| On the Occupied Bandwidth of 
            CW Emissions © 2003, Douglas T. Smith Editorial 
            Services
 
 Where the ARRL Handbook and some manufacturers 
            went wrong.
 
 
 Introduction
 
 Much 
            ado has been made lately about the occupied bandwidth of SSB phone 
            emissions. 3 kHz or so of bandwidth, accompanied by typical levels 
            of IMD products, has been the acceptable norm for a long time now. 
            Much more than that on a crowded band tends to raise objections. 
            What is the acceptable norm for CW emissions?
 
 Part 97 
            of the FCC rules states that emissions "… shall not occupy more 
            bandwidth than necessary for the information rate and emission type 
            being transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice." (47 
            CFR 97.307a) A reasonable definition of good amateur practice 
            includes the avoidance of waveforms that produce objectionable 
            levels of interference to other users. Why then do we put up with 
            commercial transmitters that consistently demonstrate such 
            waveforms?
 
 I postulate that the production of 
            offensive CW signals is caused by one of two things, or both: 1) 
            inconsiderate operators, or 2) ignorance on the part of equipment 
            designers about the optimal CW waveform. The first thing must be 
            left to our intrepid federal law-enforcement officials; I attempt to 
            address the second in what follows.
 
 One Wrong 
            Way
 
 For many years, the ARRL Handbook has 
            published a figure in Chapter 12 with the caption, "Optimal CW 
            waveform." In recent editions, it is Fig 12.20, whose shape is 
            reproduced here as Fig 1. Even a cursory analysis reveals it to be 
            far from optimal.
 
 
   Granted, such an envelope can be produced by 
            a simple R-C network. Rise and fall times may be controlled by the 
            time constant of the network. The trouble is that such an envelope 
            produces significant and unnecessary keying sidebands. It does that 
            because it contains amplitude discontinuities; its amplitude does 
            not change smoothly as it begins rising or falling. It has abrupt 
            changes in its slope at those points.
 Fig 2 is a 
            spectral analysis of the waveform of Fig 1. Spectral occupancy is 
            chiefly determined by the envelope shape and not by the keying 
            speed. To be sure, keying such a waveform at high speed puts more 
            energy into adjacent frequencies than at low speed; but the 
            instantaneous amplitude of the keying sidebands is constant during 
            the rise and fall times, regardless of keying speed.
 
 
  Well, the 
            Ten-Tec Orion does it better!
 
 
 The Right 
            Way
 
 Fig 3 is a depiction of the ideal CW keying 
            envelope. It rises uniformly from zero amplitude to its maximum; it 
            also falls smoothly from there to zero. Envelope shape is 
            sinusoidal; it is called "raised-cosine" keying, which is very close 
            to the shape occupying minimum bandwidth.
 
 
  Fig 4 is a spectral 
            analysis of the waveform of Fig 3. By comparison with Fig 2, note 
            that modulation sidebands have decreased in amplitude by a large 
            factor. Digital signal processing (DSP) readily allows designers to 
            implement such a keying envelope. Admittedly, it is difficult to 
            achieve with traditional analog electronics; but for DSP-based rigs, 
            it is relatively simple. Why then don't we see such waveforms from 
            modern production radios generally?
 
 
  ALC 
            Effects
 
 One reason is that automatic level control 
            or ALC in a transmitter may modify the transmitted envelope. The job 
            of ALC is to reduce drive to the final power amplifier in a 
            transmitter so that it is not overdriven. In other words, it sets 
            the maximum power output.
 
 It follows that more drive 
            than necessary to reach that maximum output power is initially 
            applied. ALC reduces drive rapidly when the maximum is reached. That 
            effectively shortens the rise time of CW elements because the attack 
            time of ALC is fast. ALC decay time is usually slow, so the fall 
            time is not usually affected by ALC. The result is an envelope 
            resembling Fig 5 that has a sharp change of slope at the power set 
            point.
 
 
  Transmit gain control 
            or TGC is an algorithm that largely avoids envelope distortion. It 
            does that by reducing drive over time so that ALC does not have to 
            work so hard. Drive is adjusted slowly-- more slowly than in ALC-- 
            such that excess drive does not exceed a dB or so. Sharp slope 
            changes caused by ALC are thus mitigated. More information about TGC 
            can be found at www.doug-smith.net/digitalagc.htm.
 
 
 Conclusion
 
 Certain 
            production rigs could produce better CW envelopes than they do. If 
            we are serious about 47 CFR 307a, let us apply it consistently 
            across the variety of different modes, including CW. Our 
            publications ought to indicate what is best without ambiguity. 
            Perhaps then equipment designers would wake up and smell the 
            coffee-- Doug Smith, 
  KF6DX.
 |