[eagle] Re: Another idea on phased array configuration

Louis McFadin w5did at amsat.org
Thu Apr 26 08:07:30 PDT 2007

For 43 of the Hittite devices it would take 132 w to deliver 43w of  
RF.  This doesn't count the circuitry needed to drive the finals or  
other spacecraft requirements.
This will also present a huge thermal problem with the need to dump  
around 100w of heat on the top of the spacecraft.
At least 250w of solar capacity would be needed to support this based  
on current requirements.

On Apr 26, 2007, at 1:08 AM, Tom Clark, K3IO wrote:

> Bill Ress wrote:
>> Hi Tom,
>> Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the phased array approach.
>> I especially appreciated your block diagrams which really helped.  
>> I'm sorting through the approach and will likely have some questions.
>> Regarding amplifiers for 5.7 GHz, Sirenza has a 1/4 watt for  
>> $4.80. It draws 165mA @ 5V or 7 amps for 43 of them.
>> Now here's the real heartburn device. The Hittite HMC409LP4 (I  
>> think the one you referred to) provides just over 1 watt, costs  
>> $8.52 (not bad at all) but runs 615mA at 5V - or  26 Amps for 43  
>> antennas. If that input power doesn't bother anyone - there's part  
>> of our design!
>> I've never heard any estimates of what DC power Eagle is planning  
>> to deliver. Is that figure available yet?
>> Thanks again Tom for your time and thoughts.
>> Regards...Bill - N6GHz
> Bill -- it was the Hittite HMC408 that we looked at. We (N4HY,  
> W3GPS & I) got one of the HMC408 eval boards and tested it in  
> Sep.'05. I presented a quick summary of our tests at the Eagle  
> working group meeting in Pittsburgh in Oct.'05. I looked around for  
> my PowerPoint presentation and found it; it can be gleaned on my  
> "freebie" website at http://mysite.verizon.net/w3iwi/HMC408.ppt.  
> The presentation, as posted, has one glaring error: the Hittite  
> brick is missing from Slide #7. It's pretty obvious, bur it is a  
> block between the DB6NT  upconverter and the -16 dB directional  
> coupler. I never had a reason to re-present the talk, so I never  
> bothered to fix the drawing.
> Anyway, the main conclusions from our "quickie" tests were
> It worked as advertised in the data sheet (within ~ 1 dB which was  
> comparable to our measurement accuracy).
> We concluded that we could affect you could optimize efficiency at  
> any given power output level by tweaking Vctl.
> The peak DC>RF efficiency we saw was ~ 22% for Vctl in the 3.5-4V  
> range and Vcc1=Vcc2=5V.
> There is a possibility of doing even better by doing a more careful  
> optimization of Vcc1 and Vctl. I suspect that Vcc2 needs to be the  
> recommended 5V. This is especially true if we are going to be able  
> to use constant envelope BPSK.  (i.e. something approaching Class-C).
> Any amplifier can be easily shut down by setting Vctl=0.
> Let's hope we can find a more efficient amplifier chip!
> 73, Tom
> _______________________________________________
> Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
> Eagle at amsat.org
> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/eagle

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://amsat.org/mailman/private/eagle/attachments/20070426/dbf8d31b/attachment.html

More information about the Eagle mailing list