(HP-67/97) CATV System design & operation
|
11-07-2020, 12:30 PM
Post: #1
|
|||
|
|||
(HP-67/97) CATV System design & operation
An extract from Fve Programmable Calculator Programs for CATV System Design and Operation, CATJ (v5 n2), Calculated to Save Time and Money, pgs. 13-18
" Programs for All Seasons In the August 1977 issue of CATJ a cabtl operator explained how he has programmed an SR-56 calculator to do elementary system layout for placement of tap-off devices on feeder lines … has been utilizing Hewlett Packard programmable calculators for routine and special CATV system layouts for quite some time. The programs to follow cover four separate everyday CATV applications utilizing either the HP97 or HP67 calculators, or the HP25/HP25C models. Included are programs for: 1) Tap selection (built around the Sylvania 2 and 4 way multi-taps), using the HP97 or HP67; 2) Tap selection( built around the Sylvania 4 way multi-taps), using the HP25/HP25C; 3) Trunk levels with the HP25/HP25C: 4) AC powering with the HP25/HP25C and, 5) System distortion calculations with the HP25, or HP67 or HP97. The assumption with all of these programs is simply this. That you understand calculator programming fundamentals, and that given the proper instructions you will be able to implement the programs listed. " BEST! SlideRule |
|||
11-07-2020, 01:33 PM
Post: #2
|
|||
|
|||
RE: (HP-67/97) CATV System design & operation
SlideRule,
FYI - The attachment here is the same one as in the other (HP25) article. But thanks, interesting to see this old magazine with the interesting Ads, etc. --Bob Prosperi |
|||
11-07-2020, 01:48 PM
Post: #3
|
|||
|
|||
RE: (HP-67/97) CATV System design & operation
Hi Bob; yes, it is the same. I post multi-reference articles in their respective sub-forums for those members less inclined to explore articles based solely on the SUBJECT description. I hope this is a value-added procedure for this forum.
BEST! SlideRule |
|||
11-07-2020, 06:55 PM
Post: #4
|
|||
|
|||
RE: (HP-67/97) CATV System design & operation
A single article makes sense and is indeed better all around. I still had the article open and could see the issue was from Feb '78, and this post referenced the Aug '77 issue, so I thought it was an error. My error, saying it was your error...
--Bob Prosperi |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)