Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Peter R.

You could just add a line conditioner.


Brad Belton wrote:


We have found many (most all?) 10kW job site type generators do not work
well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply rent
a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide cleaner power that
the APC UPS's are happy with.

Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with
APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong deal!

Best,


Brad
 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Brad Belton
Do you mean something like this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=150135562844

This idea actually came up as a possible idea between another ISP and me not
long ago.  I can get the 5605 joule rated version (looks identical to the
one listed above) for about $100.00.  

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 10:55 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

You could just add a line conditioner.


Brad Belton wrote:

We have found many (most all?) 10kW job site type generators do not work
well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply
rent
a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide cleaner power that
the APC UPS's are happy with.

Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with
APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong
deal!

Best,


Brad
  

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Brad Belton
This is true on the larger more expensive APC UPSs, but the smaller 500 -
750VA models don't have this feature, do they?

 

Brad

 

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

 

Brad,

You can adjust the sensitivity of the APC UPS's to handle just about any
type of incoming power. We have run a tower off a cheap Home Depot 2000watt
by adjusting the APC so it would not keep switching off an on.

Travis
Microserv

Brad Belton wrote: 

We have found many (most all?) 10kW job site type generators do not work
well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply rent
a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide cleaner power that
the APC UPS's are happy with.
 
Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with
APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong deal!
 
Best,
 
 
Brad
 
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:30 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator
 
The Guardian comes as small as 7KW for about $2100 and goes up a long 
way from there.
I have seen Guardians at cell sites and waste water lift stations around 
here.
 
George Rogato wrote:
  
http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id
=538 
  

 
I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd 
share it with the list.
 


 
  
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

2007-07-01 Thread Charles Wu
But what about the 36 / 38 dBi antenna rule for 4  6 GHz?  The SIA is
all over Fibertower's 2' request in 11 GHz...imagine 4 GHz, which could
knock out a lot of C-band downlinks (now, not being a satellite expert,
I'm not sure of the current usage of this channel, but being that the
SIA has tons of , I'm sure they'll raise up a storm)

That said, I think you need to get the antenna beamwidth requirements
waives / relaxed first...even if concurrent coordination passes, I don't
think anyone will want to be installing 6' dishes on people's houses...

-Charles 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules. 
 
The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.
 
Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference. 
 
It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
 
The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Mike
 
1. FCC links: 
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt 
 
 
 
 
 
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice - ugh...didn't read close enough

2007-07-01 Thread Charles Wu
Mike,

Can you explain your plan on getting 1' panels passed in the 4  6 GHz
bands?

-Charles 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules. 
 
The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.
 
Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference. 
 
It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
 
The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Mike
 
1. FCC links: 
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt 
 
 
 
 
 
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Travis Johnson
Any of the Smart-UPS units have this option. There is a little 
push-button on the back that you can change the sensitivity without 
having to use the software.


Travis
Microserv

Brad Belton wrote:

This is true on the larger more expensive APC UPSs, but the smaller 500 -
750VA models don't have this feature, do they?

 


Brad

 

 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

 


Brad,

You can adjust the sensitivity of the APC UPS's to handle just about any
type of incoming power. We have run a tower off a cheap Home Depot 2000watt
by adjusting the APC so it would not keep switching off an on.

Travis
Microserv

Brad Belton wrote: 


We have found many (most all?) 10kW job site type generators do not work
well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply rent
a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide cleaner power that
the APC UPS's are happy with.
 
Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with

APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong deal!
 
Best,
 
 
Brad
 
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:30 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator
 
The Guardian comes as small as 7KW for about $2100 and goes up a long 
way from there.
I have seen Guardians at cell sites and waste water lift stations around 
here.
 
George Rogato wrote:
  
http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id
=538 
  

 
I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd 
share it with the list.
 


 
  
  

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Mike Hammett

Which ones?  I'd only use Smart-UPS and AFAIK, they all have that feature.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: Brad Belton [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 11:25 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator


This is true on the larger more expensive APC UPSs, but the smaller 500 -
750VA models don't have this feature, do they?



Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator



Brad,

You can adjust the sensitivity of the APC UPS's to handle just about any
type of incoming power. We have run a tower off a cheap Home Depot 2000watt
by adjusting the APC so it would not keep switching off an on.

Travis
Microserv

Brad Belton wrote:

We have found many (most all?) 10kW job site type generators do not work
well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply rent
a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide cleaner power that
the APC UPS's are happy with.

Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with
APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong deal!

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:30 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

The Guardian comes as small as 7KW for about $2100 and goes up a long
way from there.
I have seen Guardians at cell sites and waste water lift stations around
here.

George Rogato wrote:

http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id
=538



I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd
share it with the list.





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Tom DeReggi

automatic transfer does not take place at
one quarter of a cycle in a 60 cycle per second AC
power supply, then the sensitive logic controllers of
any network equipment, PLCs, etc will detect the
automatic transfer as a possible zero voltage
condition.


So What? Does that matter, as it is a one time event when the initial 
transfer occurs?
So the 750VA UPS, temporarilly switches to the UPS battery standby power, 
keeping Radios up, until the Generator power stablizes as on, then UPS 
switches back to line power from the generator.  IF the generator delivers 
unclean unstable power so what, that is the purpose of the small APC UPS to 
keep clean power going to the radio devices. So what if the UPS regularly 
switches back and forth from battery to Line voltage, as long as the switch 
is quick within required tolerances, and that it is not to frequent to drain 
the UPS battery.


From my experience, when the UPS did not do its job, it was because the UPS 
had a bad battery that could not handle the load, or a low grade UPS that 
did not have a fast enough transfer time itself, not a flaw in the 
generator's or its autoswitch.


What I had understood that George had said was not the the UPS switched back 
and forth between line and battery, but he said the UPS itself kept 
switching OFF and ON, as if the UPS was then malfunctioning.


What I was wondering was what type of power output was the problematic 
generator putting out? Pure Sinewave or  Pulse Modulated.  Many low cost 
devices put out PulseModulated, which is easier to regulate, to put out 
regulated power.  However, the Squared edge nature of the wave can be 
interpreted by a UPS further downstream as Bad Power, and possibly even 
damage the downstream UPS.  Which is a reason one is never supposed to 
install a ppure sinewave UPS downstream of a Pulsemodulated UPS.


We had designed some battery backup systems usign Tripplite's Power 
Inverters (pulse modulated output), which worked great, but we could not use 
APC Online UPS (puresinewave) UPSes in the racks.  To add better surve 
protection we put the protection directly in the Panel box with AC surge 
protection.  To check status of power outage, we install a cheap Linksys 
router, plugged directly into the AC outlet prior to the backup power 
systems, and then when this device stops responding, we know that there is 
not power beign sent to it. (yes there is an issue where the Linksys could 
lock up, and then us not know if it is the Linksys locked up or no power). 
One thing we were considering was to plug it inline with the Generators AC 
output feed, so teh Linksys bydefault is always off, and then when generator 
power kicks in the Linksys powers up, and if we can get to it, we know we 
are runnign on backup power.


So the point I'm making is, many generators, just put out raw voltage 
without regulation, purposely, so a UPS can be used after it to protect 
against drops and surges, and so Rack based UPSes do not need to be removed. 
The acception to this is if it has high end voltage regulation that puts out 
Pure Sinewave power.


Its actually relevent that we are specifically talkign about the APC 750VA 
rackmount UPS. I'm assuming you are talking about the Pure sine wave Online 
version.
That model is a sweat spot model because it is inexpensive, has SNMP model 
support, and it allows external batteries, and uses the slighly larger 
battery type, which enables longer run-time. Its worth finding a generator 
compatible with it. I was surprised to hear you were having the problem you 
represent.


Thats my take on it.  But will be interesting what you guys find out on what 
ends up working best.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Felix A. Lopez [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator



George/Mike:  I worked for 6 years in deep UPS and
power quality at PGE in Silicon Valley including
IEEE1159 and CBEMA curve.  Our field work demonstrated
that if an automatic transfer does not take place at
one quarter of a cycle in a 60 cycle per second AC
power supply, then the sensitive logic controllers of
any network equipment, PLCs, etc will detect the
automatic transfer as a possible zero voltage
condition.  The weblink provided below did not specify
the automatic transfer switch cycle time (see pages 18
to pages 23).  A true UPS with continuous power will
actually provide your utility power source through a
battery system  including power conditioning along
with generator backup.  I had the opportunity to work
with the FAA in Fremont, California which has true
UPS it was quite a setup.

So you may want to ask at what level you of continuity
you need for your wireless network.

I know of a few subject matter experts in the industry
should you need a consultant.

Felix
Energy and Wireless practioneer
Silicon Valley Area



Re: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

2007-07-01 Thread Tom DeReggi
I'd also add, I'm not certain everyone wants the antenna beamwidth 
requirements waived on these protected bands.


I HIGHLY support NOT lowering the antenna size requirement for 11Ghz, as 
anything smaller than its at today, just compromises long haul backhaul 
applications, in which WISPs do not have many option for long haul. At 8-10 
miles, a couple extra Degrees of beamwidth is capable of interfering with a 
much wide length of area in the city effected.  Although, I'd like to see 
6Ghz lowered to 4 ft dishes.  There isn't a landlord in their right mind 
that would allow a 6 ft antenna installed on their roof.

Or maybe a nicely designed 3 ft model, possibly acceptable.

Not that I'm not for concurrent coordination.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice


But what about the 36 / 38 dBi antenna rule for 4  6 GHz?  The SIA is
all over Fibertower's 2' request in 11 GHz...imagine 4 GHz, which could
knock out a lot of C-band downlinks (now, not being a satellite expert,
I'm not sure of the current usage of this channel, but being that the
SIA has tons of , I'm sure they'll raise up a storm)

That said, I think you need to get the antenna beamwidth requirements
waives / relaxed first...even if concurrent coordination passes, I don't
think anyone will want to be installing 6' dishes on people's houses...

-Charles


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules.

The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.

Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference.

It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.

The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

1. FCC links:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA 

Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Mike Hammett
Unclean power will cause it to switch back and forth to\from the battery. 
As said, this is an adjustable setting on the UPS.


What Felix is talking about is the switch from line to battery is detected 
as zero voltage by the powered equipment.  There is no doubt that this 
exists and is an issue that more sensitive electronics have problems with. 
With constant switching, the powered equipment may fail.  If your supply is 
not clean, the UPS will not fix it.  I am unsure if clean power is produced 
when on battery.  A line conditioner's job is to clean up the power.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator



automatic transfer does not take place at
one quarter of a cycle in a 60 cycle per second AC
power supply, then the sensitive logic controllers of
any network equipment, PLCs, etc will detect the
automatic transfer as a possible zero voltage
condition.


So What? Does that matter, as it is a one time event when the initial 
transfer occurs?
So the 750VA UPS, temporarilly switches to the UPS battery standby power, 
keeping Radios up, until the Generator power stablizes as on, then UPS 
switches back to line power from the generator.  IF the generator delivers 
unclean unstable power so what, that is the purpose of the small APC UPS 
to keep clean power going to the radio devices. So what if the UPS 
regularly switches back and forth from battery to Line voltage, as long as 
the switch is quick within required tolerances, and that it is not to 
frequent to drain the UPS battery.


From my experience, when the UPS did not do its job, it was because the 
UPS
had a bad battery that could not handle the load, or a low grade UPS that 
did not have a fast enough transfer time itself, not a flaw in the 
generator's or its autoswitch.


What I had understood that George had said was not the the UPS switched 
back and forth between line and battery, but he said the UPS itself kept 
switching OFF and ON, as if the UPS was then malfunctioning.


What I was wondering was what type of power output was the problematic 
generator putting out? Pure Sinewave or  Pulse Modulated.  Many low cost 
devices put out PulseModulated, which is easier to regulate, to put out 
regulated power.  However, the Squared edge nature of the wave can be 
interpreted by a UPS further downstream as Bad Power, and possibly even 
damage the downstream UPS.  Which is a reason one is never supposed to 
install a ppure sinewave UPS downstream of a Pulsemodulated UPS.


We had designed some battery backup systems usign Tripplite's Power 
Inverters (pulse modulated output), which worked great, but we could not 
use APC Online UPS (puresinewave) UPSes in the racks.  To add better surve 
protection we put the protection directly in the Panel box with AC surge 
protection.  To check status of power outage, we install a cheap Linksys 
router, plugged directly into the AC outlet prior to the backup power 
systems, and then when this device stops responding, we know that there is 
not power beign sent to it. (yes there is an issue where the Linksys could 
lock up, and then us not know if it is the Linksys locked up or no power). 
One thing we were considering was to plug it inline with the Generators AC 
output feed, so teh Linksys bydefault is always off, and then when 
generator power kicks in the Linksys powers up, and if we can get to it, 
we know we are runnign on backup power.


So the point I'm making is, many generators, just put out raw voltage 
without regulation, purposely, so a UPS can be used after it to protect 
against drops and surges, and so Rack based UPSes do not need to be 
removed. The acception to this is if it has high end voltage regulation 
that puts out Pure Sinewave power.


Its actually relevent that we are specifically talkign about the APC 750VA 
rackmount UPS. I'm assuming you are talking about the Pure sine wave 
Online version.
That model is a sweat spot model because it is inexpensive, has SNMP model 
support, and it allows external batteries, and uses the slighly larger 
battery type, which enables longer run-time. Its worth finding a generator 
compatible with it. I was surprised to hear you were having the problem 
you represent.


Thats my take on it.  But will be interesting what you guys find out on 
what ends up working best.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Felix A. Lopez [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator



George/Mike:  I worked for 6 years in deep UPS and
power quality at PGE in Silicon Valley including
IEEE1159 and CBEMA curve.  Our field work demonstrated
that if an automatic transfer does not take place 

Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Tom DeReggi

Mike,

Thanks for the clarification...And the information provided is All good and 
helpful.  But this is where I'm confused



With constant switching


What makes characteristics of Constent switching.
It should only switch ONCE or TWICE unnecessarilly (which is not 
Constent), when the backup generator first kicks in.

Not sure why thats considered a big problem.
Unless one is thinking ahead, that the UPS Batteries may not be good enough, 
at the time a Power failure occurs and Generator activity is required.


Unless suggesting that running on the generator, will cause constant voltage 
drops, causing repeat UPS false detects.



If your supply is not clean, the UPS will not fix it.


Most UPSs made by APC above 500VA, both low cost Pulse Modulation models and 
Smart Online (pure Sinewave) models have Voltage Regulation built-in, and 
minor surge protection (350 joules or so) for the purpose to clean up the 
power.  With the exception of the really cheapo Desktop models shaped like 
thick surge protector trips.


I recognize that the switch setting on the APC UPS, is what allows one to 
set the Voltage Variation Range to be less sensitive to the Voltage drops 
and such, possibly solving the problem using them with generators.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator


Unclean power will cause it to switch back and forth to\from the battery. 
As said, this is an adjustable setting on the UPS.


What Felix is talking about is the switch from line to battery is detected 
as zero voltage by the powered equipment.  There is no doubt that this 
exists and is an issue that more sensitive electronics have problems with. 
With constant switching, the powered equipment may fail.  If your supply 
is not clean, the UPS will not fix it.  I am unsure if clean power is 
produced when on battery.  A line conditioner's job is to clean up the 
power.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator



automatic transfer does not take place at
one quarter of a cycle in a 60 cycle per second AC
power supply, then the sensitive logic controllers of
any network equipment, PLCs, etc will detect the
automatic transfer as a possible zero voltage
condition.


So What? Does that matter, as it is a one time event when the initial 
transfer occurs?
So the 750VA UPS, temporarilly switches to the UPS battery standby power, 
keeping Radios up, until the Generator power stablizes as on, then UPS 
switches back to line power from the generator.  IF the generator 
delivers unclean unstable power so what, that is the purpose of the small 
APC UPS to keep clean power going to the radio devices. So what if the 
UPS regularly switches back and forth from battery to Line voltage, as 
long as the switch is quick within required tolerances, and that it is 
not to frequent to drain the UPS battery.


From my experience, when the UPS did not do its job, it was because the 
UPS
had a bad battery that could not handle the load, or a low grade UPS that 
did not have a fast enough transfer time itself, not a flaw in the 
generator's or its autoswitch.


What I had understood that George had said was not the the UPS switched 
back and forth between line and battery, but he said the UPS itself kept 
switching OFF and ON, as if the UPS was then malfunctioning.


What I was wondering was what type of power output was the problematic 
generator putting out? Pure Sinewave or  Pulse Modulated.  Many low cost 
devices put out PulseModulated, which is easier to regulate, to put out 
regulated power.  However, the Squared edge nature of the wave can be 
interpreted by a UPS further downstream as Bad Power, and possibly even 
damage the downstream UPS.  Which is a reason one is never supposed to 
install a ppure sinewave UPS downstream of a Pulsemodulated UPS.


We had designed some battery backup systems usign Tripplite's Power 
Inverters (pulse modulated output), which worked great, but we could not 
use APC Online UPS (puresinewave) UPSes in the racks.  To add better 
surve protection we put the protection directly in the Panel box with AC 
surge protection.  To check status of power outage, we install a cheap 
Linksys router, plugged directly into the AC outlet prior to the backup 
power systems, and then when this device stops responding, we know that 
there is not power beign sent to it. (yes there is an issue where the 
Linksys could lock up, and then us not know if it is the Linksys locked 
up or no power). One thing we were considering was to plug it inline with 
the Generators AC output feed, so teh Linksys bydefault 

Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Tom DeReggi

George,

We investigated these units about 4 years ago, and they were our first pick 
for converting to Propaine backup.
However, at the time we decided against it for cost reasons. We did not need 
16Kwatt and we were not aware of a 7Kwatt model at that time.
The $3500 for the 16K base unit is not the only cost. The autotranser switch 
added about $500, and then the Propain Tank is also an additional cost, but 
more importantly, the second we used Propaine in a cmmercial building, we 
needed a licensed Propain installer to do the work, to meet landlords 
requirements, which added another grand or two.


We instead installed Triplite 3500 watt power inverters $500 + 8 high end 
batteries (CD150AH batteries @ $350 each, but have a 10year + lifespan).


The arguement was that generators can be finicky, sometimes not starting on 
demand, if not routinely tested and started, and with the battery inverter 
solution we also were bypassing a high UPS cost, which is high for 3500watt 
rated units. So we solved our problem for 3 grand, instead of 6 grand after 
all considered, said, and done.


Now with that said. Seeing a 7Kwatt unit for only $2000, that changes 
everything! It would definately be more cost effective doing the generator 
instead of batteries.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 12:27 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Low cost generator



http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=538

I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd share 
it with the list.


--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.9.6/865 - Release Date: 6/24/2007 8:33 AM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] TrangoLINK Giga vs Dragonwave

2007-07-01 Thread Charles Wu
Hi John,

Thanks for taking the time to respond...as usually, listserv emails just
get typed out quickly late at night, and often are full of all sorts of
mistakes...This time around, I at least took the time to review what I
type once =)

That said, it would be great if you'd be willing to provide some
technical information about the TrangoLINK Giga, as all we have right
now is a lot of guesses

6.  TrangoLINK-Giga uses 256 QAM modulation to get 311+ Mbps FD (not
240 Mbps as Charles claims) using an 80 MHz channel.  

Using a 55 MHz channel...Horizon can achieve ~400 Mbps of FD
capacity...what's interesting here is that although it is technically
legal to license an 80 MHz channel under FCC 18 GHz rules, both
Dragonwave  Ceragon label their 56 MHz products under ETSI; if memory
serves me correctly, there were issues and reasons why most
manufacturers with experience in Part 101 don't recommend licensing 80
MHz channels, but I can't for the life of me recall, so I'm not going to
push it (now 23 GHz is another matter)

But back to apples to apples...

TrangoLINK-Giga 256QAM in 56 MHz Channel = ~300 (as high as 311+) Mbps
FD Throughput
Dragonwave Horizon 256 QAM in a 56 MHz Channel = ~400 (as high as 450+)
Mbps FD Throughput

Now, the next question would to ask regarding throughput would be
payload and architecture related

Horizon is a native Ethernet radio and has a built-in GigE port...line
rate, depending on ethernet frame size (e.g., 64 byte), I have seen
throughput tests as high as ~450 Mbps FD on the 56 MHz channel variant
(avg throughput comes out to about 400 Mbps FD)

I have a few questions about the TrangoLINK-Giga

1. Is it a native Ethernet radio? Or is it Ethernet over SONET...most
OEM manufacturers have SONET-based platforms (e.g., OC-3 / OC-6 /
etc); I've seen such systems suffer due to the overhead of Ethernet to
SONET packet translation issues?

2. Do you have any packet per second / packet size / throughput tests of
the TrangoLINK-Giga in just a lab environment?

3. How do you support TDM ports using adaptive modulation?

Using 128QAM TrangoLINK-Giga achieves 273 Mbps with a receive
sensitivity of -64.
(comparable to Charles' claim about Horizon) Now, to REALLY compare
apples to apples, take Horizon's (per Dragonwave's datasheet) 40 Mhz
channel 256 QAM 
(297 Mbps with RX sens of -60.5) and compare it to Trango 40 MHz
channel 256 QAM (240 Mbps with RX sens of -63.2).  It is not as
different as he implies.  

GigaLINK 128QAM: Rx Sens = -64 dBm
GigaLINK 256QAM: Rx Sens = -63.2 dBm

Something doesn't seem right about this number, a sampling of 6 other
radio manufacturers making similar products average 5-8 dB in Receive
Sensitivity loss when moving from 128QAM to 256QAM...Are you stating
that Trango only loses 0.8 dB of Rx sensitivty when moving from 128 to
256QAM?

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread JohnnyO

Ok George - don't call me :)

JohnnyO
337-764-5953


- Original Message - 
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator


If it was just for radios, I'd be just using ups with extra batteries, but 
it's actually for a small data room with a half a dozen or more servers 
and some pc routers etc as well as couple of radios.


Right now we are just using ups for each server, but they don't last long, 
they just help if the power blinks or is out for a short time.


But if the power is out for a few hours, I'd like to keep operating.


Tom DeReggi wrote:

George,

We investigated these units about 4 years ago, and they were our first 
pick for converting to Propaine backup.
However, at the time we decided against it for cost reasons. We did not 
need 16Kwatt and we were not aware of a 7Kwatt model at that time.
The $3500 for the 16K base unit is not the only cost. The autotranser 
switch added about $500, and then the Propain Tank is also an additional 
cost, but more importantly, the second we used Propaine in a cmmercial 
building, we needed a licensed Propain installer to do the work, to meet 
landlords requirements, which added another grand or two.


We instead installed Triplite 3500 watt power inverters $500 + 8 high end 
batteries (CD150AH batteries @ $350 each, but have a 10year + lifespan).


The arguement was that generators can be finicky, sometimes not starting 
on demand, if not routinely tested and started, and with the battery 
inverter solution we also were bypassing a high UPS cost, which is high 
for 3500watt rated units. So we solved our problem for 3 grand, instead 
of 6 grand after all considered, said, and done.


Now with that said. Seeing a 7Kwatt unit for only $2000, that changes 
everything! It would definately be more cost effective doing the 
generator instead of batteries.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 12:27 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Low cost generator



http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=538

I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd 
share it with the list.


--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.9.6/865 - Release Date: 6/24/2007 8:33 AM







--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread dave
 I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.

[ snipped link ]

That's either the very same generator I have, or very close to it.

(Actually, it's just very close. Ours can run on either propane or
natural gas, and it's presently wired up for the latter.)

Sadly, in the five months since we moved to our new office, with that
fancy new generator, we haven't had a single power outage. Not so much as
a flicker. It pops on once a week for its exercise cycle, and I've done
the flip the big switch and make sure the generator fires up test a
couple times, so I assume it works.)

As with any big purchase, shop around. Ours was $500 cheaper than the
price on that Web site; we just had Lowe's special-order it for us.

David Smith
MVN.net

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Brad Belton
So, you bought this LP  Natural Gas generator for $1460 delivered,
including tax and transfer switch?

http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id
=370

That is an amazing deal!  Maybe Lowe's made a mistake on the price?


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 10:56 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

 I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.

[ snipped link ]

That's either the very same generator I have, or very close to it.

(Actually, it's just very close. Ours can run on either propane or
natural gas, and it's presently wired up for the latter.)

Sadly, in the five months since we moved to our new office, with that
fancy new generator, we haven't had a single power outage. Not so much as
a flicker. It pops on once a week for its exercise cycle, and I've done
the flip the big switch and make sure the generator fires up test a
couple times, so I assume it works.)

As with any big purchase, shop around. Ours was $500 cheaper than the
price on that Web site; we just had Lowe's special-order it for us.

David Smith
MVN.net

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

2007-07-01 Thread Blake Bowers

Shame, you have some nice gensets


- Original Message - 
From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator



Ok George - don't call me :)

JohnnyO
337-764-5953


- Original Message - 
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator


If it was just for radios, I'd be just using ups with extra batteries, 
but it's actually for a small data room with a half a dozen or more 
servers and some pc routers etc as well as couple of radios.


Right now we are just using ups for each server, but they don't last 
long, they just help if the power blinks or is out for a short time.


But if the power is out for a few hours, I'd like to keep operating.


Tom DeReggi wrote:

George,

We investigated these units about 4 years ago, and they were our first 
pick for converting to Propaine backup.
However, at the time we decided against it for cost reasons. We did not 
need 16Kwatt and we were not aware of a 7Kwatt model at that time.
The $3500 for the 16K base unit is not the only cost. The autotranser 
switch added about $500, and then the Propain Tank is also an additional 
cost, but more importantly, the second we used Propaine in a cmmercial 
building, we needed a licensed Propain installer to do the work, to meet 
landlords requirements, which added another grand or two.


We instead installed Triplite 3500 watt power inverters $500 + 8 high 
end batteries (CD150AH batteries @ $350 each, but have a 10year + 
lifespan).


The arguement was that generators can be finicky, sometimes not starting 
on demand, if not routinely tested and started, and with the battery 
inverter solution we also were bypassing a high UPS cost, which is high 
for 3500watt rated units. So we solved our problem for 3 grand, instead 
of 6 grand after all considered, said, and done.


Now with that said. Seeing a 7Kwatt unit for only $2000, that 
changes everything! It would definately be more cost effective doing the 
generator instead of batteries.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: George Rogato 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 12:27 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Low cost generator



http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=538

I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd 
share it with the list.


--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.9.6/865 - Release Date: 6/24/2007 8:33 AM







--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[WISPA] Fw: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT

2007-07-01 Thread Marlon K. Schafer

fyi
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Richard J. Fiero II W5TFW [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT



I havent seen the legs of the tower to be honest, since I got out of the
hospital, my lawyer has it he sent it to a metal expert who told him that
the legs were rusted on the inside and therefore collapsed,
I have put up and taken down many towers over the yrs,
this one ( rohn 25 )  just buckled, and down she came, I dont remember
falling, just waking up sucking air,
the tower on top of me,
and the pain, Let me tell you the pain,..  I have been Combat wounded, But
the pain I felt from a broken body, That hurt !
  for 25 days I was hospitalized, 14 days in intensive care, I had a blood
clot in my left lung, I am lucky to be alive,

  Joey
- Original Message - 
From: kd4e [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Dan Cisson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Richard Joey Fiero II W5TFW [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT



Dan  Joey,

   We do not have enough information yet.

   Joey is on the 6M list and many of the guys prayed
and encouraged him through the early days following his
accident.

   Joey didn't post the insurance report, perhaps the
missing variables are in there.

   I am guessing that the tower may have suffered some
sort of internal rusting or some other damage prior to
his work on it.

   The stress of the work at 100 feet and then removing
the top sections may have stressed those weaknesses until
they finally gave.

   There may also have been a change in weather, e.g.
wind gusts, temperature, etc.

   Metal fatigue sometimes results in failures at odd
moments and I am sure Joey is happy that tower failed
when he was at 40 feet vs 100!


I found a couple of things you said that did not add up correctly,
obviously
it happened,, but seems it should not have. You said you had the tower
down
to the 40 ft. level...By the way, is the tower Rohn 25??
When the tower was fully up with the antennas and all the guy cables,
that
tower was at maximum load. Then you added your body weight, your gear to
take the tower down, and all the movement that comes with getting a
tri-bander down from 100 ft. That is theoretically when the tower shoud
have
collapsed. The only way I could see any different, is the bottom set of
wires created some pivot at the failure point. But if that tower was up
with
proper guy cables, with a minimum of 3/16 EHS, 3990 lb break strength,
the
guy should have never broke. I am sure sorry of your accident, I hope
what I
am describing, and what happened to you can foil another tower
tragedy...I
sure feel it should not have happenedBest Wishes,, Good Luck to 
you,,

Dan Cisson N4GNR




--

Thanks!  73, doc, KD4E
Personal: http://bibleseven.com/kd4e.html
Ham QTH: http://bibleseven.com/steel/cjb-steelhouse-index.html
___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk




___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[WISPA] Fw: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT

2007-07-01 Thread Marlon K. Schafer

fyi
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: jeremy-ca [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Blake M [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bill 
Winkis [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT



First of all, ANY tower that is installed by burying a section should be
suspect UNLESS you are absolutely sure that the legs have plenty of
drainage.

Drilling a small hole in the legs a few inches above ground can give you 
an

idea if there is standing water. If the water is clear then it is probably
safe; if rusty then walk away.

If its a dry hole at that level then snake some cotton string down the 
hole.

If it comes back wet and rusty then Id also suggest not climbing.

New tower construction should always use a base plate and pier pin if the
only support is guy wires. If house bracketed then a minimum of 2 brackets
is required. The base should be a standard base plate but with one hole at
each corner and secured to the concrete with 3/4  J bolts.

An existing tower that was installed without drainage MAY have its life
extended by drilling those small holes I mentioned. Then with ~ 3/16 
tubing
inserted down to the bottom regularly pump out any water. There are ways 
to

derust the legs and seal against further rust but its an iffy proposition
when you cant tell the extent of the damage.

Carl
KM1H




- Original Message - 
From: Bill Winkis [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Blake M [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT



This information is all well and good ... it rings with a bell of
caution ... BUT , how do you know .. 
In this case the climber felt all was well until the tower came down
with him on it .. but now how in the world do you test and determine
all is OK before you climb.?? Or what steps do you use to protect
your self ...
Certainly the professional tower people who partake in this forum
will have a degree of in site for us .. but it needs to be
discussed.!!! We've got guys here with 5-10-20 plus years old towers
What is the answer??

-Bill

At 10:05 PM 6/26/2007, Blake M wrote:


If I had a nickel for every time somebody has told me this line!!

In my experience, what this really means is:

This is a hack-job install, but I really need to make you believe it's 
OK
or else you're going to bolt on me and I'm going to have to fork out 
major

coin for a crane.

Simple psych 101 If you have a pretty girlfriend, you wouldn't have 
to

walk around telling people how pretty she is, now, would you?  ;-)

Be safe

73,
Blake N4GI



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard J. Fiero 
II

W5TFW

 The owner told me that he and his Brother Both men about 230 pounds 
each

had been on the tower recently
at the same time and that it was strong as an ox.


___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk


___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk



___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[WISPA] Fw: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT

2007-07-01 Thread Marlon K. Schafer

fyi
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Roger (K8RI) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Bill Winkis [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Blake M [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT




I can only tell you what I've done in the past.
I'm not a professional, but I've been climbing for many years and had to 
do

so at work as well.



This information is all well and good ... it rings with a bell of
caution ... BUT , how do you know .. 


First you do a thourough visual inspection of the tower, tower bolts, 
guys,

and guy anchors looking for any damage, irregularities (is it straight,
bent, twisted, or dented. How about cross braces no longer attached.), and
*signs* of rust. Rusty bolts, or signs of rust around the bolt holes. I'd
even go so far as to remove at least one bolt from the bottom of each 
tower

leg. Is the bolt rusty or is the bolt good but has signs of rust being
deposited on it, particularly as a stain. (pull the top bolt of the pair 
and

use a light to inspect the lower bolt in place if possible)

Guy wires may or may not rust from the inside. I've taken down towers 
where

the guy wires were completly coated with rust, but proved to be plenty
strong.  Be wary of small guy wires. Wire rope showing rust is likely to 
be
bad or at least seriously compromised and particularly the smaller 
diameter

stuff. It can be tensioned to near it's working strength as a test using a
Loos gage. If it passes back off to the normal 10% of the rated strength.

I *always* use temporary guys on any older tower. Even use extra temporary
guys if there is any doubt.

I shold note that the tensioning of the guy wires doesn't necessiarily 
prove

the tower is good. It's only a test of the guys and the atach points.
Remember a tower can have some serious damage and still have sufficient
strength in the vertical plane while having very little in the horizontal 
at

spots.

Internal rust may be completely invisible from the outside, hence the 
reason

for checking the bolts for signs of rust. It may be stains which are a
warning sign, but not necessiarily and indication the tower is ready to
fail. OTOH if there is loose, granular rust laying on the bolts or visible
at  the base of the tower it's time to call a crane in. I'd definately not
climb in that case.

At one time I had an electronic thickness gage that worked on steel and
aluminum. It only needed to be calibrated for the material to be tested. 
We
used it on pressure vessels. How well that would have worked on tower 
legs,

I don't know.

BUT even after a thourough inspection there is still a fair amount of
intuition involved because as I said above, some serious damage may be
completely invisible and with no outward signs elsewhere.   I've put up 
and
taken down a lot of towers, but when it comes to older towers I become 
very

picky. As I said earlier, I also use temporary guys so even if a guy broke
or a secion buckled it'd not fall far unless it broke off completely.


In this case the climber felt all was well until the tower came down
with him on it .. but now how in the world do you test and determine
all is OK before you climb.?? Or what steps do you use to protect
your self ...
Certainly the professional tower people who partake in this forum
will have a degree of in site for us .. but it needs to be
discussed.!!! We've got guys here with 5-10-20 plus years old towers


http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/tower9.htm  The tower shown is well
over 30 years old and had been up at 3 different locations. It showed no
signs of rust and was climbed regularly. However it was reaching the point
where there were many small irregularities in it. IE it was no longer
straight. Not bad, but not straight either and that was when I decided it
was time to replace it.  After it was taken down there were no signs of 
rust

damage inside.


What is the answer??


As a personal opinion, climbing is risky even with the proper equipment.
Climbing old towers can be down right dangerous and I'd not recomend it 
for

a casual climber unless they can get some one in the know to do a good
apraisal of the tower. Even then there are no gurantees.

Roger (K8RI)

___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[WISPA] Fw: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT

2007-07-01 Thread Marlon K. Schafer

fyi  for you tower owners or soon to be tower owners.
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Pete Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT



There is an excellent presentation by W3LPL from the 2006 Dayton antenna
forum at (http://www.kkn.net/dayton2006/w3lpl_dayton_2006.pdf), titled
Design, Construction and Maintenance
of Antennas and Towers for Storm Survival and Long Term Reliability -
Practical Checklists of Best Practices

It would be a conservative solution, but if people only climbed towers 
that

had been designed and maintained according to Frank's checklists, there'd
probably be a few more still living.

73, Pete N4ZR




At 10:18 AM 6/27/2007, David Jordan wrote:

What would be really good for the list members is a set of questions one
should ask before beginning work on a tower that they do not own or do not
have knowledge of the structural health.

In the instance provided the writer was told the tower is in good shape, 
by
the owner.  That is a pretty subjective statement.  What is good shape to 
an
inexperienced ham radio operator who has no experience with towers might 
be
a red flag for a professional tower installer. Some obvious questions 
that

come to my mind are:

- How long has the tower been installed?
- Have the guy wires been replaced regularly?
- Has the tower been inspected regularly?
- Has the tower been hit by lightning?
- Who did the installation?
- Has the tension on the guy lines been measured?

I'm sure there are better questions to ask but having a check-list for our
list members might prevent future accidents. Maybe, such a list, already
exist on a web site but I'm not aware of such a list and I'd like to have
access to such a list for myself and my friends in the hobby.  I'd post 
such

a list on our club web page.

Thanks,
Dave
Wa3gin

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Lux
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 9:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT

At 04:39 AM 6/27/2007, Bill Winkis wrote:
This information is all well and good ... it rings with a bell of
caution ... BUT , how do you know .. 


___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk


___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/