Antenna Meter ?

[scannerbum]

Is there a meter to measure the amount of signal an antenna is receving ? If so , how much , where to get one , and can it help with antenna location , type ect...... ?

 

[nd5y]

There are several test equipment manufacturers that have what you need.

http://www.home.agilent.com/USeng/nav/-536900798.536883226/pd.html
http://www.tek.com/site/ps/0,,2G-15543-INTRO_EN,00.html
http://www.us.anritsu.com/products/ARO/North/Eng/showProd.aspx?ID=673&cat=1&cat2=2&cat3=36&cat4=0

There is one slight problem for radio hobbyists.
These test sets cost thousands of dollars. Even used ones.

 

[DickH]

Is there a meter to measure the amount of signal an antenna is receving ? If so , how much , where to get one , and can it help with antenna location , type ect...... ?

The thing that does what you want is a signal strength meter, built into some scanners.
I don't know which scanners have one. You will either have to wait for someone who knows to reply or look at the specs of many scanners.

 

[Don_Burke]

Is there a meter to measure the amount of signal an antenna is receving ? If so , how much , where to get one , and can it help with antenna location , type ect...... ?

Before you spend any money, try comparing the squelch setting to block a given system.

If a given setting blocks your local fire department on one antenna and another antenna requires a higher setting to block the same system, the second antenna is putting more signal to the radio.

It certainly is not precise, but the price is right.

If you have an older scanner you do not mind ripping into, you can measure the AGC voltage, which is what many signal strength meters do anyway.

 

[N_Jay]

There are lots of ways to measure the signal with a receiver, such as the S-meter, the squelch setting, the AGC or the Limiter voltage, BUT (BIG BUT) . . . .

The issue is calibration. If you want to get an absolute level you need to calibrate to a known signal.
Usually comparative readings are good enough. The best tool for this is a switchable attenuator.

 

[kb2vxa]

Hi Bum and all,

First the bad news.

"Is there a meter to measure the amount of signal an antenna is receiving?

Yes, a wave meter is exactly the thing. It's a calibrated receiver that reads out the signal in microvolts. Another thing is a spectrum analyzer which also has other applications and is a bit more difficult to set up and operate.

"If so , how much?"

More than you care to spend, for a few thousand dollars think of how many scanners you can buy.

"Where to get one?"

Being professional test equipment you'd have to look at suppliers of lab grade instruments. A "calibration house" is where you can find refurbished surplus gear at a lower price BUT still you're looking at around two grand.

"and can it help with antenna location , type ect...... ?"

That's exactly what they're used for among other things.

Now the good news.

There are plenty of receivers (not scanners) that cover the frequencies you want that have S meters which tell you the relative strength of the signals. Unlike wave meters and spectrum analyzers they're not calibrated but "good enough for government work". VHF/UHF ham transceivers have extended receive that covers adjacent bands but not everything so a good communications receiver with the proper plug in converter modules would be your best bet at around $1,000 to $1,500.

"The thing that does what you want is a signal strength meter, built into some scanners."

OK but sloppy, still it's a meter and better than nothing.

"Before you spend any money, try comparing the squelch setting to block a given system."

The degree of "sloppiness" depends on how broad the squelch is. If you have a "tight" squelch it's passable but doing it that way on my BC796D is futile. Good idea though and well worth a try.

"The best tool for this is a switchable attenuator."

Here we go again. N_Jay, an attenuator is useless without a calibrated receiver and where are you going to get one of those?

"Usually comparative readings are good enough."

As compared to WHAT?

"The issue is calibration."

Well, you always manage to get ONE thing right even if the rest is rubbish.

"The above attached post will be Humorous, Sarcastic and/or Accurate."

That much we ALWAYS agree on, you're a walking contradiction and misleading by purpose and design.

 

[N_Jay]

Hi Bum and all,

First the bad news.

"Is there a meter to measure the amount of signal an antenna is receiving?

Yes, a wave meter is exactly the thing. It's a calibrated receiver that reads out the signal in microvolts. Another thing is a spectrum analyzer which also has other applications and is a bit more difficult to set up and operate.

"If so , how much?"

More than you care to spend, for a few thousand dollars think of how many scanners you can buy.

"Where to get one?"

Being professional test equipment you'd have to look at suppliers of lab grade instruments. A "calibration house" is where you can find refurbished surplus gear at a lower price BUT still you're looking at around two grand.

"and can it help with antenna location , type ect...... ?"

That's exactly what they're used for among other things.

Now the good news.

There are plenty of receivers (not scanners) that cover the frequencies you want that have S meters which tell you the relative strength of the signals. Unlike wave meters and spectrum analyzers they're not calibrated but "good enough for government work". VHF/UHF ham transceivers have extended receive that covers adjacent bands but not everything so a good communications receiver with the proper plug in converter modules would be your best bet at around $1,000 to $1,500.

"The thing that does what you want is a signal strength meter, built into some scanners."

OK but sloppy, still it's a meter and better than nothing.

"Before you spend any money, try comparing the squelch setting to block a given system."

The degree of "sloppiness" depends on how broad the squelch is. If you have a "tight" squelch it's passable but doing it that way on my BC796D is futile. Good idea though and well worth a try.

"The best tool for this is a switchable attenuator."

Here we go again. N_Jay, an attenuator is useless without a calibrated receiver and where are you going to get one of those?

"Usually comparative readings are good enough."

As compared to WHAT?

"The issue is calibration."

Well, you always manage to get ONE thing right even if the rest is rubbish.

"The above attached post will be Humorous, Sarcastic and/or Accurate."

That much we ALWAYS agree on, you're a walking contradiction and misleading by purpose and design.

Maybe I was reading between the lines, but I thought he was looking at comparing two different antennas.

With a step attenuator you can get the signal down to mid-range on the s-meter (hopefully a decent linear point and easy to identify on the meter face), the do the same with the second source and within your ability to resolve the meter, you with KNOW the difference between the signals.

Yes, it is true that you still only have relative measurements, but at least they are ACCURATE relative measurements.

Way better then the squelch trick, or trying to read the difference direct on the S-meter.
-----------------------------------------
Now you can either spend your time attacking everything I post, or use the time and energy to learn how to use the quote feature!

 

[slicerwizard]

Is there a meter to measure the amount of signal an antenna is receving ? If so , how much , where to get one , and can it help with antenna location , type ect...... ?

If you're trying to compare different antennas and mounting locations, the easiest route is to run the receiver's AGC voltage to a digital voltmeter. The higher the reading, the better job the antenna/location is doing for you.

The only downside is finding the AGC circuitry without a schematic. Some receivers may have a test point marked on the RF board.

 

[DaveH]

I think that a step attenuator would provide an approximate
comparison of two cases by adjusting the signal to the lowest
receivable level, and comparing the two settings. Never mind
trying to read the S meter for differences. Below threshold
the FM signal quickly disappears so this "boundary" case is
better. Remember how direction finding can be done better
by nulling a signal, than by trying to detect a maximum peak.

Dave

 

[slicerwizard]

Remember how direction finding can be done better by nulling a signal, than by trying to detect a maximum peak.

Hey, don't be giving away all my secrets!