know a lot of hams probably are not aware of this line of info.
thanks again Alan... keep up the good work. for sure thumbs up... heads and tails above what the ARRL paper pusher put out for the new ham going mobile.
73's
G.M> WA6CDE
|
|   |
|
TW1 Remote
|
|
|
by RADIOBOB on January 17, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thanks Alan for the nice article. I might not ever use the tuner, but it’s nice to know about it. Good info for future use.
As to where to put such writings.
If I understand many here, all articles, should be nicely tucked away in their appropriate little file folder, i.e. ……. Forum.
Like others, I would never of seen it.
Eham’s method of finding something in the forum section leaves a lot to be desired, which is a shame, since there is lots of good info being passed along in the forum sections.
Lets all just enjoy a nice article, and not debate it.
|
|   |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other How To Articles
Measuring a Solid-State PA’s Zs
How to Help in an Emergency...Tools
6-Meter Square Copper Dipole
|
|
|