Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Tuning Capacitor Rating Part Two

Expand Messages
  • patrick_mcstorm
    Hello Everyone Referring to my message: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Electronics_101/conversations/topics/87771
    Message 1 of 20 , Jul 13, 2014

      Hello Everyone


      Referring to my message:

      https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Electronics_101/conversations/topics/87771


      Something went the opposite way than I expected. Holding L at the same place (0.44874 MicroHenrys in my 11-6 meter I.C. receiver circuit), I found that a tuning cap of a HIGHER pF rating gave me a LOWER frequency- I expected the opposite to be true.


      Thinking of this, I remembered that the 365pF tuning cap took us down to the BCB in kiloHertz range (at about 540 kilohertz to 1700 kilohertz), but with a different coil). 


      I used: http://www.1728.org/resfreq.htm


      And got the following results (if you can stand the headache of reading my notes):


      Given INPUT MegaHertz (I used highest frequency for this project -i.e. 56 MegaHertz)

      INPUT Picofarad 18


      Find Inductance:

      4.4874e-7 Henrys, or 4.4874e-4 MilliHenrys, or 0.44874 MicroHenrys.


      This is where the 0.44874 MicroHenrys came from.


      Okay. I set about finding the frequency for a higher 36 pF rating as the tuning cap:


      The answer is (I THINK) Frequency = 39.598 MegaHertz. RATS!


      This is a LOWER frequency than the 18pF tuning cap!


      I tried again with a LOWER rated (LESS than 18pF) tuning cap and got:


      Find frequency with:

      INPUT Picofarad 10pF

      Inductance 0.44874


      Frequency= 75.132 MegaHertz!


      The lower tuning cap value gave me a HIGHER frequency.


      I was sure that a higher rated tuning cap would give me a higher frequency.


      Now my head hurts A LOT. I'm going to let it rest. 


      Ideas? Am I THAT lost?


      Thanks


      Patrick


      p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.

    • patrick_mcstorm
      Hello Two additional points: 1). After my last message on this thread, I looked up the number of turns on the coil. It s only 13 turns of #20 enameled wire.
      Message 2 of 20 , Jul 14, 2014

        Hello


        Two additional points:


        1). After my last message on this thread, I looked up the number of turns on the coil. It's only 13 turns of #20 enameled wire. That's a fairly small number of turns. It occurred to me that (maybe) I could use different values completely for the coil and tuning cap and end up with the same thing frequency wise*. In other words, I could come up with my own combination of the coil and tuning cap. If this is true, it would be great for working out of a junk box when it comes to parts. I would be inclined to leave the coil tapped at 2 1/2 turns from the ground end...at least for starters.


        2). I suspect I might need to change a diode, too, if one is used, but I'm uncertain about this part.


        Am I right as far as number 1 goes??


        Patrick


        *See parts list...it's the image at the bottom of the Web page.

        URL:
        https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Electronics_101/files/Temp/11_6%20meter%20IC%20Receiver%20/


        p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.


      • ahumanbeing2000
        Freq = 1 / 2 / PI / SQRT( L * C ) Freq = 1 / 2 / 3.14 / SQRT ( 4.4874e-7 * 18e-12 ) = 56e+06 From the above formula, if C is doubled (to 36 pF), the frequency
        Message 3 of 20 , Jul 14, 2014

          Freq = 1 / 2 / PI / SQRT( L * C )

          Freq = 1 / 2 / 3.14 / SQRT ( 4.4874e-7 * 18e-12 ) = 56e+06

          From the above formula, if C is doubled (to 36 pF), the frequency decreases to 56/SQRT(2) = 39.598 39.598 MHz.

          If C is halved (to 9 pF), the frequency increases to 56 * SQRT(2) = 79.2 MHz.

        • patrick_mcstorm
          Kerim Thanks for the workable units. 4.4874e-7 What does the E stand for? Does SQRT stand for square root ? Thanks! Patrick p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS
          Message 4 of 20 , Jul 14, 2014
            Kerim

            Thanks for the workable units.

            "4.4874e-7"

            What does the "E" stand for?

            Does "SQRT" stand for "square root"?

            Thanks!

            Patrick


            p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.



          • ahumanbeing2000
            Yes, SQRT stand for square root . 4.4874e-7 = 4.4874E-7 . Now what about “e” or “E”? “3,000,000” could be shortened to “3e6”. Here,
            Message 5 of 20 , Jul 14, 2014

              Yes, "SQRT" stand for "square root".

               

              "4.4874e-7" = "4.4874E-7".

              Now what about “e” or “E”?

               

              “3,000,000” could be shortened to “3e6”.

              Here, “e6” means (x 1,000,000), i.e. “1” followed with 6 zeros.

              So R=2.2e3 Ohm is equivalent to 2.2 x 1000 = 2200 Ohm.

               

              Could you guess now the value of 4e0?

              It is 4 x 1.

              "4" is multiplied by "1" only

              because “0” after “e” means there is no zero’s after it.

               

              Now if the number after e (or E) is negative,

              the multiplication becomes division.


              For example, 3e-6 means 3 / 1,000,000.

              Therefore if 3e-6 is a capacitance value,

              it means 3 uF ( 1uF = 1 / 1,000,000 F )


              Similarly 4.7e-9 is 4.7 / 1,000,000,000.

              For capacitors it means 4.7 nF.

               

              Another example:

              4.4874e-7 H = 4.4874 / 10,000,000 H

              But this value could be written as:

              (4.4874 / 10) / 1,000,000 => 0.44874 / 1,000,000 H

              Or

              0.44874 uH ( since 1uH = 1 / 1,000,000 H )
            • rtstofer
              Or, read E as times 10 to the... 1.0E06 means 1 times 10 to the 6th power - a million 1.0E-06 means 1 times 10 to the minus 6th power of one millionth. One
              Message 6 of 20 , Jul 14, 2014

                 

                Or, read E as "times 10 to the..."

                 

                1.0E06 means 1 times 10 to the 6th power - a million

                1.0E-06 means 1 times 10 to the minus 6th power of one millionth.

                 

                One way to deal with negative exponents is to put them in the denominator

                 

                1.0E-06 is identically equal to 1 / (1.0E+06)

                 

                Richard


                 

              • patrick_mcstorm
                Kerim & Richard et al So E indicates exponent and refers to the following numeral and it is a power of ten; the sign + - of the numeral indicates whether
                Message 7 of 20 , Jul 14, 2014
                  Kerim & Richard et al

                  So "E" indicates "exponent" and refers to the following numeral and it is a power of ten; the sign +\- of the numeral indicates whether the power of ten is plus or minus power of ten.

                  And "SQRT" indicates "square root".

                  Got it, thanks!

                  Patrick

                  p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.

                • rtstofer
                  QUOTE So E indicates exponent and refers to the following numeral and it is a power of ten; the sign + - of the numeral indicates whether the power of ten
                  Message 8 of 20 , Jul 14, 2014

                     

                    QUOTE

                     

                    So "E" indicates "exponent" and refers to the following numeral and it is a power of ten; the sign +\- of the numeral indicates whether the power of ten is plus or minus power of ten.

                    And "SQRT" indicates "square root".

                    /QUOTE

                     

                     

                    Yes

                     

                    I keep thinking back to the days where the sliderule was king.  We kept a running "power of ten" in our head while dealing two or three significant digits on the sliderule.

                     

                    Richard

                     


                  • patrick_mcstorm
                    Hello My idea about the Two additional points above must have REALLY missed the boat badly. And I thought I was on a hot trail. I should have known it
                    Message 9 of 20 , Jul 15, 2014

                       Hello


                      My idea about the "Two additional points" above must have REALLY missed the boat badly.


                      And I thought I was on a hot trail. I should have known it couldn't be that easy.


                      Best Regards


                      Patrick


                      p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.


                    • rtstofer
                      Write down the resonant frequency equation: f = 1/(2*PI*Sqrt(L*C)) As L or C increase. the SQRT(L*C) increases (eg, the square root of 5 is greater than the
                      Message 10 of 20 , Jul 16, 2014


                        Write down the resonant frequency equation: f = 1/(2*PI*Sqrt(L*C))

                         

                        As L or C increase. the SQRT(L*C) increases (eg, the square root of 5 is greater than the square root of 4) so, with the denominator getting bigger, the frequency is going down.  The equation says it all.  The problem with writing it out in a Fortran-ish way is that it isn't as obvious how it works as it would be if the equation was written in textbook form with the wide dividing line.  One over big dividing line over the 2*PI*Sqrt(L*C)) bit.

                         

                        Not a good analogy and one I wouldn't hope to defend but here goes:

                         

                        Consider inductance and capacitance as inertia - a resistance to change.  If C or L increases, there is more inertia so the resistance to change goes up.  Frequency is the change in voltage.  Inertia goes up, frequency goes down.

                         

                        Kind of like a pebble versus a boulder.  It's pretty easy to skip a pebble (small capacitance, small inductance) on the water, but a boulder (large capacitance, large inductance)?  Not so much.

                         

                        Another way to consider the alternatives is to create a spreadsheet with a column for resonant frequency, a column for capacitance (in Farads) and another column for inductance (in Henries).  Pay particular attention to the units and the powers of 10.  Now you can experiment with a range of values without all the grunt work.

                         

                        Richard

                         

                      • lt_wright_flg
                        As stated in another post the resonant freq equation is: F = 1/(2 pi sqrt (LC))...1 over 2 pi times sq root of L x C So as you decrease L and/or C the
                        Message 11 of 20 , Jul 19, 2014
                          As stated in another post the resonant freq equation is:

                          F =  1/(2 pi sqrt (LC))...1 over 2 pi times sq root of L x C

                          So as you decrease L and/or C the resonant freq increases.  This works for both parallel and series LC circuits.

                          You can work with the Q, the bandwidth of the values of L and C to make narrower or wider.  For parallel the higher the C the higher the Q or bandwidth.  In series the higher the L the higher the Q.

                          I once made a notch filter for notching out that old interfering sig on cable TV HBO channel, the interfering sig the cable company put in the middle of HBO so if you did not have the filter it tore up the picture.  I made notch filter with large tunable cap and for inductor/L had 3/4 inch wire connected between the cap leads forming a parallel  LC tuned circuit.  Since C large and L small made high Q/narrow bandwidth circuit.  Worked ok, not as good as the cable company trap, but I got HBO for free, hi.

                          73, ron, n9ee/r
                        • patrick_mcstorm
                          Ron I m sure HBO and other such channels STILL haul in money by the truckload! Patrick p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are
                          Message 12 of 20 , Jul 19, 2014
                            Ron

                            I'm sure HBO and other such channels STILL haul in money by the truckload!

                            Patrick


                            p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.

                          • patrick_mcstorm
                            Hello What I m wondering is if I can change the LC specs and retain an unaltered circuit otherwise in the tuning section and amplifier sections and end up
                            Message 13 of 20 , Jul 19, 2014
                              Hello

                              What I'm wondering is if I can change the LC specs and retain an unaltered circuit otherwise in the "tuning" section and amplifier sections and end up with a receiver that works on a different frequency.

                              Best Regards

                              Patrick


                              p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.

                            • epa_iii
                              Patrick, That is exactly how it is done. Variable C and one or more Ls for band switching or vice-verse with a variable L and one or more Cs for band
                              Message 14 of 20 , Jul 20, 2014
                                Patrick, That is exactly how it is done. Variable C and one or more Ls for band switching or vice-verse with a variable L and one or more Cs for band switching.

                                As for how far you can take this from a given point/frequency that you know works, this depends on the rest of the circuit. There will be other elements, capacitance, inductance, resistance that will effect the LC tank circuit. Some circuits can operate over many decades of frequency and others will be more restricted. You can certainly experiment. You will probably find that, at some point, the frequency will not match what you calculate or the response will drop off or the circuit may break into oscillation.

                                Paul A.


                                ---In Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com, <vw_beetle_fix_it@...> wrote :

                                Hello

                                What I'm wondering is if I can change the LC specs and retain an unaltered circuit otherwise in the "tuning" section and amplifier sections and end up with a receiver that works on a different frequency.

                                Best Regards

                                Patrick


                                p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.

                              • patrick_mcstorm
                                A question for Richard Hello Richard Is: resonant frequency equation: f = 1/(2*PI*Sqrt(L*C)) The exact same formula described (in blue) as the Resonant
                                Message 15 of 20 , Jul 21, 2014
                                  A question for Richard

                                  Hello Richard

                                  Is:


                                  "resonant frequency equation: f = 1/(2*PI*Sqrt(L*C))"


                                  The exact same formula described (in blue) as the "Resonant Frequency Calculator" on this Webpage; and using the proper units?

                                  URL:

                                  Resonant Frequency Calculator

                                  http://www.1728.org/resfreq.htm


                                  Please forgive my being so slow to catch on to what you're telling me.


                                  Thanks!!


                                  Patrick


                                  p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.


                                • Andy
                                  Patrick wrote: Is: resonant frequency equation: f = 1/(2*PI*Sqrt(L*C)) The exact same formula described (in blue) as the Resonant Frequency Calculator on
                                  Message 16 of 20 , Jul 21, 2014
                                    Patrick wrote:

                                    "Is:


                                    "resonant frequency equation: f = 1/(2*PI*Sqrt(L*C))"


                                    The exact same formula described (in blue) as the "Resonant Frequency Calculator" on this Webpage; and using the proper units?"


                                    Yes, that is the same exact formula.  The "dots" mean multiplication, and Sqrt(X) means take the square root of X.

                                    The formula works correctly with the units of Henrys, Farads, and Hertz.  Those are the "normal" engineering or scientific units.  Any time someone throws in a multiplier such as Milli or Pico or Mega, you probably have to compensate for it.  Sometimes you get lucky by having the same multipliers in both the numerator and denominator, and then they cancel one another.

                                    Regards,
                                    Andy


                                  • rtstofer
                                    While the resonant frequency equation has been discussed, nothing has been said about Q - the selectivity or bandwidth of the tuned circuit. Kerim showed this
                                    Message 17 of 20 , Jul 22, 2014

                                      While the resonant frequency equation has been discussed, nothing has been said about Q - the selectivity or bandwidth of the tuned circuit.  Kerim showed this with the RLC LTSpice circuit he submitted months ago.  There was a family of curves depicting the varying bandwidth.

                                       

                                      For a series RLC circuit, Q is increased with a larger inductor and smaller capacitor.  For the parallel circuit, it is the opposite:  Q is increased with a larger capacitor and smaller inductor.

                                       

                                      So, just picking arbitrary values of L & C to obtain a particular resonant frequency will not result in a particularly good tuned circuit.

                                       

                                      Note that I left out the R (resistance) factor but it, too, affects the Q of the circuit.  For the series circuit, a higher resistance results in a lower Q, for the parallel circuit, a lower resistance results in a lower Q.

                                       

                                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor

                                       

                                      I suspect there is a reason why certain values of L & C keep showing up in radio circuits.

                                       

                                      Richard

                                       

                                       

                                    • patrick_mcstorm
                                      Hello Special thanks to all who answered this post. I ve been really fuzzy with my symptoms of late and I ve been SLOW to catch on. My original question
                                      Message 18 of 20 , Jul 22, 2014

                                        Hello


                                        Special thanks to all who answered this post. I've been really fuzzy with my symptoms of late and I've been SLOW to catch on. My original question happened on a "good" day.


                                        In my fuzzy state, I do better with single word answers. I'll try to let you know when my symptoms are acting up. It may save you some typing.


                                        I'm somewhat better today..., but I don't know if my thinking will clear up substantially or not.


                                        Thanks Again


                                        Patrick


                                        p.s. NOTE: NO TYPO CHECK WAS DONE HERE; please forgive any that are present.


                                      • jpopelish .
                                        On 7/22/14, rstofer@pacbell.net [Electronics_101] wrote: (snip) ... There are a lot of unstated assumptions in those rules of
                                        Message 19 of 20 , Jul 22, 2014
                                          On 7/22/14, rstofer@... [Electronics_101]
                                          <Electronics_101@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                          (snip)
                                          > For a series RLC circuit, Q is increased with a larger inductor and smaller
                                          > capacitor. For the parallel circuit, it is the opposite: Q is increased
                                          > with a larger capacitor and smaller inductor.

                                          There are a lot of unstated assumptions in those rules of thumb. They
                                          assume that high Q capacitors are always available and high Q
                                          inductors are not. They also neglect the impedance of any circuit
                                          connected to the tuned circuits, or assume the impedances are
                                          something like those found in tube amplifiers. Maybe a bit out of
                                          date.

                                          --
                                          Regards,

                                          John Popelish
                                        • rtstofer
                                          The math doesn t change with the passage of time or specs. What does change is the ability to measure/predict all of the parameters. Mutual inductance,
                                          Message 20 of 20 , Jul 22, 2014
                                            The math doesn't change with the passage of time or specs.  What does change is the ability to measure/predict all of the parameters.  Mutual inductance, distributed capacitance, circuit impedances, all are rather difficult to measure/predict.  So, they hang a little trimmer capacitor on the tuning capacitor to allow for matching to the display and the inductors will often have a tuning slug.

                                            That's one of the cool things about LTSpice (or any other Spice for that matter):  We can get the wrong answer to several significant digits.

                                            Richard

                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.