So...
Watts = Volts x Amps
Watts = 14.5 x 28A
Watts = 406
Input watts
Possible output conversion - using 70% efficiency...
Potential Output Watts = 406 x 0.7
Output Watts = 284.x (Rounding)
I can easily see the 284 true watts RMS (Rounding up to an even 300 Watts can demonstrate this too) - but with 600 PEP? JMO Hmm...I've been the beat-up guy on where you'd get this result - but to me the Red Letters above show more of a true nature of the beast than to claim "Ghost watts" due to harmonics adding fluff - kinda hard to knock it out of the park except for overswing and read on further to explain more...
The MORE:
, I'm not sure of the LOAD you are using - for if it's an antenna - then the 2nd (including any higher n-th order) harmonic power output is possibly skewing your results - Antennas are REACTIVE and even if you can't get an SWR reflection to show - throw on the output - a means to measure, like a Spectrum Analyzer - on the mess to view and you'll see the 2nd order is still there - and it's power does skew readings - it's on everyone else's - no one is left out - so if you run the amp and keep the filters in place - you're numbers would be better. How? well others would have to chime in but those out there in the real world would know from listening, as well as the S-meter readings - from everyone else participating in this melee.
The potential errors come from PEP meters and their error correction for meter drive and levels - the sensors themselves work with what is present on the line, so if harmonics which are everyday thing - are present, no matter how accurate the readings may be, the load being the reactive element in this - we can not rule out errors in the readings no matter how "Calibrated" the equipment can be and is able to be.
- So for CB590 to sell this amp, he may want it back. Especially if he needed a spare in todays current conditions.
Again, as the "Beat up guy" which really doesn't mean a hill of beans - if you can cook tomorrows breakfast using the Grease from tonight's Amp-Basted - Pork Roast - save the drippings for the sear marks. Because you'll need proof the Amp was really a giant cooker and sorry to be heard thru your toaster...as the main excuse.
Not saying it's bad, (Your numbers) not by a long shot. Just be realistic (Radio Shack or Bust...) about this.
Many use the numbers you're getting from your equipment before the Derating - as an EGO boost to their (ahemn) "attitude" about things...
The real meat and Winner Winner Chicken Dinner - is in how you get over them in the pileup.
Let's reverse engineer that wattage...
PEP - 600?
You say you have 14.5V DC?
Divide the 14.5 INTO that wattage figure...
Amps = 600 / 14.5
Amps = 41 Amps - you using pennies over there? Might want to use Quarters - and in Quarter-Inch Thick stock to handle that Buss Bar...
To add this to keep it in simplicity...
The 170~180 watt figure seems conservative when it comes to RMS or even AVG watts.
Knowing the conversion efficiency of the Amps I've seen in previous working environments, the 600W PEP sounds a bit much, as per the simpleton amps or E I R equations and their skewing of results based upon accuracy of readings and known variables that often get thrown out the window,,,
So to help you, the 280 Watt or 300 watt figure is a figure of Merit based upon the Facts present and shown in calculations. This would be of 70% efficiency - but If I try to de-rate to 50% which is more likely - the only value that applies in your readings is the 175 Watts as true Carrier (Dead key Class C) watts. The 600 PEP figure can't hold weight as being a true PEP figure of using the 4:1 (Modulation to Carrier properly set) ratio.
- Then the Ammeter shows one thing scenario;
- - so obviously the MPG on the Amp will vary - to it's OWN, it is on the side of better than expected - meaning your readings on the LOW end (your 170-180W) of that scale that does meet, beat and equate to the rules the Electrons must follow.
Now that may be total power going out - but not PEP - but too - the 175 if you look at ratios of 4:1 the 175 Carrier multiplied by that 4 - doesn't get you 600 it brings you to 700 - which your input watts don't show...
What this is demonstrating - is an error, in not the readings. But how to
Interpret those readings that get made thru known trusted references - and then it get's beaten up and stomped to death as left to explain that the READING that can't be ignored, yet even understood; for is it true or just Ghost?
I'm being conservative to show that the AMP is easily capable of producing wattage for it's sticker, but it's SSB modes and Class_
Taking_Chances_C to even be worth the guess as to it's true output level of getting clipped and squared-waved into where T-Mobile looks good on paper when it comes to 5G broad banding...You need the more realistic (There it is again) viewpoint of real numbers of known values to attain any sort of sense out of the otherwise senseless data
Each time I try to bring this down to a simple answer - to get to that result takes more explanation than to say - Hey! It Works! Leave it alone! Weld it shut...
