Hi, Doing true RMS over the selected passband is very easy to do with DSP and I have no reason to doubt that the K3 dBV meter is a very close approximation to true RMS even on signals that are far from sinusoidal (such as noise). Analog is a different story and I agree that there are many false claims to be "true RMS".
AB2TC - Knut Bill W4ZV wrote: > > <snip> > While that may be true for sinusoidal signals I doubt it holds for noise > measurements. Accurate noise measurements require a "true RMS-responding" > meter...not a peak-responding or average-responding meter calibrated to > display RMS for sinusoidal waves (only). Many DMMs throw around the term > "true RMS" but are actually NOT true RMS-responding (which is required for > accurate noise measurement). True RMS meters are much more expensive and > will measure both sinusoidal and non-sinusoidal signals including noise. > Most analog DMMS use thermocouples to determine the heating value (or > energy content) of signals. There is a way to do true RMS with a DSP but > would require a much wider bandwidth (i.e. higher sampling rate) than the > K3 uses. > > 73, Bill > -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/APF-tp5963894p5968012.html Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
