scientific explanation???

[DainBramage]

The rf generator wasn't touched.
The only thing that changed was the jumper.

actually the RF generator WAS "touched" when he changed the coax, he actually changed what the radio "sees" as the load impedance.

OK, one more kick at the cat:

..... if he used the coax that showed lower output power, and just changed frequency instead,

what do you think would have happened?

 

[vkrules]

would love to see the input vswr.

 

[rabbiporkchop]

actually the RF generator WAS "touched" when he changed the coax, he actually changed what the radio "sees" as the load impedance.

OK, one more kick at the cat:

..... if he used the coax that showed lower output power, and just changed frequency instead,

what do you think would have happened?

actually you are wrong about him touching the RF generator because the cable doesn't even connect to the RF generator. it is a simple patch cable between the radio and the amplifier. changing the cable length alters the waveform of the amplifier.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

The radio IS the RF generator in this case. It generates the RF that drives the amp.

 

[RatsoW8]

You don't have to be an engineer to know that's not how you do controlled testing. An export CB radio, Fat Boy (really?) CB garage amp and patch cables of unknown quality and workmanship? No. The guy is selling patch cables built to spec from his magic formula.

So to the OP; How can a "scientific explanation" be applied to testing that isn't scientific to begin with?

 

[rabbiporkchop]

You don't have to be an engineer to know that's not how you do controlled testing. An export CB radio, Fat Boy (really?) CB garage amp and patch cables of unknown quality and workmanship? No. The guy is selling patch cables built to spec from his magic formula.

So to the OP; How can a "scientific explanation" be applied to testing that isn't scientific to begin with?

"Built to spec" and accomplishing the same results every single time using "garbage equipment" regardless of amplifier or radio sounds pretty scientific to me. I'm still waiting for another radio technician to be able to demonstrate consistent results and to make a video demonstrating the same thing but I have yet to see such a thing. If anything, it is pretty impressive how he can take many variations of garbage equipment and create a perfect waveform every time. When I was in the navy, all the equipment we worked on was built to pretty stringent standards and tight tolerances, so accomplishing the same results every time was pretty easy to do, but it blows my mind how he can take total junk and regardless of what it is achieve perfection every time.
I think Captain Kilowatt came up with the best answer so far regarding impedance, but I think something else is going on or biasing is part of the equation somehow.

 

[Road Squawker]

it blows my mind how he can take total junk and regardless of what it is achieve perfection every time... I think something else is going on...somehow.

I think you don't have a clue

WHY did you post this CB pseudo science (junk) in the amateur section and then tell people that DO know it is bullshit that it is "perfection"?


Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I see you had some one @ "finetune" tweak your radio,

did ya buy the proper length cable too?

 

[rabbiporkchop]

Apparently you are unable to read a scope if you can't recognize perfection when you see it, and I just realized that since his radios are the only ones that I can hear and be heard long distances "groundwave" (skip doesn't count), that he must be on to something. That being said, any rig matched to an amp with a phase angle other than a multiple of 180° must be misaligned hence the great number of people with expectations much lower than mine, and underperforming rigs from coast to coast. It makes sense anyway.
Anyway the reason for posting in the ham forum was because the cb guys are a bunch of idiots who known absolutely nothing and the ham guys are supposed to be the smart ones with all the knowledge.

 

[n8fgb]

Apparently you are unable to read a scope if you can't recognize perfection when you see it, and I just realized that since his radios are the only ones that I can hear and be heard long distances "groundwave" (skip doesn't count), that he must be on to something. That being said, any rig matched to an amp with a phase angle other than a multiple of 180° must be misaligned hence the great number of people with expectations much lower than mine, and underperforming rigs from coast to coast. It makes sense anyway.
Anyway the reason for posting in the ham forum was because the cb guys are a bunch of idiots who known absolutely nothing and the ham guys are supposed to be the smart ones with all the knowledge.

First, no "ham guy, would run any junk like what is used on video. Now if I was to use his magic secret formula, I would need to change jumpers every time I change bands, not practical. Second there are no "groundwave" on 11 meter. That happens on the lower bands. Shows everyone what you know about RF theory.
Rich

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

That being said, any rig matched to an amp with a phase angle other than a multiple of 180° must be misaligned hence the great number of people with expectations much lower than mine, and underperforming rigs from coast to coast. It makes sense anyway.
Anyway the reason for posting in the ham forum was because the cb guys are a bunch of idiots who known absolutely nothing and the ham guys are supposed to be the smart ones with all the knowledge.

Maybe I have been awake for far too long but could you please explain what the bold text quoted above means?

 

[ExitThirteen]

Shit amp. Those amps don't even have tuned input. That's the problem right there. Because the deadkey of the setup is affected by the jumper (due to lack of input tuning), it is lowering the deadkey (clearly seen on the wattmeter) which directly affects your modulated output, which clearly shows on the scope. That's why the scope shows severe overmodulation and flat topping on the 3 and 6 foot jumpers. Like CK stated, had the amp been a GOOD ham amp with real input tuning, it'll look the same, regardless of the jumper.

~Cheers~

 

[rabbiporkchop]

Shit amp. Those amps don't even have tuned input. That's the problem right there. Because the deadkey of the setup is affected by the jumper (due to lack of input tuning), it is lowering the deadkey (clearly seen on the wattmeter) which directly affects your modulated output, which clearly shows on the scope. That's why the scope shows severe overmodulation and flat topping on the 3 and 6 foot jumpers. Like CK stated, had the amp been a GOOD ham amp with real input tuning, it'll look the same, regardless of the jumper.

~Cheers~

I think that's a pretty acceptable answer. It sounds very rational.
Can we at least acknowledge with the first jumper he would not be bleeding over onto TV sets and with the second and third jumper he would be bleeding all over your TV set if he was sitting in your driveway?

 

[RatsoW8]

Can we at least acknowledge with the first jumper he would not be bleeding over onto TV sets and with the second and third jumper he would be bleeding all over your TV set if he was sitting in your driveway?

My tv is fed with expensive Charter cable and may be less likely to be bled into by a dirty CB amp. Not sure we can answer the question since I didn't see a spectrum analyzer in the video but I bet that Fat Boy makes high order IMD like a boss regardless of the jumper he used.

 

[222DBFL]

All the jumper length is doing is creating a false reading per say as the input tune of the amp or the radio is not right. Has nothing to do with the length of the coax. The coax is simply masking the issue. JMHO.