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

Re: Fw: Re: [softrock40] Rocky and SR-40

Expand Messages
  • Milt Cram
    ... I stand corrected. Milt -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.10/189 - Release
    Message 1 of 11 , Dec 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Bill Dumke wrote:

      >It is not a doubler. It just squares up the duty cycle to 50 %, if you
      >are talking about the QRP2001 circuit. See:
      >
      >
      I stand corrected.

      Milt


      --
      No virus found in this outgoing message.
      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
      Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.10/189 - Release Date: 11/30/2005
    • Arthur J. Lekstutis
      Has anyone considered using a phase splitter like Rick Campbell KK7B shows in A Small High-Performance CW Transceiver Nov 1995 QST Vol 79 Number 11? (see
      Message 2 of 11 , Dec 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Has anyone considered using a phase splitter like Rick Campbell KK7B
        shows in "A Small High-Performance CW Transceiver" Nov 1995 QST Vol 79
        Number 11? (see figure #2, L2). That fed into a pair of voltage
        comparators should be fairly broadband source for a digital QSD. I just
        ran it through spice and it looks like the phase difference could be
        fairly flat over much of the HF band, although it would certainly
        benefit from software calibration in-circuit (like Rocky does).

        Basically it's just a bridge with an inductor and capacitor in each leg,
        with the inductors coupled (i.e. a transformer). Each capacitor connects
        to both inductors, and each inductor connects to both capacitors.

        Later,
        Artie Lekstutis
        KC2MFS

        >I want to run a couple more test and make sure I'm not missing
        >something major in my simulation and then I'll post it.
        >
        >Basically, the comparators compare the signal differentially( looking
        >for zero crossing) and are fed the signals through a isolating
        >transformer, one comparator receives the oscillator signal divided by
        >two (in amplitude), the other, is fed by another isolated secondary
        >and is fed through a slightly modified RC network(multiple poles) and
        >again compared in differential mode (detecting the zero-crossing).
        >Because the signal is +- to ground I need a -Vcc on the
        >comparator, but there are ways to get around that also, I could
        >reference the whole thing to 1/2 the Vcc.
        >
        >The goal is to have the filter have a delay that is linearly related
        >to it's frequency, so as the frequency goes up the delay decreases by
        >the ratio of the frequency, in that way they stay in Quadrature.
        >
        >As the frequency changes the two signals stay in quadrature but the
        >second signal decreases in amplitude( which doesn't matter since I'm
        >looking at the zero crossing), eventually the second signal is too
        >low to reliably detect it's zero crossing, but by then we are way up
        >in frequency.
        >
        >Looks great on the PC screen, but it might not play out in reality,
        >but it might work over a much wider range, which would be handy if
        >using a DDS to move around a range of frequencies.
        >
        >What Spice doesn't tell me without having a more detailed simulation
        >is how much jitter there is at the higher frequencies, but I would be
        >happy if it could do a 2:1 ratio of frequencies, on Spice it looks
        >like it will do 8:1 ratio
        >
        >There are additional components, a hexfiliar transformer, a couple of
        >extra R's and C's, and it's wired a little different, and the signal
        >source must be a sine wave. My main problem right now is a lack of a
        >DDS that is functional, but a FT-817 with a attenuator will do for
        >test in the ham bands only. Also a lack of a SR-5 but that will be
        >remedied soon I hope.
        >
        >Warning this idea has been copyrighted, any attempt to steal it
        >without giving due credit will be met by the use of nuclear weapons.
        >
        >Details later if it works out, same Bat Time, same Bat Channel.
        >
        >
        >At 01:22 PM 12/1/2005, you wrote:
        >
        >
        >>Interesting ! Care to give us some more detail ?
        >>
        >>73 Kees K5BCQ
        >>
        >>
        >>softrock40" on the web.
        >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        >>
        >><mailto:softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        >><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
        >>
        >>
        >>----------
        >>
        >>
        >
        >
        >Cecil Bayona
        >KD5NWA
        >www.qrpradio.com
        >
        >I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
        >same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
        >only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Arthur J. Lekstutis
        Hi, I m not an analog guy, and I am new to ham radio, so maybe I have this all wrong. I was trying to ask for the opinions of others on this subject. It looks
        Message 3 of 11 , Dec 2, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi,

          I'm not an analog guy, and I am new to ham radio, so maybe I have this
          all wrong. I was trying to ask for the opinions of others on this subject.

          It looks to me like a variation of the circuit that Rick Campbell KK7B
          used is a fairly wide band solution of deriving a pair of signals with
          one having a 90 degree phase offset from the other. I expect the output
          to be connected to a pair of voltage comparators to feed the video switch.
          http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Images/PhaseSplitter_002.GIF

          The circuit loss is not insignificant at 17db max, but that does seem
          workable.

          Can this work, or am I missing something?

          Thanks!

          Later,
          Artie Lekstutis
          KC2MFS

          >Has anyone considered using a phase splitter like Rick Campbell KK7B
          >shows in "A Small High-Performance CW Transceiver" Nov 1995 QST Vol 79
          >Number 11? (see figure #2, L2). That fed into a pair of voltage
          >comparators should be fairly broadband source for a digital QSD. I just
          >ran it through spice and it looks like the phase difference could be
          >fairly flat over much of the HF band, although it would certainly
          >benefit from software calibration in-circuit (like Rocky does).
          >
          >Basically it's just a bridge with an inductor and capacitor in each leg,
          >with the inductors coupled (i.e. a transformer). Each capacitor connects
          >to both inductors, and each inductor connects to both capacitors.
          >
          >Later,
          >Artie Lekstutis
          >KC2MFS
          >
          >
          >
        • Bill Dumke
          Arthur, All that is, is what RF and microwave engineers call a quadrature hybrid. Normally you use 50 Ohms at all ports. I don t know why he chose the
          Message 4 of 11 , Dec 2, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Arthur,

            All that is, is what RF and microwave engineers call a quadrature
            hybrid. Normally you use 50 Ohms at all ports. I don't know why he
            chose the resistor values the way he did, maybe he was trying to
            minimize the loss. Sure you can get 90 degrees phase shift, but it
            will still be band linmited.

            The advantage of the digital scheme is that the continuous frequency
            coverage for 90 degrees will be a lot better. But that can certainly be
            band limited as well. It will, however work, everywhere below some
            frequency. Whereas the quadrature hybrid will be limited to some
            bandpass for a specific accuracy.

            Bill WB5TCO

            Arthur J. Lekstutis wrote:

            > Hi,
            >
            > I'm not an analog guy, and I am new to ham radio, so maybe I have this
            > all wrong. I was trying to ask for the opinions of others on this subject.
            >
            > It looks to me like a variation of the circuit that Rick Campbell KK7B
            > used is a fairly wide band solution of deriving a pair of signals with
            > one having a 90 degree phase offset from the other. I expect the output
            > to be connected to a pair of voltage comparators to feed the video switch.
            > http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Images/PhaseSplitter_002.GIF
            >
            > The circuit loss is not insignificant at 17db max, but that does seem
            > workable.
            >
            > Can this work, or am I missing something?
            >
            > Thanks!
            >
            > Later,
            > Artie Lekstutis
            > KC2MFS
            >
            > >Has anyone considered using a phase splitter like Rick Campbell KK7B
            > >shows in "A Small High-Performance CW Transceiver" Nov 1995 QST Vol 79
            > >Number 11? (see figure #2, L2). That fed into a pair of voltage
            > >comparators should be fairly broadband source for a digital QSD. I just
            > >ran it through spice and it looks like the phase difference could be
            > >fairly flat over much of the HF band, although it would certainly
            > >benefit from software calibration in-circuit (like Rocky does).
            > >
            > >Basically it's just a bridge with an inductor and capacitor in each leg,
            > >with the inductors coupled (i.e. a transformer). Each capacitor connects
            > >to both inductors, and each inductor connects to both capacitors.
            > >
            > >Later,
            > >Artie Lekstutis
            > >KC2MFS
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > SPONSORED LINKS
            > Icom ham radio
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Icom+ham+radio&w1=Icom+ham+radio&w2=Shortwave+receivers&w3=Ham+radio&c=3&s=60&.sig=hFU0G_eqoU6djYHaEX8cmQ>
            > Shortwave receivers
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Shortwave+receivers&w1=Icom+ham+radio&w2=Shortwave+receivers&w3=Ham+radio&c=3&s=60&.sig=SnHD-7dqpZF6oUGxGq4Olw>
            > Ham radio
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Ham+radio&w1=Icom+ham+radio&w2=Shortwave+receivers&w3=Ham+radio&c=3&s=60&.sig=39SoBQoTdzg3LjLq8wz-Iw>
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
            >
            > * Visit your group "softrock40
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40>" on the web.
            >
            > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > <mailto:softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
            >
            > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            >
          • Arthur J. Lekstutis
            Bill, Rick Cambpell KK7B used 50 Ohms on all ports in his design (http://www.arrl.org/members-only/tis/info/pdf/9511041.pdf). I see now that I had
            Message 5 of 11 , Dec 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Bill,

              Rick Cambpell KK7B used 50 Ohms on all ports in his design
              (http://www.arrl.org/members-only/tis/info/pdf/9511041.pdf). I see now
              that I had mis-calculated his inductors (he published only number of
              turns and core type). Running his values I see that it has similar
              performance to my values, but the impedances are all 50 ohms. The
              bandwidth is limited, but over the ham hf bands it has a fairly flat
              phase difference, and the loss is no worse than 17db. Considering that
              the output is going to a voltage comparator, the 17db might not be too
              bad and would give a full decade of bandwidth. Perhaps phase noise would
              increase at the extremes?
              http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Images/PhaseSplitter_001.GIF

              I prefer the all digital schemes for my own experimentation, but they
              require a 2x or higher clock. There are certainly cases where analog
              designs have their advantage though, and the SoftRock v5.0 is a clear
              example (putting an RC phase shifter on the band module). There may be
              other cases where an all hf bands phase splitter may be desirable, and I
              was just trying to point out one candidate I knew of and ask if it would
              be usable to those that are interested.

              Can't wait to get my SoftRock v5.0 :-)

              Later,
              Artie Lekstutis
              KC2MFS

              >Arthur,
              >
              >All that is, is what RF and microwave engineers call a quadrature
              >hybrid. Normally you use 50 Ohms at all ports. I don't know why he
              >chose the resistor values the way he did, maybe he was trying to
              >minimize the loss. Sure you can get 90 degrees phase shift, but it
              >will still be band linmited.
              >
              >The advantage of the digital scheme is that the continuous frequency
              >coverage for 90 degrees will be a lot better. But that can certainly be
              >band limited as well. It will, however work, everywhere below some
              >frequency. Whereas the quadrature hybrid will be limited to some
              >bandpass for a specific accuracy.
              >
              >Bill WB5TCO
              >
              >Arthur J. Lekstutis wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              >>Hi,
              >>
              >>I'm not an analog guy, and I am new to ham radio, so maybe I have this
              >>all wrong. I was trying to ask for the opinions of others on this subject.
              >>
              >>It looks to me like a variation of the circuit that Rick Campbell KK7B
              >>used is a fairly wide band solution of deriving a pair of signals with
              >>one having a 90 degree phase offset from the other. I expect the output
              >>to be connected to a pair of voltage comparators to feed the video switch.
              >> http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Images/PhaseSplitter_002.GIF
              >>
              >>The circuit loss is not insignificant at 17db max, but that does seem
              >>workable.
              >>
              >>Can this work, or am I missing something?
              >>
              >>Thanks!
              >>
              >>Later,
              >>Artie Lekstutis
              >>KC2MFS
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>>Has anyone considered using a phase splitter like Rick Campbell KK7B
              >>>shows in "A Small High-Performance CW Transceiver" Nov 1995 QST Vol 79
              >>>Number 11? (see figure #2, L2). That fed into a pair of voltage
              >>>comparators should be fairly broadband source for a digital QSD. I just
              >>>ran it through spice and it looks like the phase difference could be
              >>>fairly flat over much of the HF band, although it would certainly
              >>>benefit from software calibration in-circuit (like Rocky does).
              >>>
              >>>Basically it's just a bridge with an inductor and capacitor in each leg,
              >>>with the inductors coupled (i.e. a transformer). Each capacitor connects
              >>>to both inductors, and each inductor connects to both capacitors.
              >>>
              >>>Later,
              >>>Artie Lekstutis
              >>>KC2MFS
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
            • KD5NWA
              I ve been trying among other things using a RC bridge to see if the Quadrature will stay in phase for a longer range of frequencies. One side a High-Pass
              Message 6 of 11 , Dec 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                I've been trying among other things using a RC bridge to see if the
                Quadrature will stay in phase for a longer range of frequencies. One
                side a High-Pass filter, the other a low pass, it's been working very
                well on Spice over 4.5 Octaves of frequency. I will have to try this
                one using inductors and see if the losses are less than the RC variety.

                In all these experiments I use a comparator to detect the zero
                crossing of signals since the amplitudes are not constant, also many
                DDS cards do not have a constant amplitude as you change frequencies.

                By using zero crossing detection you also eliminate changes if your
                power supply changes or the clock input amplitude changes.

                In my original experiment I detected the zero crossing of the clock
                as one phase, and the same clock through a constant phase RC network.
                As the frequency of the Clock changes the second signal has a
                changing delay keeping that signal in Quadrature to the clock. The
                amplitude of the second signal keeps decreasing as you go higher in
                frequency, so the only reliable detection is the zero crossing, that
                seem to work over several octaves.

                Right now I have been using SPICE to do simulations, but I am in the
                process of buying parts to actually build these circuits.

                If having fun is illegal , I would be in a lot of trouble!

                Thanks for bring the LC bridge to my attention.

                At 09:22 AM 12/3/2005, you wrote:
                >Bill,
                >
                >Rick Cambpell KK7B used 50 Ohms on all ports in his design
                >(http://www.arrl.org/members-only/tis/info/pdf/9511041.pdf). I see now
                >that I had mis-calculated his inductors (he published only number of
                >turns and core type). Running his values I see that it has similar
                >performance to my values, but the impedances are all 50 ohms. The
                >bandwidth is limited, but over the ham hf bands it has a fairly flat
                >phase difference, and the loss is no worse than 17db. Considering that
                >the output is going to a voltage comparator, the 17db might not be too
                >bad and would give a full decade of bandwidth. Perhaps phase noise would
                >increase at the extremes?
                > http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Images/PhaseSplitter_001.GIF
                >
                >I prefer the all digital schemes for my own experimentation, but they
                >require a 2x or higher clock. There are certainly cases where analog
                >designs have their advantage though, and the SoftRock v5.0 is a clear
                >example (putting an RC phase shifter on the band module). There may be
                >other cases where an all hf bands phase splitter may be desirable, and I
                >was just trying to point out one candidate I knew of and ask if it would
                >be usable to those that are interested.
                >
                >Can't wait to get my SoftRock v5.0 :-)
                >
                >Later,
                >Artie Lekstutis
                >KC2MFS
                >
                > >Arthur,
                > >
                > >All that is, is what RF and microwave engineers call a quadrature
                > >hybrid. Normally you use 50 Ohms at all ports. I don't know why he
                > >chose the resistor values the way he did, maybe he was trying to
                > >minimize the loss. Sure you can get 90 degrees phase shift, but it
                > >will still be band linmited.
                > >
                > >The advantage of the digital scheme is that the continuous frequency
                > >coverage for 90 degrees will be a lot better. But that can certainly be
                > >band limited as well. It will, however work, everywhere below some
                > >frequency. Whereas the quadrature hybrid will be limited to some
                > >bandpass for a specific accuracy.
                > >
                > >Bill WB5TCO
                > >
                > >Arthur J. Lekstutis wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >>Hi,
                > >>
                > >>I'm not an analog guy, and I am new to ham radio, so maybe I have this
                > >>all wrong. I was trying to ask for the opinions of others on this subject.
                > >>
                > >>It looks to me like a variation of the circuit that Rick Campbell KK7B
                > >>used is a fairly wide band solution of deriving a pair of signals with
                > >>one having a 90 degree phase offset from the other. I expect the output
                > >>to be connected to a pair of voltage comparators to feed the video switch.
                > >> http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Images/PhaseSplitter_002.GIF
                > >>
                > >>The circuit loss is not insignificant at 17db max, but that does seem
                > >>workable.
                > >>
                > >>Can this work, or am I missing something?
                > >>
                > >>Thanks!
                > >>
                > >>Later,
                > >>Artie Lekstutis
                > >>KC2MFS
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>>Has anyone considered using a phase splitter like Rick Campbell KK7B
                > >>>shows in "A Small High-Performance CW Transceiver" Nov 1995 QST Vol 79
                > >>>Number 11? (see figure #2, L2). That fed into a pair of voltage
                > >>>comparators should be fairly broadband source for a digital QSD. I just
                > >>>ran it through spice and it looks like the phase difference could be
                > >>>fairly flat over much of the HF band, although it would certainly
                > >>>benefit from software calibration in-circuit (like Rocky does).
                > >>>
                > >>>Basically it's just a bridge with an inductor and capacitor in each leg,
                > >>>with the inductors coupled (i.e. a transformer). Each capacitor connects
                > >>>to both inductors, and each inductor connects to both capacitors.
                > >>>
                > >>>Later,
                > >>>Artie Lekstutis
                > >>>KC2MFS
                > >>>
                > >>>
                > >>>
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >


                Cecil Bayona
                KD5NWA
                www.qrpradio.com

                "I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
                same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
                only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ... "
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.