On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:58:13 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 20:58:17 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman
wrote:

Why is 12 watts the limit for a legal SSB radio?

Because the FCC says so.


Why?

I can only speculate. Any CB radio capable of both AM and SSB would probably use
the same final, which must be linear to allow SSB operation, and be capable of
16 watts PEP (4 watts AM, 100% mod). But the -average- power of SSB, if limited
to 16 watts PEP, would be higher than that of AM with a carrier of 4 watts RMS
(assuming a peak-to-average modulation ratio of 3 to 1), and could require a
final with higher power dissipation. So my guess would be that the FCC adopted
the lower limit of 12 watts PEP to put the average RF power of SSB -below- that
of AM, therefore preventing the need for a CB design that would allow AM power
greater than 4 watts carrier RMS.

If you have a better explanation, please share it.

The only one that I have seen is, they just took the 16 watts PEP for
AM, subtracted the 4 watts for the carrier.

Thats why I asked you earlier about PEP power for an AM radio.

On 17 Jul 2003 10:04:12 -0700, (Aaron H.
Voobner) wrote:

Swan Radioman wrote
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 20:58:17 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

Swan Radioman
wrote:

Why is 12 watts the limit for a legal SSB radio?

Because the FCC says so.


Why?

The short answer; to facilitate communication. To allow the greatest
number of people to have equal access to the CB frequencies. If
everyone decided their own power limit, high power stations would
overwhelm low power stations.

-Aaron-

Understood, but why 12 watts? A legal AM radio has 16 watts PEP. Why
didn't they pick 16 watts?

: Frank Gilliland wrote:
: Too many people are preoccupied with RF power; i.e, WATTS. What they don't
: realize is that the MODE of operation is far more important than power...

What many of the technical heads don't realize is the simplicity of AM
mode for the average joe. The average arm chair CB person doesn't want to
crank a clarifier knob in SSB operation. AM remains popular for the
average CB operation regardless of efficieny issues.

: AM (Amplitude Modulation) is composed of three parts: The carrier, the lower
: sideband and the upper sideband. The carrier stays constant while the sidebands
: vary in power according to the modulation. When a 4 watt carrier is modulated to
: 100%, there will be 1 watt transmitted in each sideband, for a total of 6 watts
: of RF power that is being transmitted. But the voice can't modulate the carrier
: to 100% all the time -- speech does not have a constant amplitude. Average
: modulation is usually somewhere around 30%, so the average RF power that is
: transmitted is closer to 4.6 watts.

Modulation percentage & duty cycle.

In the real world, one must consider the radio service, operator and
equipment. Speech processing (power mics into proper mic limiter
circuits as an example) and background noise can lead to modulation
percentages greater than 30%. You should qualify your statement to say
something like the typical human voice might modulate an unprocessed AM CB
about 20 to 30% on average. Throw in a typical power mic or some type of
speech processor box (like the Heil type of of radio equipment) and that
all goes out the window.

[cut and paste a little bit of good theory]
With 100-percent sine-wave modulation, a transmitter produces 1.5
units of RF power. The additional 0.5 unit of power is furnished by the
modulator and is distributed equally between the two sidebands. This AM
transmitter is compared with an SSB transmitter rated at 0.5 unit of
peak-envelope power (PEP). Peak-envelope power is defined as the RMS power
developed at the crest of the modulation envelope.

Many of these rec radio cb technical posts fail to mention the source of
the additional power which is furnished by the modulator.

: Now AM works fine if you don't mind wasting power.

Most people prefer to trade the "wasted power" for the simplicity of AM
operation. Kind of the SUV of radio thing... just lacking the dam cell
phone planted in your ear as you drive along.

: But SSB has another advantage: Because it only uses one sideband, it uses half
: the bandwidth of AM (6 KHz for AM vs 3 KHz for SSB). That means it receives half
: the noise of AM, thereby doubling the all-important signal-to-noise ratio, and
: effectively doubling the power of the transmitted signal.

Lets add some more real information.

When the RF signal is demodulated in the AM receiver an audio voltage
develops which is equivalent to the sum of the upper- and lower-sideband
voltages, in this case 1 unit of voltage. This voltage represents the
output from a diode detector as normally used for AM reception. Such
detection is called coherent detection because the voltages of the two
sidebands are added in the detector.

When the RF signal is demodulated in the SSB receiver, an audio voltage
of 0.7 unit develops which is equivalent to the transmitted
upper-sideband signal. If a broadband noise level is chosen as 0.1 unit
of voltage per 6 kc bandwidth, the AM bandwidth, the same noise level is
equal to 0.07 unit of voltage per 3 kc bandwidth, the SSB bandwidth.

These values represent the same noise power level per kc of bandwidth,
that is, 0.12 divided by 6 is equal to 0.072 divided by 3. The s/n ratio
for the AM system is 20 log s/n in terms of voltage, or 20 dB. For the
SSB system the s/n ratio is also 20 dB. Therefore the 0.5 power unit of
rated PEP for the SSB transmitter produces the same signal
intelligibility as the 1 power unit of rated carrier power for the AM
transmitter .

In summary it can be stated that, under ideal propagating conditions but
in the presence of broadband noise, an SSB signal and an AM signal provide
equal s/n ratios at the receiver if the total sideband power contained in
each of the signals is equal. This means that, to perform under these
conditions as well as an SSB transmitter of given PEP rating, an AM
transmitter requires twice that figure in carrier power rating.

: All summed up, a stock CB with SSB has the same range and talk-power as
: the same CB using AM with a 100 watt linear -- and it's LEGAL!

I don't agree, but you be your own judge. Also those of you nit pick
types notice the mention just above "stock CB". It's a big deal when
assuming modulation percentages and duty cycle. Throw a typical power mic
into the mix and the big picture quickly changes.

Many CB'ers use power mics, most AM (and FM) Broadcasters use heavy Audio
processing. A science unto itself which is also an it's own industry.

Your results will probably vary...

cheers

skipp
http://sonic.ucdavis.edu

From:

(sheik=A0yerbooti)


While I can disagree with Frank when he's being a troll, even though is
exact figures are a little off, basically he's correct.
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0Landshark


How the hell wouldyou know if he was off a

little or not?



LOL,,,what difference does it make?
HE isn't the subject,,,,Egad, but you angry trolling, lids share the
need for personal attack of another.


you say this because tnom says he is off. You

know **** about radios.



Neither do you,,,how could you,,,you're never on...at least most of us
can say we have talked to others in this group on the air..you can't, as
you're never there, you're here worrying about what someone may post
next..LOL!

From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In , Swan Radioman
wrote:
snip
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Thanks for being such an asshole, You
never said anything about PEP. I figured someone else was going to bring
it up so I asked.

And that's why I said, "if you're not trolling then
somebody else will".
=A0

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0My post in now way flamed or attacked you, in fact
I backed you up. Whats you damn problem?


The PEP question raised a point that I thought
should be addressed. If you took it personally

then that's your problem.
_
No Frank..it's you,,,it's always you. You're the only one that can't see
it despite everyone telling you and as usual, you tell everyone else
it's their problem..no one has a problem Frank,,,you just can't stand
yourself. You are filled with perpetual anger.

From: (Aaron=A0H.=A0Voobner)
Swan Radioman wrote
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 20:58:17 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote:
=A0=A0Swan Radioman
wrote:
Why is 12 watts the limit for a legal SSB radio?

Because the FCC says so.

Why?
_
The short answer; to facilitate communication. To allow the greatest
number of people to have equal access to the CB frequencies. If everyone
decided their own power limit, high power stations would overwhelm low
power stations.
-Aaron-
_
And the truth:
You aren't the least bit concerned about the rules,,your forges
illustrate your agenda nicely,

In , Swan Radioman
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 08:58:27 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman wrote:

snip

Thanks for being such an asshole, You never said anything about
PEP. I figured someone else was going to bring it up so I asked.

And that's why I said, "if you're not trolling then somebody else will".

My post in now way flamed or attacked you, in fact I backed you
up. Whats you damn problem?

The PEP question raised a point that I thought should be addressed. If you took
it personally then that's your problem.


Ok, I apologize for my response to you.

No problem. It did make me think (ouch!), and because of that I came up with the
following 'quick' explanation of the difference between the CB's modes of AM and
SSB:

-----
The average RF power transmitted by AM is about 4.7 watts, but 4 watts are
wasted in the carrier, and half of the remainder is redundant. The average RF
power transmitted by SSB is about 4 watts, and wastes nothing at all.
-----

Accurate?





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

In , Swan Radioman
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:58:13 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 20:58:17 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman
wrote:

Why is 12 watts the limit for a legal SSB radio?

Because the FCC says so.


Why?

I can only speculate. Any CB radio capable of both AM and SSB would probably use
the same final, which must be linear to allow SSB operation, and be capable of
16 watts PEP (4 watts AM, 100% mod). But the -average- power of SSB, if limited
to 16 watts PEP, would be higher than that of AM with a carrier of 4 watts RMS
(assuming a peak-to-average modulation ratio of 3 to 1), and could require a
final with higher power dissipation. So my guess would be that the FCC adopted
the lower limit of 12 watts PEP to put the average RF power of SSB -below- that
of AM, therefore preventing the need for a CB design that would allow AM power
greater than 4 watts carrier RMS.

If you have a better explanation, please share it.

The only one that I have seen is, they just took the 16 watts PEP for
AM, subtracted the 4 watts for the carrier.

Thats why I asked you earlier about PEP power for an AM radio.

The problem here is that AM PEP is not a simple sum. For example, if you start
with 16 watts PEP (100% mod) and subtract the 4 watt carrier then you are left
with 12 watts that must be split between two sidebands. So each sideband should
have 6 watts, but that's wrong because we already know that each sideband has
only 1 watt. That is also the reason why carrier and modulation must be measured
seperately with AM power -- because it's not simple addition.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 10:58:16 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:58:13 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 20:58:17 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , Swan Radioman
wrote:

Why is 12 watts the limit for a legal SSB radio?

Because the FCC says so.


Why?

I can only speculate. Any CB radio capable of both AM and SSB would probably use
the same final, which must be linear to allow SSB operation, and be capable of
16 watts PEP (4 watts AM, 100% mod). But the -average- power of SSB, if limited
to 16 watts PEP, would be higher than that of AM with a carrier of 4 watts RMS
(assuming a peak-to-average modulation ratio of 3 to 1), and could require a
final with higher power dissipation. So my guess would be that the FCC adopted
the lower limit of 12 watts PEP to put the average RF power of SSB -below- that
of AM, therefore preventing the need for a CB design that would allow AM power
greater than 4 watts carrier RMS.

If you have a better explanation, please share it.

The only one that I have seen is, they just took the 16 watts PEP for
AM, subtracted the 4 watts for the carrier.

Thats why I asked you earlier about PEP power for an AM radio.

The problem here is that AM PEP is not a simple sum. For example, if you start
with 16 watts PEP (100% mod) and subtract the 4 watt carrier then you are left
with 12 watts that must be split between two sidebands. So each sideband should
have 6 watts, but that's wrong because we already know that each sideband has
only 1 watt. That is also the reason why carrier and modulation must be measured
seperately with AM power -- because it's not simple addition.


So what do you think power output of a average legal SSB CB is? 12
Watts?

In , Skipp peaks into this mess
wrote:

: Frank Gilliland wrote:
: Too many people are preoccupied with RF power; i.e, WATTS. What they don't
: realize is that the MODE of operation is far more important than power...

What many of the technical heads don't realize is the simplicity of AM
mode for the average joe. The average arm chair CB person doesn't want to
crank a clarifier knob in SSB operation. AM remains popular for the
average CB operation regardless of efficieny issues.

I don't think it's a matter of the adjustment of one knob, since people seem to
get their kicks out of having lots of knobs on their radios. I think it's more
about the cost of the radios. You can pick up an AM rig at any flea market for
pennies; but a working SSB rig, new -or- used (that hasn't been butchered), will
cost you a few bills.

: AM (Amplitude Modulation) is composed of three parts: The carrier, the lower
: sideband and the upper sideband. The carrier stays constant while the sidebands
: vary in power according to the modulation. When a 4 watt carrier is modulated to
: 100%, there will be 1 watt transmitted in each sideband, for a total of 6 watts
: of RF power that is being transmitted. But the voice can't modulate the carrier
: to 100% all the time -- speech does not have a constant amplitude. Average
: modulation is usually somewhere around 30%, so the average RF power that is
: transmitted is closer to 4.6 watts.

Modulation percentage & duty cycle.

Duty cycle is irrelevant since there is no modulation percentage to be measured
when the radio isn't transmitting.

In the real world, one must consider the radio service, operator and
equipment. Speech processing (power mics into proper mic limiter
circuits as an example) and background noise can lead to modulation
percentages greater than 30%. You should qualify your statement to say
something like the typical human voice might modulate an unprocessed AM CB
about 20 to 30% on average. Throw in a typical power mic or some type of
speech processor box (like the Heil type of of radio equipment) and that
all goes out the window.

I took the peak-to-average modulation ratio from the ARRL handbook (as well as
several other textbooks). Take up your argument with it's author.

[cut and paste a little bit of good theory]
With 100-percent sine-wave modulation, a transmitter produces 1.5
units of RF power.

....."units"?

The additional 0.5 unit of power is furnished by the
modulator and is distributed equally between the two sidebands. This AM
transmitter is compared with an SSB transmitter rated at 0.5 unit of
peak-envelope power (PEP).

If the "additional 0.5 unit of power" is distributed equally between the two
sidebands, don't you mean 0.25 unit for a single sideband?

Peak-envelope power is defined as the RMS power
developed at the crest of the modulation envelope.

Many of these rec radio cb technical posts fail to mention the source of
the additional power which is furnished by the modulator.

I didn't. Read my post again.

: Now AM works fine if you don't mind wasting power.

Most people prefer to trade the "wasted power" for the simplicity of AM
operation. Kind of the SUV of radio thing... just lacking the dam cell
phone planted in your ear as you drive along.

And I prefer to believe that "most people" are uneducated as to the benefits of
SSB, which is why I wrote that post.

: But SSB has another advantage: Because it only uses one sideband, it uses half
: the bandwidth of AM (6 KHz for AM vs 3 KHz for SSB). That means it receives half
: the noise of AM, thereby doubling the all-important signal-to-noise ratio, and
: effectively doubling the power of the transmitted signal.

Lets add some more real information.

When the RF signal is demodulated in the AM receiver an audio voltage
develops which is equivalent to the sum of the upper- and lower-sideband
voltages, in this case 1 unit of voltage. This voltage represents the
output from a diode detector as normally used for AM reception. Such
detection is called coherent detection because the voltages of the two
sidebands are added in the detector.

Holy Smoked Oysters, Skip! That's called "envelope detection" and has nothing to
do with sidebands! And the "coherer detector" was an ancient method of detection
that was used long before tubes, even before galena crystals! It used iron
filings that magnetized and 'cohered' to each other under modulated RF currents,
changing the overall resistance with the modulation. You are WAY, WAY out in
yonder pasture with THAT one, Skip.

When the RF signal is demodulated in the SSB receiver, an audio voltage
of 0.7 unit develops which is equivalent to the transmitted
upper-sideband signal. If a broadband noise level is chosen as 0.1 unit
of voltage per 6 kc bandwidth, the AM bandwidth, the same noise level is
equal to 0.07 unit of voltage per 3 kc bandwidth, the SSB bandwidth.

A bit obtuse, but ok....

These values represent the same noise power level per kc of bandwidth,

Wrong. Noise voltage level is NOT noise power level, the latter being the sum of
all the noise within the bandwidth. Narrowing the bandwidth does not reduce the
noise voltage level but it DOES reduce the noise power level, and it does so in
direct proportion to the bandwidth. IOW, cut the bandwidth in half and you cut
the noise power level in half.

snip faulty explanation based on your lack of understanding

: All summed up, a stock CB with SSB has the same range and talk-power as
: the same CB using AM with a 100 watt linear -- and it's LEGAL!

I don't agree, but you be your own judge. Also those of you nit pick
types notice the mention just above "stock CB". It's a big deal when
assuming modulation percentages and duty cycle. Throw a typical power mic
into the mix and the big picture quickly changes.

Many CB'ers use power mics, most AM (and FM) Broadcasters use heavy Audio
processing. A science unto itself which is also an it's own industry.

Overmodulation is next week's lesson.

Your results will probably vary...

cheers

skipp
http://sonic.ucdavis.edu





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----