GeistHaus
log in · sign up

https://ka7oei.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default

atom
23 posts
Polling state
Status active
Last polled May 19, 2026 02:22 UTC
Next poll May 20, 2026 02:15 UTC
Poll interval 86400s
ETag W/"4ef17b967ccfa6e8307ebd55a0e31fcd60398aa4c4564e3877fc447e0e310b44"
Last-Modified Mon, 18 May 2026 13:25:24 GMT

Posts

A (simple) WWVB loop amplifier for radio-controlled clocks
60khzamplifieratomic clockboosterbpcclockDCF77interferenceJJYloopMSFradio clockRFISwitching power supplyWWVB
Show full content

Note:

The techniques described below should work - with only minor adaptation - for any "Longwave" time signal used by these radio-controlled (non-GPS) clocks - not only WWVB, but DCF77, MSF, BPC and both JJY signals as well.

* * * * *

Last year I moved a bunch of SDRs (KiwiSDRs, RTL-SDR) and a bunch of network gear to a new shelf in my shack, but this placed them much closer to the wall on which I'd previously mounted the two "Atomic" (e.g. radio-controlled) clocks which had been there - and operating - for years.  Since then, they hadn't been able to reliably synchronize to the 60 kHz WWVB signal out of Fort Collins, Colorado.

Figure 1:
The two radio clocks surrounded by
the four-turn loop, near a number of
pieces of "noisy"equipment.
The top clock is set to UTC and
the bottom for local time.
Click for a larger version.

While annoying, I wasn't terribly surprised.  There are several switch-mode power supplies involved in the aformentioned gear and it's not uncommon for them to operate in the 30-60kHz range, offering the potential of "jamming" the receivers.  As both the location of these clocks - and the nearby gear - is convenient, I wasn't too inclined to move them again and initial efforts to "filter" the switching power supplies didn't really help - but I wasn't surprised about this, either, since it's likely direct coupling of their magnetic fields that is the culprit rather than any electrostatic field as the clocks themselves use ferrite loopstick antennas sensitive to just the H-field.

A solution

 Many years ago a friend came to me to solve a similar problem in a downtown Salt Lake office building where the WWVB clocks in a conference room never synchronized and I constructed the remote loop and amplifier/coupling system, described here:

  • Getting "Atomic" (WWVB) clocks to work indoors and in weak signal areas - LINK 

In short, a rooftop loop antenna amplified the signal and it was conveyed into the room with the clocks where it was further amplified and then, using inductive loops placed in the proximity of the clocks.  This is how the WWVB signal was coupled to them.  To my knowledge, this system worked for many years (well over a decade) and for all I know, it may still be in use.

 Why revisit?

I've tackled this type of problem before - but I decided to revisit it as the circumstances are slightly different:  I already had a signal source as noted below plus I wanted to see if I could do this with more commonly-available components in a simpler manner.

While I don't have a WWVB loop on my roof, I do have a dedicated LF E-field whip antenna - a 40 year old LF Engineering LF-400B with integrated low-pass filter.  This antenna has been on the roof wherever I have lived almost continuously since I purchased it in the mid-late 1980s and with a few repairs over the years, it still works well, having been on the roof of my current house for several decades.  Its use for LF reception as described on the following page:

  • A (semi)-typical suburban E-field whip receive system for the 630 and 2200 meter amateur bands - LINK 

The fact that I already had an LF/VLF receive antenna system meant that I had a "clean" source for WWVB, and other devices that receive signals below 500 kHz (e.g. LF receivers for 630 and 2200 meter operation and my Blitzortung "Blue" receiver) and I decided to add one more to the list.

Other types of outdoor antennas 

Note that the circuit described here should work well with other types of active antennas including E-field types such as the PA0RDT "Mini-Whip" and the DX Engineering ARAV3 - to name but two.  An amplified loop such as the Wellbrook and similar will work, provided that it is not oriented such that the desired time station's transmitter is not in its nulls.

Buffer/Amplifier

Through back-of-the-envelope calculations I figured that the already-amplified signal from the active whip needed another 15dB or so of boost and it could then be applied to a loop of wire around the WWVB clocks on my wall.  One thing that helps greatly is that the WWVB signal is extremely strong here in northern Utah - on the order of 5mV/meter or so - and connecting an oscilloscope to my LF-400B whip's signal output showed that the amplitude-modulated time code of the 60 kHz signal from WWVB was visible among the many others.

What I needed to do was to tap off the signal (e.g. "bridge" the connection) from the existing coaxial cable without affecting was was being sent to the other devices using it, amplify it. and apply it to the loop - and I did this "tap" using a BNC "Tee" connector on my antenna feed.

The circuit diagram below gives more details:

Figure 2:
The schematic of the loop buffer/amplifier/driver showing the isolation from the power supply
via L1, the buffer circuit of Q1 and the amplifier and loop driver of Q2.
Click on the image for a larger version.


Circuit description

Of high importance is L1, a common-mode choke, liberated from a failed switch-mode power supply somewhere.  This particular unit has an inductance of about 1mH per winding meaning that it has about 377 Ohms of impedance at 60 kHz and helps to prevent a ground loop and the coupling noise from the power mains.  If you replicate this circuit I would strongly suggest that whatever you use for L1 have at least a similar amount of inductance.  On either side of L1 are electrolytic capacitors (C1, C2 - preferably of low ESR types) to offer low impedance and a degree of reinforcement of common-mode rejection through L1 while C2 and C3 provide RF bypassing for the circuit itself.

A buffer amplifier consisting of Q1 - with a high-impedance input, but no actual gain - couples the signal from the existing antenna:  Having several k-Ohm of input impedance, it is unlikely to appreciably load the existing antenna system.  On the feed from the E-field whip, I simply installed a coaxial "T" connector to allow me to bridge across the signal feed rather than split the signal, which would have been complicated owing to the fact that the DC power for the whip was also being carried on that same cable.  The connection to the amplifier in Figure 3 was made using a very short piece of coaxial cable (about 2 feet long - less than a meter) and since this whip is not used for reception above about 500 kHz, neither its presence or that of the added amplifier had any discernible effect on the other received signals.

Coupling from the existing antenna are series components L2 and C4, selected to resonate at about 60 kHz:  The resonance is extremely broad, so finding a capacitor combination precisely equal to the "ideal" value of C4 - according to the formula below actually calculating as 0.007uF (7000 pF) - is unimportant.  This series resonant circuit is probably not essential and a simple coupling capacitor of 0.01uF (10000 pF) could be used (omitting L2 entirely) but I chose built it with L2 to broadly filter off-frequency signals - something that might be important if your E-field whip antenna doesn't have a low-pass filter to remove AM (Mediumwave) signals as mine does as well as to block any stray coupling of HF signals when I transmit.

Figure 3:
The circuit of Figure 2 built on a piece of prototyping board
in the case.  Bifilar choke L1 is on the right with the BNC
connector (J1, input) and output to the loop (J2) on the left.
Click on the image for a larger version.
The buffered signal from Q1 is then passed to amplifier Q2 which is configured to have "about" 15dB of signal gain.  This circuit is, perhaps, slightly more complicated than it needs to be, but with its feedback, it is very stable and tolerant of large signals.  The use of electrolytic capacitors for C5 and C6 is, perhaps, overkill (0.1uF ceramic would probably suffice) but I used them as they were handy.

As the signal from WWVB is quite strong at this location, there is only one stage of amplification shown in Figure 2, but if I lived more distant, greater overall system gain might be required.  Replicating the circuit involving Q2 (R4-R8, C5-C6) and cascading it with the existing amplifier would add yet another block of gain to boost the absolute signal level - but this would presume that whatever active antenna you were using outdoors to pick up the WWVB signal was working well, providing a "clean" signal and that the deficit was just in signal strength at the clocks rather than than signal-noise ratio.

Due to the smallness of the project box that I chose I couldn't mount the bifilar choke "through" the prototype board so it was mounted on the edge to minimize height.  To hold it in place I used UV cured resin along the edge to prevent it from breaking the pin connections mechanically:  UV cured resin is very handy as it's about a strong as epoxy, but it is cured almost instantly meaning that it's able to be handled immediately.  For the BNC connector, the one that I found in my parts bin didn't have its matching mounting nut, but more UV-cured epoxy did the job for that, too!  As can be seen in Figure 3, I didn't bother "mounting" the board in the box, letting it hang about on its own wires.

Indoor Coupling loop

The "coupling loop" - visible in Figure 1 and shown on the schematic - is just a loop of wire - and it is used to inductively couple the signals from the outside antenna to the clocks.  In my case, I measured a rectangle that would encompass both of the wall clocks and found a cardboard box with similar dimensions and on it I wound four turns of 22AWG hookup wire.  Connecting this loop to the amplifier, I used some shielded microphone cable:  Coaxial cable would have been fine as would just some single-pair speaker wire as this frequency is not all that much higher than audio!

Neatly forming the individual conductors, I used small "zip" ties to hold them together and with four screws, attached it to the wall, placing the clocks inside the loop of wire.  Within the loop, signals from the amplifier would be strongly coupled into the ferrite loopsticks in the clocks themselves - but being very small in terms of the 60kHz wavelength, this loop is unlikely to radiate more than a few feet/meter outside it.

To improve efficiency of the coupling loop I wanted to series-resonate it at around 60 kHz as this would increase the amount of energy transferred to the loop from the amplifier somewhat, effectively providing "free" signal gain.  Measuring the inductance of the loop I found that it happened to be about 22uH and using this simple formula, I calculated the value of C7 - the resonating capacitor in Figure 3:

LC = 25330/(FMHz)2

Where:

LC is the product of the inductance and capacitance (e.g. Capacitance in pF * Inductance in uH)

FMHz is the desired resonant frequency in MHz (e.g. kHz/1000)

Knowing that we have 22uH of inductance in the coupling loop and a frequency of 60 kHz (0.06MHz) we end up with "LC" being equal to 7036111.  Dividing this value by the known inductance of our coupling loop (22uH) we get  the capacitance, as in (7036111/22) = 319823pF, or 0.319uF.

Figure 4:
The finished amplifier in its box, hanging
out below the loop - connected, and in
service.  (It's just visible in the bottom
of Figure 1)

Click on the image for a larger version.

As 0.33uF (330000 pF) is the closest common capacitor value, I used that for C7.  Again, as with C4 and L2, the resonance is very broad and precision isn't too important.  The article linked near the top of this page goes into more detail on how one would construct and resonate a coupling loop.  Based on this formula, if I wanted to resonate the same loop for use with DCF77 at 77.5 kHz I would have picked a 0.18 or 0.2uF (180000 or 200000 pf) capacitor, instead.  Similar changes could be made to accommodate longwave time signals on other frequencies (e.g. 40 kHz, 50 kHz, 68 kHz).

The formula above can also be used to calculate the value of C4 with the 1mH (1000uH) L2 inductor:  If your interest was for another frequency, such as DCF77 at 77.5 kHz, C4 would be 0.0047uF (4700 pf), instead.

It need not be said that this loop should not be placed very close to whatever outdoor receive antenna you are using - but more than about 10-15 feet (3-5 meters) should suffice:  If they are too close to each other, feedback (oscillation) could occur - but as this loop is only around 0.01% of a wavelength in circumference it does not radiate efficiently at all - and since it's inductive, its signals won't efficiently couple to an E-field antenna, anyway.

In the diagram, C7, the resonating capacitor for the coupling loop, is shown at the amplifier - but it could have been placed at the loop itself.

Power supply  

First off, do not use a switching power supply for this device!

As noted, common-mode choke L1 was used to "decouple" the power supply from the amplifier - and also from the coaxial cable of the LF antenna.  To power this loop amplifier I would strongly recommend using ONLY a transformer-type DC power supply and NOT any type of switching power supply for the simple reason that the switching power supply will be comparatively noisy, and it - its harmonic - will likely operate at/near the frequency of WWVB or whatever time signal you are trying to receive.

This power supply does not need to be regulated:  Simple capacitor filtering with low-ish ripple (a few hundred millivolts) will suffice and any voltage between about 11 and 16 volts will work which means that about any old "wall wart" in that voltage range - regulated or not - would be fine.

Conclusion

Having had the parts on hand it took only a bit more than an hour to piece this together and almost as long to put it in the box seen in Figure 4.

When I forced both clocks to re-acquire WWVB's signal for syncing they immediately set themselves to the correct time and date - and since it had been the start of daylight saving time the night before but had not been able to synchronize prior to this - they "knew" the new, correct time, too!

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-7581184505677997326
Extensions
Repairing a ("smoked") MFJ-998 1.5kW automatic antenna tuner
1.5kw1500 wattantenna tuneranti-trackingauto tunerburned boardhigh powerIntellitunerMFJmfj-998pcbrelayrepairslottunerVSWR
Show full content

Figure 1:
The (repaired) MFJ-998 front, now working, sitting
atop my Heathkit SA-2060 manual tuner and underneath
my homebrew neon bar-graph VSWR/Power meter.
Click on the image for a larger version.

To inspect or not inspect 

When I buy some types of ham gear second-hand, I'll treat it like as I would if I were to buy used Heathkit gear that had been put together by someone with "average" (or unknown) kit building experience:  I take the cover off, tighten the screws, reflow suspicious solder joints and do a visual inspection.  Regardless of brand, it's probably a good idea to pop the covers and take a look at gear that you buy second hand before using it.

For some reason - when I recently bought a second-hand MFJ-998 1.5kW automatic antenna tuner on EvilBay - I didn't do that.

When this '998 arrived I did a cursory look at the case, connected it, and tried it out at 100 watts - and it seemed to work OK - but over the course of a few weeks being used at just 100 watts I noticed something odd:  It would occasionally start re-tuning during a transmission for no obvious reason and, perhaps, there was a faint whiff of "something" in the air - but I never connected the two and didn't investigate.  I'd previously operated using my old Heathkit SA-2060 (non-"A" version) antenna tuner for several years on this same antenna and hadn't noticed a randomly changing VSWR that might explain this tendency for the '998 to "hunt".

Figure 2:
A of relay K2 from the top:  Evidence of
damaged glass-epoxy PC board material
is very clearly evident!
Click on the image for a larger version.

I checked for the usual suspects external to the tuner:  Loose coaxial or wire connections, a branch touching the antenna (an 80 meter horizontal loop) somewhere - but there was nothing obvious.  This "problem" wasn't consistent, either - not happening frequently enough to cause me to expend more effort to track it down.

Magic smoke escapes!

Several weeks ago I had occasion to run a bit more power and threw about 800 watts through it and things seemed OK for a while, but then it started retuning itself again - this time, accompanied by a very distinct burning smell.

I immediately pulled the tuner out of the circuit, going back to the Heathkit SA-2060 manual tuner, and things were fine once again, further indicating that the "instability" was related to the auto-tuner and not the antenna itself.  Later, when I had time to do so, I pulled the cover off the MFJ-998 and immediately saw the problem:  As can be seen in Figures 2 and 3, the PC board was carbonized in the vicinity of relay K2 which is used to select antenna #1 or antenna #2.

Figure 3:
The damage to the PC board as seen from the
bottom side.  Sections of the board have become
carbonized, offering current paths to RF, causing
the degradation to accelerate.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Upon seeing this, I ordered some replacement relays - ten of them, as they weren't particularly expensive - and tuner sat around for several weeks until they arrived.  I did briefly consider just omitting this relay, "hardwiring" it for just one of the antenna outputs, but decided to proceed with the repair:  If this happens again I'll reconsider doing this - or perhaps changing the way the relay(s) are configured.

What happened?

Clearly, the PC board material had "carbon tracked" at some point:  A bit of leakage between the traces had obviously occurred and with the higher RF voltage resulting from my running higher power, this "slight" leakage had gotten very much worse, heating the board material, decomposing the epoxy base of the PC board material and causing it to become conductive - and the it gets worse and worse from there.

I have the suspicion that a carbon track was present before I owned this tuner and it likely occurred due to attempting to tune an antenna that wasn't connected (possibly resulting in very high voltage), an intermittent antenna fault, or perhaps even lightning.  At the time it failed,  I'd been using antenna #1 and had nothing connected to the connector or post of antenna #2 so I'm not sure why it so readily burned across the traces between the antenna connections - but it did.

Figure 4:
Damage to the original relay.  I don't think that
the relay itself initially failed, but rather that it
was damaged by the intense heat of the glowing,
carbonized board material.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Analysis of the damage

With the "carbon tracking" between the tuner and the antenna "#1" and "#2" connections, the circuit board was nearly burned-through in a few places and the relay was destroyed - but it looked as though the damage of the relay was caused by the heat from the (burning!) PC board.  Despite looking really bad, the damage was very localized - and it provided an opportunity for improvement.

The fact that the damage was worse on the bottom of the board than the top also indicated that it was likely on the bottom side that the issue first started.

What to do?

In many cases - when high voltages are present across a section of PC board - manufacturers will place an "anti-tracking slot" between the two points:  Rather than rely on the surface of the PC board to withstand high voltages - the ability decreasing if moisture, dust or other contaminants are present - a physical slot is cut in the PC board material between those connections, greatly increasing the path length and high voltage stand-off ability.

Figure 5:
Using a rotary tool to remove ALL carbonized PC board.
All potentially-conductive board material must be removed
or else the same thing will happen again!
Click on the image for a larger version.

This "slotting" technique is frequently found on mains-powered devices that have human contact - such as phone chargers and other power supplies.  This is done where excess leakage between the high voltage from the wall plug and the low voltage output could result in injury or death if someone touched an accessible metal contact.  

While this application isn't a "life-safety" issue like a power supply, it would have made sense, given the high voltages that are possible, to implement such measures here.  For "reasons", MFJ did not choose to manufacture the PC board with such "anti-tracking" slots in this particular location - on that is very likely to have the highest voltages present across adjacent contacts to be found in the tuner.

Using a small routing bit in a rotary tool I ground away ALL of the carbonized (conductive!) material:  NOT doing so would have risked additional "tracking" in the future where it could have found a new conduction path.  The result of this work can be seen in the photos - a bit of "Swiss-cheese" of the circuit board - but now, there was only air between the contacts across which there was likely to be high voltage.

Installing the new relay

With all of the carbonized material removed, I vacuumed up the debris and cleaned the area around the relay on both the top and bottom side with alcohol, removing deposits from the soot of the burning PC board material.  I repeated this process after the new relay was soldered in.

Figure 6:
After cleaning the board with alcohol, the new.
relay was installed and the connections made
using 16AWG wire.  The "air gap" between
pins should make it more resistant in the future.
Click on the image for a larger version.

On this relay, the "common" (armature) pins are in the center with the normally-open and normally-closed pins on either side - but since I removed most of the PC board material around these pins, under the relay the "common" connection was completely missing.  This problem was easily solved using a piece of tinned wire as can be seen in Figure 6:  The air gap between the other relay contacts was maintained.

I was fortunate that the PC board connections for the coil (the two solder pads near the top of Figure 6) and both the "Normally Open" and "Normally Closed" terminals were still intact (e.g. the board wasn't burned in those areas) and this provided a solid mounting for the relay.   It was only the "common" relay contacts - those that connected back to the tuner itself - that were no longer extant so I folded a piece of 16AWG copper wire and made the connection back to the remaining PC board trace as seen in Figure 6.  (Note:  This relay, K2, is a DPDT relay of the same type as all of the other relays and both of its sections are connected in parallel.)

Testing and comments

It worked!

As there was no damage to any other circuitry, the relay properly selected between antennas 1 and 2 as designed and the memory pre-sets (on the bands other than where I was operating when the failure occurred) were just as they were indicating that the matching conditions were identical to before.

In doing research on the relays used in this tuner (all of the relays are identical - for my tuner, they are Hui Ke HK14FH-DC12V-SH - which is the same as the American Zettler AZ576-1C-12DE, the Songle SMIH-12VDC-SL-C and many others ) I noted a few things about their specifications.  As expected, they have 12 volt, non-latching coils (e.g. power must be applied for it to hold the tuning configuration) and their contacts are rated for 16 amps (resistive) for DC and mains-frequency AC, and they also have good isolation between the contacts and the coil (rated for 5kVAC at mains frequency).

What did concern me a bit was the fact that they have only a 1kVAC rating between "open" contacts - and a quick check with a "Hi-Pot" tester verified that it did, in fact, break down (arc internally between the armature and the normally-open contacts) at about 1.7KVDC.  It would seem that the designers of this tuner considered this aspect of the relays' limitations to an extent as all of the capacitors in the tuner are switched in/out using two relays in series to accommodate higher voltages - but this technique was not applied to K2, the antenna switching relay.

A quick check of the ratings of this tuner indicate that it is rated for up to 1600 Ohms at full power (1500 watts).  Knowing the power and impedance - and presuming a resistive (e.g. resonant - neither capacitor of inductive) load - we can use the following formula:

V = √(P x R
Where:
V = VoltageP = Power in WattsR = Resistance in Ohms

and based on this, at 1500 watts and 1600 Ohms, the voltage in a purely resistive load would be about 1550 Volts RMS (or about 2200 peak volts) - well above the known breakdown voltage of the contacts of the relay.  It's worth noting that it's often the case that at radio frequencies, insulation and breakdown ratings are lower than they might be at mains frequencies and DC - something else to consider!

What this implies is that under such conditions there would be enough voltage for the armature of the relay to arc to those of the unused antenna and, perhaps, the designers of this tuner should have put two relays in series for antenna switching, too:  If the "new" relay breaks down with voltage, it wouldn't be too difficult to wire a second one in series to increase the stand-off voltage, driven by the same coil driver.

What about the other extreme, where the impedance is low?  The tuner is rated for as low as 12 Ohms where the voltage would be lower and current higher and here we use a different formula:
I = √(P / R
Where:
V = VoltageP = Power in WattsR = Resistance in Ohms
 In this case 1500 watts and 12 Ohms (resistive) yields a current of about 11.2 amps RMS - somewhat lower than the relay's contact rating of 16 amps, plus there's the fact that both sets of contacts of this relay are in parallel which further increases their durability.  At such high currents, the concerns aren't necessarily with the relays, then, but rather potential I*R heating of the inductors and capacitors whenever an extreme match condition is encountered.
 In short:  If you are running anywhere near 1500 watts and have a high impedance being presented to the tuner by your antenna (e.g. using something like a directly-fed half-wave end-fed antenna with no matching device) and using both antenna ports,  you should probably reconsider your arrangement! * * * * * This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com [END] 
tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-7150919114087704862
Extensions
Modifying the MFJ-5008 parabolic ultrasonic receiver for better sensitivity and wider frequency response
arcarcingbatdirect conversionecholocationheterodyneinsectsMEMsMFJ-5008microphonenoisy power linepower linereceiverultrasonic
Show full content

Figure 1:
Front view MFJ-5008 parabolic dish with
integrated microphone and receiver
(located on the back side).
Click on the image for a larger version

The MFJ-5008 Parabolic Ultrasonic receiver

Note:

Since the MFJ-5008 is no longer being sold it can be found only on the "used" market.  A future posting in this blog will (hopefully) show how to construct a similar unit using readily-available kits and parts.

The MFJ-5008 was marketed primarily for detecting arcing on failing power line hardware, but there are other reasons why you might use such a device:

  • Listen to Bats' echolocation.  The "clicks" emitted by bats are well above human hearing.
  • Listen to other animals and insects.  Other animals and insects also emit ultrasonic sounds - both for echolocation and communication.
  • Find high pressure leaks.  Leaks in high-pressure systems (water, gas, engines, compressors) often make a lot of noise at these frequencies.
  • Locate switching power supplies.  These devices often make noise due to magnetostriction of devices (transformers, coils.)

As I find this topic to be interesting, I've written about the detection of ultrasonic signals on two previous occasions in this blog:

  • Improving my ultrasonic sniffer for finding power line arcing by using MEMs microphones - Link
  • An ultrasonic superheterodyne receive converter (e.g. "Bat Listener") - Link

* * * * *

While there are several devices out there that you can buy to enable listening at these frequencies, the landscape has changed in the past few years when it comes to how one might do this on a budget:

  • In years past, the MFJ-5008 was available - its primary purpose being to locate and identify arcing on power lines and related infrastructure.  As MFJ is no longer in business, this device is available only on the used market.
  • Some "bat listeners" have used electret microphones.  These inexpensive capsule microphones - while having good response across the human hearing range - lose sensitivity rapidly above this, limiting their usefulness above 20-30 kHz.  In doing A/B testing with a MEMS and an Electret ("capsule") microphone, the MEMS appears to be superior in every way when it comes to ultrasonic response.
  • Many ultrasonic detectors - including "bat listeners" - have used ceramic transducers.  Most often found for the 40 kHz range (and some were made at lower frequencies) these can be fairly sensitive.  Their frequency range is quite limited and they are only usable within a few kHz above and below their design frequency at best.  As different types of ultrasonic noise sources tend to occur at various frequencies, being able to detect such energy at various points across the spectrum can improve the usability of the device.
  • MEMs-based microphones have become cheap and available.  These devices - based on microscopic elements - can operate over a frequency range from a few 10s of Hz to over 100 kHz making the excellent replacements for the (increasingly hard-to-find) ceramic transducers.  Having a wide frequency range allows the user to tune to the peak frequency of the noise source rather than being limited to the immediate vicinity of 40 kHz.

* * * * *

How the MFJ-5008 works

Made by (the now defunct) MFJ Enterprises, this includes a 18" (46cm) diameter vacuum-formed plastic parabolic dish with a 40 kHz ceramic transducer at its focus.  Mounted on the back of the dish is a direct-conversion receiver centered at about 40 kHz that converts energy around this frequency to the audible range.  As can be seen in Figure 1 there is a bar across the front in which the ceramic transducer is mounted - but it also has holes that - along with one located behind it in the plastic dish - form a crude sighting system that works quite well to determine from where detected noises might be emanating.

If one disassembles the electronics of the MFJ-5008 they will discover a small circuit board with rather common components - namely a 555 timer used as the oscillator, an LM386 audio amplifier to drive the headphones and a few common transistors to amplify and convert the ultrasonic signals to audible.  There is a "tuning" control on board consisting of a 10k trimmer potentiometer, but it is not accessible from the outside - and it has a range of about 38-48 kHz:  A slight modification will be necessary to allow us to take advantage of the wider frequency response of the MEMS microphone.

Consider the (annotated) schematic of the MFJ-5008, below: 

Figure 2:
Schematic of the MFJ-5008 ultrasonic receiver.  The circuitry is straightforward - a simple, run-of-the-mill direct-conversion design that is very similar to the one described in the April, 2006 QST article.  Changes to C2/C8 and the added inductor are noted on the diagram.
Click on the image for a larger version. 

If we compare the above schematic with that from the April, 2006 QST article, A Home-made Ultrasonic Power Line Arc Detector - link) we see some very striking similarities:  Both use a 555 timer for the local oscillator, both use a series of bipolar transistors for signal amplification, and both use a single JFET for the frequency conversion mixer.  There are some differences, but these are pretty much superficial when you consider that the same goal is accomplished with the same types of components.

A cursory analysis of the above diagram shows that the first two amplifier stages are coupled with 1uF capacitors allowing the full audio frequency range to pass:  This mystified me at first, but in looking at the circuit board and noting some unpopulated parts locations I realized that there may have been plans to allow this circuit to be used at audio frequencies - and, perhaps, have a switch to select audible or ultrasonic ranges as well.

For the original 40 kHz ceramic transducer, this wide frequency range isn't a problem, but for a MEMS microphone - which can hear equally well over a 100Hz through at least 60 kHz, this would be:  As the mixer (Q3) is just single-ended, it will happily amplify the original input as well as do a frequency conversion meaning that you are likely to hear audio-frequency "bleedthrough" on the audio output - and indeed, when I retrofitted it with a MEMS microphone (to be described shortly) I did.

Figure 3:
Picture of the MFJ-5008 with location of the various
various components and board locations involved in the
modifications annotated.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Adding "proper" high-pass filtering to the MFJ-5008

The only sort of "high-pass" filtering present are capacitors C10 and C11 which are conspicuous by their being in series:  Why use two capacitors (1000pF and 220pF) rather than just a single 180pF capacitor?  The answer lies on the circuit board where there are unpopulated locations marked "L1" and "L2" (see Figure 2) which correspond with an (uninstalled) pair of inductors between the junction of C10 and C11 and ground.

To make the unit much less sensitive to audio frequencies - and to make it more compatible with a MEMs microphone, several changes should be made:

  • Change C2 and C8 to 0.01uF (e.g. 10nF) capacitors.  This will prevent the first two amplifier stages from being overloaded by audio frequencies and go a long ways in prevent "bleedthrough".
  • Install inductance at the positions of L1 and L2.  I suspect that two inductors were in mind when they designed the board as high-inductance, surface-mount devices are comparatively rare and expensive, so they could use a pair of lower-value coils in series to get the desired value.  See the footnotes on the bottom of this blog for suggested inductors.
  • Figure 4:
    Apparently designed to be used in several ways, the MFJ-
    5008's board has several unused parts locations, including
    positions for inductors that could be used for improved
    high-pass filtering as shown here.
    Click on the image for a larger version.
    Connect a 4.7k resistor between the center pin of the RCA connector (to the microphone) and the "V+" pad near the un-populated switch.  This inserts a current-limited 9 volt supply on the microphone lead.

The amount of inductance to install at L1 and L2 isn't too critical, but finding such components may be awkward - but the total amount of inductance to use may be anything between 27mH (that's milliHenries!) and 68mH with 47mH being optimal - a relatively huge amount for an SMD device.  In perusing my collection of inductors, I found a through-hole 27mH inductor that I tacked into place, securing it with glue:  Note that it gets soldered across the two pads of L1 and L2 closest to the socketed 555 IC as Figure 4 depicts.

When modifying the MFJ-5008, the MEMS microphone was fitted first and it became clear that audio-frequency energy sailed right through the system, significantly reducing its efficacy at the detection of ultrasonic energy.  It is my opinion that both the changing of C2 and C8 to 0.01uF capacitors and the addition of the inductor are necessary modifications for good performance. 

Note:

If you don't have a suitable inductor for the above modification, the receiver will still work, but you will hear a bit of audible frequency bleedthrough:  In a location with high ambient noise, this may be a problem, but in an otherwise quiet location, it probably won't be an issue:  Changing C2 and C8 do a reasonable job of reducing audio-frequency response and should be considered to be mandatory if you use a MEMS microphone.

In other words, if you don't install the inductor, don't let that stop you from making the modification to the MFJ-5008 and using it with a MEMS microphone - just be aware of the audio frequency "bleedthrough" issue.

Extending the tuning range of the MFJ-5008

Figure 5:
Potentiometer R10 - originally 10k - was replaced with a
50k miniature potentiometer to allow tuning.  A 4.7k resistor
paralleling R22 can be seen in this fuzzy photo.
Click on the image for a larger version.
As the tuning control isn't readily accessible - unless you drill a hole in the box and use a screwdriver - a modification is required to both make the tuning accessible and increase the range.  To do this, I found a small 50k potentiometer and soldered it into place where the original 10k trimmer (R20) was:  Note that two of the potentiometer's leads are connected together, so the "new" device would go between Pin 7 of the 555 in the schematic and resistor R22.  While doing this, R22 should be changed from its original value of 10k to 3.3k (or you could tack a 4.7 or 5.1k resistor in parallel with it).  Increasing the value of R20 from 10k to 50k allows the frequency to be tuned down to 20-22 kHz while lowering the value of R22 allows it to be tuned above 50kHz, all of this encompassing the frequency range where noisy, arcing connections (and bats!) are likely to be found.

Figure 6:
The modified MFJ-5008 with the (barely visible)
tuning knob sticking out on the left.  The blue
label indicates the approximate tuning frequency.
Click on the image for a larger version.
While I was able to cram the (very small) potentiometer onto the board (Figure 5), you may need to be creative - possibly mounting the potentiometer on the cover or side of the box using (very short!) flying leads:  If you use a metal potentiometer, I suggest connecting is body to the "ground" of the circuit (e.g. the outside shell of the microphone's phono plug) to prevent pick-up of nearby electric fields that might affect tuning.

The final result of the modification can be seen in Figure 6:  The cut-off shaft of the potentiometer protrudes slightly out of the left side of the enclosure and there is a label depicting the approximate frequency of the oscillator (and the center of the converted range) with respect to the adjustment of the potentiometer and its white paint mark.

What potentiometer to use?

To fit in the location of the original 10k trimmer, one needs to use a small potentiometer:  A suitably small potentiometer is the Bourns 3310C-001-503L which is available from DigiKey HERE and from Mouser Electronics HERE.  With a bit of care, it can be mounted to the board and the case modified to allow the shaft to protrude out the side - but it would be a good idea to use something (e.g. "hot melt" glue) to make it more rigid and prevent fatiguing/breaking the potentiometer's leads.  If you are creative, a larger potentiometer might be usable, attached with flying leads, but if it's metal, be sure to connect its body to the V- (battery negative - the shell of the phono plug will work) to minimize noise pick-up.

Note:

If you don't make the (highly recommended!) "tuning" modification, the MEMS microphone is still useful in that its sensitivity extends over a wide frequency range:  You may be able to adjust the original potentiometer (which can be adjusted between 35 and 48 kHz) to a frequency that is more suited for the types of noises that you are seeking.

Using a MEMS microphone


Note:  

In this section, I refer to a "homebrew" MEMS microphone carrier board - but there are "breakout" boards available that are already assembled:  This next section describes how either a "breakout" board or a homebrew board like this may be mounted in the focus of the dish.

Figure 7:
The original 40 kHz ceramic transducer and
carrier board (top) and the homebrew version with
the MEMS microphone (bottom) both mounted using
the pairs of screws on stand-offs in the front bracket.
Click on the image for a larger version.Farther down this page you will find a description of a commercially-available MEMS break-out board (from SparkFun) and how it may be used, should you be unwilling to assemble your own!

                    * * * * *

For the specific MFJ-5008 depicted in this article I used an already-prepared MEMS microphone module:  This was described in a previous article linked HERE.  This circuit was designed to accept a wide range of voltages (3.5-10) to be imposed onto the same conductor as the audio, making it easy to interface on a single cable as we did here.

In the MFJ-5008, there is an aluminum "U" channel across the front in which the ceramic transducer is mounted and its location places it at the focus of the parabolic dish.  What this means is that when we replace this device with something else - a MEMS microphone in this case - it must not only be located at the same axial position (left, right, up, down) as the original, but the sensing element must also be at the same distance from the surface of the dish.

Behind the nesting cover (accessible via the removal of four screws - two at each end) there is a circuit board mounted on two stand-offs and the focus of this dish is precisely midway between the two.  Removing this and peering inside the original ceramic transducer, you can see the element located inside, recessed slightly from the front grille:  The distance of that element from the circuit board is that which should be replicated with the replacement microphone.

Figure 8:
Homebrew carrier board with MEMS
microphone installed, facing the surface of the
dish.  The microphone's "sound hole" - facing
from the camera in this photo - is located
precisely between the two mounting screws.
Click on the image for a larger version.
As can be seen in Figures 7 and 8, I mounted the homebrew MEMS modules on the "front" side of a piece of PCB prototype board, taking care of placing the center of the microphone (not visible in the photo) on the center line between the two screws and equidistant between them.  Once this was done, the "new" microphone was mounted back in the "U" channel and the wires soldered as seen in Figure 8.  As it turned out, the thickness of the homebrew board placed the MEMS element at the same distance from the dish as the original element - a fact later verified by noting that the "sharpness" and accuracy of the pointing with the new element seemed to be the same as before.

Using a Sparkfun MEMS microphone "breakout" board

Soldering a tiny microphone module successfully to a circuit board requires a bit of skill - but there are "breakout" boards that already have the microphone and some of the needed components already on them - and one of these is available from SparkFun (the "BOB-19389") for about US$9.00 at the time of writing. While it is possible to order from SparkFun directly, I ordered it via Amazon for the same price - plus shipping was "free".  Detailed information on this board may be found here:

https://www.sparkfun.com/sparkfun-analog-mems-microphone-breakout-sph8878lr5h-1.html

This breakout board contains both a microphone and an operational amplifier and here are their respective data sheets:

  • Microphone element data sheet - LINK
  • Op Amp data sheet - LINK

As originally designed, the SparkFun board "sort of" works for ultrasonic detection, but there are a few circuit elements that require attention before we use it.  Consider the schematic, below:

Figure 9:
Diagram of the SparkFun BOB-19389 MEMS breakout board.  As can be seen,
there's nothing special about this design:  A microphone coupled to a single op-amp section - but
but there's a problem with this circuit in our application:  The gain set by R4 is unnecessarily high
for our needs and this - along with C3 - reduce the useful frequency response to less than 30-sh kHz.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The implementation of this breakout board is nothing special - and it's worth noting that even without the gain of the op-amp, the MEMS microphone itself would have a suitable amount of drive for the MFJ-5008.

As part of our circuit analysis, I will call the reader's attention to R4 and C3 (300k and 27pF, respectively) which form a simple low-pass filter - but these components, along with the unity-gain bandwidth product of this op amp being 1 MHz - conspire to cause the frequency response to roll off rather dramatically above 15-20 kHz or so:  It will still detect lower-frequency ultrasonic signals, but sensitivity is reduced at higher frequencies while the signals that we don't want (e.g. audio-range frequencies) are not attenuated - and even if the frequency response was flat into the ultrasonic range, it would have way too much gain for our application, anyway!

Figure 10:
A close-up of the SparkFun BOB-19389 MEMS microphone
break-out board.  The location of C3 - now replaced by a
resistor.  Not also that the "sound hole" of the microphone
is on the bottom of the board, facing down in this photo.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The "fix" is to replace C3 with a resistor.  For the MFJ-5008 I would suggest using a 10k resistor in this location and by lowering the gain, the op amp's bandwidth product isn't going to get in the way of the needed frequency response.  While it doesn't really matter if one removes the capacitor or not when using a 10k resistor (the -3dB point for a 10k resistor and 27pF capacitor is somewhere north of 500 kHz) it's pretty easy to remove just the capacitor and replace it with the resistor if you have SMD parts on hand.  If you have only through-hole parts, it should be possible to tack a 1/4 or 1/8 watt 10k resistor across them.  (Note:  I used the MEMS board in Figure 10 for a different project which is why there's a 47k resistor at the position of C3:  A 10k resistor is appropriate for the MFJ-5008.)

The other issue is that of the voltage range of the breakout board's components.  In testing, the board worked "OK" at just 1.8 volts - below the "official" specifications of the the Op Amp - but it worked "better" in the specified 2.3-3.6 volt range.  In the modification for the MFJ-5008 described above, the addition of the 4.7k resistor across the "audio in" phono plug put the full 9 volts battery voltage (minus resistive drop) on this line so we need to do two things to make this work:

  • Limit the voltage to the 2.3-3.6 volt range.
  • Combine split the audio signal from the voltage at the microphone breakout board.

Fortunately, this is quite easy, requiring just a small number of components and the following diagram shows:

Figure 11:
Powering the SparkFun MEMS break-out board from the audio cable with DC bias on it as depicted in the MFJ-5008 modifications, above.  Capacitor C1 blocks the DC from the Op Amp,
resistor R1 isolates the audio and DC lines while LED1 is used as a voltage shunt to limit the
voltage to somewhere between 2.3 and 3.6 volts:  An ordinary white or blue LED is perfect for this
as they are readily available and provide a voltage in the middle of this range.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Note:  I could have simply run a separate DC line from the circuit board to the detector, but this would have still required regulating the voltage down to the voltage needed for the MEMS device:  Putting DC on the signal line is easy to do and it requires only a few, inexpensive components.

Capacitor C1 has two functions:  Block the DC from the "Audio Out" terminal and to offer a bit of a high-pass frequency response to filter audio-range energy.  Resistor R1 extracts the voltage from the "DC + Audio" line and sends it to the "VCC" terminal on the breakout board and across this, the LED acts as a voltage limiter.  As noted in the diagram above, one can use a blue or white LED as the voltage limiter:  These will "turn on" at between 2.8 and 3.2 volts which is right in the range that we need.  Alternatively, if you have some "old fashioned" red LEDs that operate from about 1.7-1.8 volts, two of these in series will do the job.

Figure 12:
The SparkFun MEMS microphone break-out board with
the circuitry in Figure 11.  These components could be
"dead bug" mounted like shown in the photo or they
could be incorporated on the "carrier" board used to hold
it at the focus of the dish - either method works!  The
"sound hole" can be seen in the lower-right portion of the
board, just above the letter "H".  Note that it is not
centered on the board - something to note when mounting.
Click on the image for a larger version.

It is recommended that you use the "diode test" function of an volt-ohm meter to verify the turn-on voltage of your LEDs and to make sure that they are connected correctly.  If you have a variable-voltage bench power supply, connect it across the two leads and, starting out at less than 2 volts, slowly increase it while measuring the voltage across the "GND" and "VCC" connections:  The voltage should limit in the 2.3-3.6 volt range and you should see the LED(s) dimly illuminate.  In testing I haven't found that light falling on the LED causes any effects in the audio, but if you are, for some reason, worried about that, feel free to cover the LED with black paint, put it in some black heat-shrink tube or shield it from light in some other way.  (Note that in the MFJ-5008, the carrier board is contained within the "C" channel aluminum pieces and mostly shielded from light, anyway.)

These three components may be mounted either as shown in Figure 12 with the components' "flying leads" holding things together, or on a piece of prototype board to function as the "carrier" board of the same type shown in Figures 7 and 8.  Note that the "sound hole" on the breakout board is on the "back" (non-component) side of the circuit board (visible in Figure 12) and that it is NOT in the center of the board and take this into account when you are mounting it to the "carrier" board.

Final words on the MFJ-5008 modifications

The above modifications should allow the MFJ-5008 to work over a wider variety of frequencies to allow optimum detection of energy from electric arcs, high-pressure gas leaks, bats, insects, switch-mode power supplies and many other things.

Prior to modification, a "test range" was set up in my back yard:  A 40 kHz transducer was driven with a sweep/function generator (an old Wavetek Model 180) and the output level at its lowest-possible setting.  From about 33 feet (10 meters) away the "warble" from the swept output was easily audible - but not particularly strong.

After the modification, the subjective impression was that the sensitivity was equal or better than the original 40 kHz ceramic transducer - but a quick walk around the house revealed the ringing presence of several switch-mode power supplies, each producing low-level noises of their own due to magnetostriction of components within - something that was totally inaudible prior to the modification, made possible only by the broad-range response of the MEMS microphone and the added ability to tune the center frequency.

* * * * *

Footnote:

  • Here are a few suggested parts for the inductor in the modification of the MFJ-5008 - all 47mH:
    • https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Murata-Power-Solutions/17476C?qs=5CKLVr1iF0nvNdEM16T%2F2A%3D%3D
    • https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/EPCOS-TDK/B82144A2476J?qs=v4Mlc8l4PHmthTExsnwGmg%3D%3D
    • https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/bourns-inc/RLB1014-473KL/2561378
    • https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/murata-power-solutions-inc/22R476C/1924732
    • https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/central-technologies/CTS4HTF-473J/16048522

 * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com


[END]


tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-888625153546147158
Extensions
Impedance matching (auto) transformer and common-mode choke for the JPC-7 dipole and other electrically-short (loaded) dipoles and verticals
autotransformerdipoleimpedanceimpedance matchingJPC-12JPC-7loaded dipoleloading coilmatchingSWRtunertuningVSWR
Show full content

Figure 1:
The JPC-7 loaded dipole out in the wild!
Click on the image for a larger version.

Loading coils and "electrically-short" antennas

It is well-known that you can make a "short" wire (e.g. one that is significantly shorter than 1/4 wavelength at the operating frequency) resonant by putting in series with it a coil.  There is no "magic" in this as the inductance of the coil, appropriately chosen, can completely cancel out the capacitance of the electrically-short wire, result being that at "resonance" we are left only with a pure resistance.

In an ideal situation, what we would be left with would be just the radiation resistance of this antenna and for such an antenna, this would mean that the feedpoint resistance would be less than 50 Ohms - probably much less!  In reality, the feedpoint resistance would really a combination of "ground" (counterpoise) losses, conductor losses of the antenna, and losses of the coil itself.

What this means is that if you have an electrically short antenna such as a loaded dipole or vertical with only a series loading coil tuned to resonance at the frequency of interest and no other matching scheme, its feedpoint impedance should be well under 50 Ohms on some bands if it is operating efficiently.

This is often not the case with portable antennas!

Figure 2:
The original stainless steel coil (top) for the
JPC-7 (and JPC-12) with the coil rewound with
silver-plated "jewelry" wire (bottom).
Click on the image for a larger version.

The JPC-7

Some time ago I wrote extensively about the JPC-7 (See the article, "Observations, analysis and field use of the JPC-7 portable "dipole" antenna" - LINK) where I discussed the bits and pieces comprising it:  I have used it in the field a number of times, finding it to work as advertised.

In short, this is a loaded dipole - at least on the lower amateur bands (especially 40 and 30 meters) that is intended for portable use:  On these bands (including 20 and 17 meters) it is physically shorter than 1/2 wavelength and it requires the adjustment of its series inductors to resonate.  On the higher bands (15 and above) its overall length approaches and exceeds a half wavelength meaning that it's a full-sized dipole and is (generally) tuned by adjusting the length of the telescoping sections.

Lossy coils!

There is a down-side:  As sold, it has loading coils that are wound with stainless steel:  As noted in the original article, these coils are very lossy, with MOST of the RF power being dissipated as heat on the lower bands (40 and 30 meters in particular - roughly an "S" unit of signal loss) where a fair bit of inductance is required.

Figure 3:
An example of heating of a stainless steel
loading coil on a short vertical - here, made by
Wolf River.  On 40 meters the temperature of
the coil rose by more than 30F (17C) with
60 watts of RF applied for 60 seconds.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The reason for this is that an electrically-short antenna (one that is physically short compared to the wavelength.)  The total length of the telescoping sections alone put together is about 198" (5 meters) - which is about 12.5% of a wavelength at 40 meters implies that the feedpoint resistance would, were there no loss at all, be around 8-10 Ohms, resulting in a VSWR of more than 4:1.

Calculations and measurements indicate that the approximate Ohmic loss of the original stainless-steel loading coil - if we optimistically presume it to have a Q of 47 - would be about 19 Ohms per coil (remember that there are two coils!) and the sum of the two coils would push feedpoint resistance near-ish 50 Ohms.  The result is that roughly 1 "S-unit" (about 6dB) is lost in the coils alone:  Contacts would still be made, but running a "compromised" antenna (e.g. physically small) that already would be less-efficient than its full-sized counterpart and adding another S-unit of loss doesn't sound like an optimal solution!

Using silver-plated copper "Jewelry Wire" (found on Amazon) to rewind the original loading coils dramatically improved the "Q" (approximately 200) and lowering the Ohmic loss to around 4 Ohms.  The result of this is that rather than something in the 40-50 Ohms for the feedpoint resistance, it dropped to "about 15" Ohms on 40 meters - a VSWR of around 3:1 - and even lower impedance than that (higher VSWR) when I reconfigured the antenna for 60 meters (e.g. added extra screw-together sections, moved the coils next to the feedpoint and added extra "drooping" wires to the ends of the dipole).  At the higher bands (20 meters and up) the feedpoint impedance is close enough to 50 Ohms that one can probably forego the auto transformer at all.

For more information about the "Silver-plated versus Stainless Steel" topic, see the blog entry "Rewinding the Stainless Steel coils with Silver-Plated copper wire on the JPC-7 and JPC-12 antennas" - link.

When a worse VSWR is a good thing!

The first thought when being faced with a higher VSWR on an antenna might be that it was made to be worse - but here is a instance where this is not the case.  As noted earlier, an electrically short antenna like a dipole or vertical can be made to be "longer" (from an RF standpoint) with the addition of a "loading" coil - but the job of the coil is to cancel out the capacitance of the, leaving only the resistive portion of the antenna's feedpoint impedance.

For a full-sized dipole or vertical, this resistance is "close enough" to 50 Ohms (perhaps 35-70 Ohms, depending on the antenna and its environment) to provide a decent load to a modern radio - even one without tuner.  But a very small antenna - where a lot more "coil" is required - will have a lower feedpoint resistance unless your coil is very lossy, as was the case with the stainless steel coils on the JPC-7.  With the lower-loss silver plated coil we (mostly) eliminate it as a lossy component - but end up with a different problem.

With a feedpoint resistance of 13-15 Ohms on 40 meters with the JPC-7 and silver plated coil and its resulting 3-ish:1 VSWR one can "fix" this with an antenna tuner to make the radio happy - and I have done this many times, placing the tuner (an LDG Z-11 Pro) right at the antenna (only a few feet/a meter of coax) but almost all common antenna tuners have quite high losses at these low impedances.

Testing with the cover of the tuner removed, I have noted that one ore more of its toroids in particular will run very warm with just 100 watts of power - Figure 4 shows the inside of this tuner showing one of its toroids discolored because of this.  Fortunately, iron-powder toroids are very forgiving of heating with very high Curie temperatures and other than cosmetic (e.g. discoloring the paint) moderate heating won't have any lasting effects as long as it remains intact (e.g. not cracked) and there aren't problems with (possibly-degraded) insulation between turns of the windings.

The other issue is that the balun originally supplied with the JPC-7 - intended for 50 Ohm operation - also got very warm, and after a bit more than a minute of continuous 100 watts at 40 meters the VSWR would start to rise due to its ferrite reaching the Curie temperature, causing the permeability to drop like a rock:  Essentially, the ferrite would "go away" when it got hot - likely not a problem on SSB or CW, but it might be on "key down" digital modes at full power.  This heating seemed to be more severe at the low impedances (below 20 Ohms) than at 50 Ohms.

Eliminating the tuner

Figure 4:
Inside the LDG Z-11 antenna tuner.  The center
toroid shows evidence of have been heated,
apparently due to matching very low "R".
Click on the image for a larger version.

By definition, we can remove the reactive component of the short antenna with the loading coil:  Its inductance will cancel out the capacitance of the antenna at resonance (which is the very definition of resonance) leaving only a pure resistance.  While an antenna tuner is able to cancel out capacitive and inductive reactance - or just pure resistance - we have a situation where, with a properly-tuned loading coil - we have only resistance and for that we don't need a tuner and we can use just a transformer, to change the impedance from whatever it is to 50 Ohms.

An easy way to do this is with an autotransformer.  This is a device with just one winding and in this case - where we are trying to tune to a feedpoint resistance lower than 50 Ohms - we can feed our power across the ends of the entire coil and tap it at various points along the winding to get our desired (lower) impedance.  For my application, having several taps between about 10 and 40 Ohms (plus the natural 50 Ohm feed impedance) would assure the ability to attain a VSWR of better than 1.5:1 for any purely resistive impedance between 7 and 75 Ohms.

The tyranny of the "electrically small antenna" and efficiency

It's worth noting several things about electrically-small low-band HF antennas - which includes portable antennas like the JPC-7, JPC-12 as well as mobile antennas - and how they interact with common antenna tuners (which an autotransformer is not):

  • Any efficient, electrically-small vertical antenna will have a very low impedance once it is resonated:  For example, a "perfect", loss-less 1.5 meter (4.9 foot) long vertical antenna system on 40 meters would have a radiation resistance of about half an Ohm.
  • Without losses due to the coils and stainless-steel telescoping rods, etc., the feedpoint resistance of the JPC-7 would, at 40 meters, be in the vicinity of 3-5 Ohms, depending on how many screw-together sections are used (e.g. the longer, the higher).
  • Any automatic (or manual) antenna tuner that you are likely to ever use for portable operation will have rather poor efficiency when trying to match at lower than 20 Ohms or so - which translates to heat as demonstrated in Figure 4.

These facts - among others - conspire against having a small, efficient mobile antenna for the lower HF bands (e.g. 80-40 meters).  In the real world, losses (coil, antenna wire, ground) will conspire to make the feedpoint impedance much higher than the "less than an Ohm" that the would theoretically be - and any difference between the feedpoint resistance at resonance and the predicted radiation resistance is where most of the power in such an antenna system is lost:  In a typical antenna of this sort, the vast majority of transmitted power is lost in heat rather than radiated.

With significant efforts, it may be practical to get the losses of such an antenna system (which includes not just the antenna, but the series matching coil and ground losses an other factors) down to about 10 Ohms - still far above the 0.5-5 Ohms of our "perfect" antennas in the examples above - but as we know, physics conspires against us as trying to force-feed such an antenna with a tuner will probably put it into the impedance range where it is very inefficient.

It's worth noting that many simple and inexpensive mobile antennas achieve at least part of their "matching" to 50 Ohms simply by being lossy:  Most of the power is simply burned up in the coil.  This method is convenient in that it simplifies the problem with matching and is often accompanied by much wider tuning bandwidth (reducing the need to frequently re-tune when one changes frequency) than with our hypothetical "high efficiency" antenna, but the trade-off is poor efficiency.

Auto transformer for impedance matching

Another way to handle this is to simply transform (pun intended!) the impedance downwards from 50 Ohms - and one way that this could be done is with a transformer of some type - and the simplest of these is one with a single winding, called an autotransformer:  Such transformers are commonly used to match a random wire (9:1 matching to about 450 Ohms) and for end-fed half-wave antennas (49:1 matching to about 2450 Ohms) - but we can also efficiently transform the impedance downwards.  By designing appropriately, this transformer can be made to be very efficient.

It would seem that the use of an auto transformer for matching a low-impedance antenna - such as a low-band mobile antenna on a vehicle - used to be more common decades ago, but has fallen out of favor, possibly due to the easy and cheap availability of automatic antenna tuners:  Devices that do this function include the Atlas MT-1 (see Figure 5) and the Swan MMBX, both of which have a number of low-impedance taps. 

Figure 5:
The Atlas MT-1 autotransformer,  The variety of
taps available provide the possibility of achieving a 1.5:1
match to any resistive loads between 9 and 75 Ohms.
Click on the image for a larger version.

My initial thought was to use a ferrite toroid as the core for the auto transformer.  As a general rule of thumb, a transformer should ideally have an inductive reactance of about ten times that of the operating impedance at the lowest frequency (e.g. 500 Ohms for a 50 Ohm system) but, in a pinch, just three times the operating impedance (e.g. 150 Ohms for a 50 Ohm system) was "OK".  With this in mind I wound 7 turns on an FT140-43 toroid with multiple taps.  The inductance of this arrangement was about 45uH which correlates with about 1900 Ohms at 7 MHz - well above the target inductive reactance but it would have been difficult to achieve the multiple taps needed to attain the impedance steps with fewer turns.

This transformer - wound on ferrite - did not work well at all!  When testing it on the antenna, I could not achieve a sensible match and I quickly realized that the problem was due to leakage inductance of the transformer itself.  An ideal transformer would simply transform the voltage according to the tap's turns ratio, but any practical transformer will place some amount of inductance in series with the supposedly ideal tap, and it was likely this spurious series inductance (which needed only to be a few uH to make it "un-matchable") was totally messing up the attempt to tune the antenna, departing far from the ideal transformer at RF.

Measuring the self-inductance of the Atlas MT-1 confirmed this:  Its end-to-end inductance was about 2uH and the inductances between the taps and ground - the results of these measurements made using my HP-4275A LCR Meter (at 4 and 10 MHz - interpolated at 7 MHz) are as follows:

Tap marking
(Ohms)@ 4 MHz
Inductance uH
(XL Ohms)@ 7 MHz (Interpolated)
Inductance uH
(XL Ohms)@ 10 MHz
Inductance uH
(XL Ohms)521.87uH
(46.6)1.8uH
(79)1.74uH
(116)230.95uH
(24.4)0.95uH
(41.8)0.95uH
(61)180.77uH
(18.1)0.75uH
(33)0.72uH
(47)130.61uH
(14.3)0.57uH
(25)0.53uH
(35.8)

Figure 6:
The impedances (XL ) of the taps on the Atlas MT-1 auto transformer versus frequency.

While "about 2uH" of inductance at 40 meters (7 MHz) doesn't fit the "3x reactance" rule-of-thumb (e.g. 79 Ohms XL in a 50 Ohm system) it will still work OK, acting as a parallel inductance across the antenna - but the important part is that there will be a fraction of the leakage inductance compared to the version with the ferrite core mentioned above:  A small amount of this inductance would lower the resonance frequency slightly, but not disastrously so.

Figure 7:
The auto-transformer, wound on a T157-2 iron-powder
toroid with taps terminated with 2.5mm banana plugs.
Click on the image for a larger version.Replicating the auto transformer

Rather than reinventing the wheel, I decided to (more or less) replicate the electrical properties of the MT-1 (and similar devices) and for this I chose a T157-2 Iron-powder toroid.  With a target inductance of "about" 2uH I wound 13 turns of 16AWG silver-plated PTFE (Teflon) insulated wire which should, in theory yield about 2.4uH - but when compressed together on the core it yielded about 3.6uH which correlates with about 158 Ohm at 7 MHz -  almost exactly 3x the 50 Ohm system impedance.

As can be seen in Figure 7, taps were placed at 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11 turns (from ground) by scraping the insulation off the side if the wire and tack-soldering wires to it providing impedance taps of approximately 11, 14, 19, 24, 36 Ohms - plus another wire across the 50 Ohm feed for the higher bands:  These impedances resulted from where the turns landed and it was convenient to attach taps rather than from any attempts to obtain specific or precise impedances:  After construction, I labeled the leads with the approximate impedances - for obvious reasons!

I used five taps to allow a selection of an impedance to be able to obtain about 1.25:1 VSWR or better, but if I were happy with just 1.5:1, I could have chosen fewer taps in the manner of the Atlas MT-1 discussed, above.

As the impedance of a tap is related to square relation of the number of turns (e.g. twice the number of turns results in 4x the impedance) there's a pretty simple formula to follow to calculate the impedance of a tap:

Ztap = (Zsys) / ((Turnstotal/Turnstap)2)

Where:

Ztap = Impedance of the autotransformer tap

Zsys = System impedance (typically 50 Ohms)

Turnstotal = Total number of turns on the autotransformer (13 turns in our example)

Turnstap = Number of turns from the bottom (ground) end of the autotransformer to the tap

In other words:

 Ztap = (50) / ((Turnstotal/Turnstap)2)

Taking our 13 turn autotransformer as an example, we can calculate the impedance at any turn.  Taking the 8th turn as an example:

Ztap = (50) / ((13/8)2)  therefore,

Ztap = 18.9 Ohms 

Or, if you know the desired target impedance and want to calculate the turn on which to make that tap, here's the above formula rewritten to solve for it:

Turnstap = Turnstotal / √(Zsys /Ztap)

I also included a "50 Ohm" tap (which is connected at the "top" of the transformer, across all of the windings) so that I could still use the common-mode choke (described below) even when operating on the higher bands (20 meters and above) where the natural impedance was close enough to 50 Ohms that I probably wouldn't have needed the autotransformer for impedance transformation, anyway.

At the end of the flying leads are 2.5mm "banana" plugs - which plug in to the feedpoint of the JPC-7.  These allow the selection of taps on the auto transformer which permits the VSWR to be minimized for those bands for which the feedpoint impedance is significantly lower than 50 Ohms:  A bit of care is required to prevent the "floating" banana plugs from touching each other (or anything else metal) but this isn't actually much of a problem.

Initial testing using a kludge of clip leads, I verified with my NanoVNA that the auto transformer worked as it should (e.g. I was able to attain less than 1.5:1 VSWR on 60, 40 and 30 meters) and almost as important, the tuning with the auto transformer was only slightly different from that using the original balun indicating that the leakage inductance of the auto transformer was not much different than that of the originally-supplied balun.

Adding a common-mode choke

Feeding a dipole (which is a balanced antenna) with coaxial cable has the inherent hazard of RF appearing on the coaxial cable feedline due to the symmetry of the antenna.  Excessive RF on the feedline can result in a "hot" rig - that is, RF energy appearing on the chassis of the radio as well which can result in distortion (RF getting into the microphone) and/or malfunction of peripherals (outboard keyer malfunctioning, USB interfaces crashing, interference to the sound card) and out "in the field" where one may not have an elaborate ground system already, this may be more likely than at home.

Figure 8:
The auto transformer (left) plus a common-mode coaxial
choke (right).  The choke is wound on an FT140-43 ferrite
toroid.  Both toroids are in the foreground for comparison.
Click on the image for a larger version.The "input" to the auto transformer is simply the opposite ends of its 13 turn winding which would normally be soldered to an RF connector.  Rather than doing that, I soldered it to a 36" (91cm) piece of RG-316 PTFE coaxial cable - the shield going to the "bottom" (ground) side of the auto transformer, insulating the connections with adhesive-lined heat-shrink tubing.  The rest of this RG-316 was wound on an FT140-43 toroid yielding 13 turns using the "cross-over" technique where about half of the turns are wound on the opposite side of the toroid:  This method is said to (slightly) increase the series choking impedance at higher frequencies (e.g. 15 meters and up).

Not having a UHF connector designed for RG-316 on hand, I used a crimp-type PL-259 intended for RG-58.  I stripped more than usual of the jacket from the end of the coax, folding the shield over the outer sheath.  Using some PTFE tubing and part of the jacket stripped from the coax itself I was able to increase the effective diameter of the inner dielectric.  Assembling the cable - remembering to include the ferrule and pieces of adhesive-lined heat shrink - I was able to fold the outer shield over the ferrule after a bit of tugging on it to increase its inner diameter.  At that point, I was able to crimp the ferrule into place, securing the coaxial cable firmly.

Figure 9:
The auto transformer with the common
mode choke on the JPC-7's feed.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Since RG-316 is fairly small (it's the same size as RG-174) - and because the weight of the connecting coaxial cable and the common-mode choke itself would be hanging from the cable - I protected the connector with several pieces of adhesive-lined shrink tubing - using a smaller piece just behind the connector to increase its outside diameter and then a larger piece over the ferrule, onto the previous piece of tubing. Not content with this, I wound several turns of "miniature" paracord (1.15mm diameter) onto the ferrule and tied it securely, feeding both free ends underneath yet another piece of heat-shrink tubing that was then installed over where I'd tied the paracord - taking careful care not to damage the cord when applying heat to shrink it.

These two strands of mini-paracord were then counter-wound over the RG-316 as can be seen in Figures 8 and 9 and were tied to the ferrite core of the common-mode choke such that when hanging, the weight of the connector was on the cord and not the coaxial cable:  I did a similar thing between the core of the auto transformer and the balun to prevent the cable itself from being pulled.

Putting it on the antenna

Figures 8 and 9 shows the combination auto transformer and common-mode choke at the feedpoint of the JPC-7 loaded vertical.  As noted earlier, testing showed only a slight difference in tuning between the lowest VSWR achieved with the original 1:1 balun and the transformer-choke combination indicating that its effect was minimal:  As figure 10 shows, transmitting 100 watts on 40 meters also resulted in only very slight heating of the auto transformer - certainly a much lower amount of signal loss than that which resulted in the heating and discoloring of the toroid in the antenna tuner pictured in Figure 4.

Figure 10:
Thermal infrared view of the autotransformer
(top) and common-mode choke (bottom)
after 60 seconds key-down with 100 watts
on 40 meters.  The temperature of the
autotransformer increased only by about 2F
(1C) while the common-mode choke got about
10F (6C) warmer.
Click for a slightly larger version.
Testing the common-mode choke
 The efficacy of the common-mode coaxial choke was also verified:  Without it, grasping the shield of the coaxial cable with one's hand would result in slight detuning of the antenna, but with it, there was no detectable effect - and there was no detectable amount of "hot rig" due to the presence of common-mode currents flowing beyond the choke and onto the radio's chassis - even without the use of a counterpoise/ground wire.
 The presence or lack of effect of the change of antenna tuning when body capacitance is introduced is a simple - but effective - means of determining the presence of RF current on the feedline at the point where it is grasped.  Figure 10 shows that this core heated only minimally - also indicative of low loss.

Does it work?

I have put this configuration pictured in Figure 9 on the air several times since assembling it on 60 through 15 meters.  As expected, the best match on 60 meters (<1.5:1) required the 11 Ohm tap while 40 meters seemed fine with either the 11 or 14 Ohm tap.  20 meters, on the other hand, found the best match using the 36 Ohm tap while 15 meters worked well with either this or the 50 Ohm tap.  Again, the heating of the autotransformer at 100 watts was also minimal on any band - even on the 60 and 40 meters where the losses would probably have been the highest.

Conclusion

The use of an autotransformer rather than an L/C antenna tuner is a time-honored means of matching an "electrically-short" antenna, so what has been presented is nothing new - but it may be "new" to some of the readers.  For a portable antenna such as this, its size and relative simplicity can't be beat as it's far smaller than any antenna tuner that could handle 100 watts at the low impedances that may be presented - and it's certainly lower loss as well!

The only "complication" is that which is already intrinsic to this type of antenna:  As this is a dipole, there are two elements - each with its own coil and telescoping rod making it a bit "fiddly" to tune, something best done with a VNA or antenna analyzer.  With this antenna I keep a card that is marked with the physical locations of the tap positions of the two coils for the various bands:  These are held up to the coil and the sliders adjusted, quickly getting "close" to a match with the analyzer used to do any final touch-ups on the tuning.

* * * * * * *

Related pages:

* * * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.com

[END]

 


tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-564492750667603643
Extensions
How I prevented QRM to HF reception from my solar charger and AC inverter at Quartzfest
charge controllerHFinterferenceinverterNoiseqrmRFIsolar
Show full content

Figure 1:
White board from Quartzfest!
Click on the image for a larger version
As it happens, I found myself at QuartzFest in Arizona in the latter half of January, 2026 where we set up some banners proclaiming the existence of the Northern Utah WebSDR (link) - but I also scribbled on a small white board the words "QRM-Free Solar is possible - Ask How!".

Between the SDR, this message and the diverse portable HF antennas erected, I have had a lot of conversations over the past several days about these and many other topics, meeting new people and re-acquainting myself with others that I've seen on and off over the past several years of my attending QuartzFest (this is year #4 for me.)

RFI-less solar IS possible 

During the "Solar Walkabout" - an on-foot tour to look at how others camping have deployed their solar panels - I volunteered to have folks look at what I'd set up:  It's nothing obviously special - a glass-panel 200 watt Renogy folding array and another Renogy "flexible" solar array - but there is one major difference:  It does NOT produce HF QRM, meaning that I can plant my portable antennas near my panels and not get any interference on HF.

As I've done some previous articles on this, what I'll present here is mostly a set of links to those articles with a quick overview, but this effectively puts that information in one, handy place.

Let's start with quieting the Renogy solar charge controllers:

Reducing QRM (interference) from a Renogy 200 watt (or any other!) portable solar panel system- Link

Figure 2:
My humble, RF-quiet solar array at 2026 Quartzfest
Click on the image for a larger version.The main issue with Solar charge controllers is that you have a "dipole + transmitter" situation:  The panels themselves do NOT cause RFI, but the charge controller is effectively a transmitter - especially if it's a PWM and/or MPPT-type - and the legs of the "dipole" are the solar panels (possibly long wires connected to large, rectangular pieces of metal) and another set of wires going to the battery - which also find their way around your RV/campsite via the inverters, DC wires, etc.:  It is no surprise at all that RF finds its way out of these things!  By adding filtering, we are effectively "shorting out" the the RF at the feedpoint of this hypothetical dipole and preventing it from radiating.

To quiet these panels, I added bifilar-wound ferrite toroids - but also bypass capacitors:  The toroids (ferrite) alone will probably knock down the QRM by 2-3 "S" Units, but if you are getting S-9+ interference from your solar, simply knocking it down to S-6 or S-7 when you are in the boondocks - where the natural noise floor is closer to S-1 or S-1 - is still pretty bad!

The key here is adding capacitors in addition to the ferrites and this method is perfectly capable of quieting even the noisiest of solar chargers.  It is also vitally important to put this filtering physically close to the noisy device and use good-quality bypass capacitors. 

Figure 3:
Filtering on the bottom of the Renogy controller
making it RF-quiet.
Click on the image for a larger version.

While the above blog entry showed a modest (200 watt) system, the above can be scaled up for higher-power systems:  Larger wire will handle more current and larger toroids will accommodate it!

RF Quieting a Samlex 150 watt Sine Wave inverter - Link 

Another component of RV/camping with power is the inverter to run mains-voltage devices, and these can be terrible noise sources.  The article above shows how it's possible to make one of these devices completely quiet.  For the older Samlex inverter - which was terribly noisy out-of-the-box, it is now quiet enough that I can power LED Christmas lights from it that are strong from the same mast as the antenna and I get NO RFI (the LED Christmas themselves don't produce QRM).

I was fortunate that there was enough room in the Samlex's case to be able to add this filtering, but it may be added externally as well, provided that the leads are kept short.

What follows below are some methods for quieting UPSs (Uninterruptable Power Supplies).  These are very much like the inverters in an RV in that they produce mains voltage from battery power - and the same problems with RFI occur:

A high-current DC (and AC) noise filter for UPS or RV use - Link

This shows a rather extreme example (an 8kVA UPS) where high currents are involved:  Such would be the case with a kilowatt-class DC-AC inverter or even a large PV system.

Containing RF noise from a sine wave UPS - Link

This article shows the techniques involved in quieting a lower-power UPS, but it also introduces some other components:  Rather than winding your own filter using toroids and wire, you can get "Line Filter" modules from electronic parts supplies (e.g. Digi-Key, Mouser) with brand names like "Corcom" or "Delta" (among many others.)  These are self-contained modules with the components built-in - available in a wide variety of voltage and current ratings - that can do an excellent job of filtering.

 

Completely containing switching power supply RFI - Link

This is an extreme example, but it shows how one might be able to make even the noisiest switching power supply quiet - and this might be important to someone who is trying to get every device in their ham shack - whether it be at home or on the road - quiet.  This method is foolproof in its effectiveness, but it is also likely overkill for many applications, but it discusses the "how and why" these techniques can work.

* * * * * * 

I hope that this helps those who venture out in the wild with their RVs, solar power and battery system and still be able to operate HF.

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]

 

 

 

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-6370307257904101128
Extensions
Neon bar-graph VSWR/Power meter using the ИН-13 (a.k.a "IN-13") "Nixie" - Part 3 (of 3)
AD8307bar-graphbridgeIN-13neonnixiepeakpowerpower meterRF power meterrussianSWRtandem bridgeVSWRИН-13
Show full content

Figure 1:
Power/VSWR meter using ИН-13 neon bar-graph indicators.
This was taken prior to installing the dark plastic to
improve contrast
Click on the image for a larger version
In Part 1 (link)  I talked a bit about the origination of the design - and how the high voltage for the Neon tubes were generated and how the tubes would be driven along with the "Tandem" power detector using the AD8307 logarithmic amplifiers. In part 2 (link) I showed how the tubes were connected and mounted, the laser-cut acrylic backplane and the associated LED-based edge lighting.

In this - the final installment - we'll see how it all goes together.

* * *

As I'm wont to do, I used a PIC microcontroller for this - chosen because I'm more familiar with it than something like an Arduino - and something more "powerful" (an ESP or similar) would be overkill and arguably more difficult to implement as we'll see.

In the PIC environment I have used - for decades - the PICC compiler by CCS (Custom Computer Services) having started out with a very early compiler of theirs.  Programming in K&R C allows me to get pretty close to the "Bare Metal" of the microcontroller where I tend to write in low-level code and extensively use the interrupts and state machines to get things done.

Before delving right into details about the code, let's first look at the remainder of the schematic - and rather than make you, the reader, go back and look at previous installments, I'll include them all below in their entirety, starting with the controller and power supply.

Figure 2: 
Schematic of the controller and LV and HV power supplies.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The controller that I chose for this is the PIC18F1330 - an device in an 18 pin package that sports a built-in clock to permit operation at 32 MHz with no external crystal, PWM generators and a multiplexed 10 bit A/D converter.

High voltage control

As can be seen, "PWM1" is connected directly to our high voltage transistor, Q301 which is used to do a voltage boost, with R301 - a pull-down resistor - used to turn it off when the processor is in an indeterminate state.  As mentioned before, I tend to use state machines and interrupts heavily in my microcontroller code and with a PWM frequency of 31.25 kHz to generate the high voltage, I also have the interrupts occurring at that same rate, driven by the same clock source as the PWM.

Within the ISR (Interrupt Service Routine) there is a state machine that reads the A/D inputs - namely the high voltage, the forward power and the reverse power - but there's a catch here:  There is only ONE actual A/D converter - and this poses a problem.  Generating a stable high voltage requires a closed loop feedback - and with a processor there's always going to be a bit of delay, but what's worse is that since we have only a single A/D converter we must constantly switch it between the three voltage sources that we must measure - but this has several steps:

  • Set the A/D channel.  After doing this we must wait for a time for the A/D MUX switch to settle - but we can't afford to sit and "spin our wheels" in the ISR as we don't have the time:  While we are in our the ISR we really can't do much else.
  • Start the conversion.  Once our MUX has settled we can safely start our conversion.  This takes much longer than setting the A/D channel - but much shorter than our ISR period.
  • Get the result.  On the next ISR cycle the A/D converter will have finished and we can put the result in memory and set flags to indicate to the rest of our code that it's ready to be processed.
    • Note:  At this point we can conserve time a bit and upon getting our result, we can set the A/D channel for the next conversion:  This means that we get a new A/D reading every other ISR cycle.

 To minimize "lag" in our closed loop voltage control, I do the following "gets" of analog data:

  • Get the HV reading
  • Get the Forward power reading
  • Get the HV reading
  • Get the Reverse power reading

By alternatively grabbing the high voltage reading every fourth ISR cycle we can use this information to "tweak" the PWM duty cycle:  If the voltage is too high, we reduce the duty cycle slightly and if too low, we increase it - and this adjustment, within the ISR, is triggered by a flag that is set every time we get an update of its voltage.

Before we leave the discussion of the high voltage generator I'll note that it's triggered by the detection of RF:

  • Immediately on the detection of RF from the transmitter, the high voltage generator is activated.
  • About 3 seconds after the last detection of RF from the transmitter, the high voltage generator is turned off. 

According to the specifications, these neon tubes have only a limited lifetime - as is the case with any gas discharge tube that is glowing - so it makes no sense to "wear them out" unless there's information (e.g. a reading of RF power) to be displayed.  Additionally, the high voltage generator in my unit produces a just audible bit of RF interference in the form of weak "birdies" spaced at the 31.25 kHz PWM interval - and shutting off the high voltage generator soon after transmitting has stopped prevents their being heard.

Backlight control

Let's now look at the diagram of the backlight drivers.

Figure 3:
Tube and LED drivers - along with buffering from the power detectors.
Click in the image for a large version.

As can be seen there are three LED backlight drivers:  One for the Forward power using white LEDs, one for the Reverse power power using blue LEDs and another for the VSWR using Green LEDs.  In order to adjust the brightness, these are also driven by a PWM signal that is smoothed and fed to a the same sort of "precision current sink" circuit using an op amp and transistor as the Neon tubes themselves.

While there are other PWM channels on the PIC18F1330, I chose to use a "software" PWM as I already had available a rather fast ISR (31.25 kHz) that would be able to provide a smooth enough control voltage:  As can be seen in Figure 3, a 150k resistor and 0.1uF capacitor (e.g. R501 and C501, respectively for the "FWD" channel) are used to smooth the PWM signal - the two components providing a time constant of about 15 milliseconds (67 Hz).  In the ISR the "software PWM" uses 128 steps and at the 31.25 kHz rate this yields a frequency of about 244 Hz - about 4 times that of the R/C filter making it pretty much flicker-free while allowing a fast response time.

The way the "software PWM" works is that in the ISR there's a counter that goes from 0-127, and the value of this counter is lower than or equal to our desired PWM (brightness) value, the corresponding PWM output is turned ON - otherwise if it OFF.

Dimming LEDs in a "believable" way 

Before moving on from the LED brightness control, it's worth mentioning something about the way the human eye perceives brightness.  While the actual LED brightness varies quite linearly in proportion to the PWM setting of 0-127 (off to fully "on"), if we wanted to slowly dim the LED from full brightness to off - and we simply decremented the value from 127 down to 0, our eyes would perceive it as dimming slowly at first - and then suddenly going out.  Perhaps it's my OCD kicking in, but I prefer a dimming LED to seem to fade out to nothing - and do so gradually without it perceptibly "snapping" off.

My intent is that when RF power is detected, the relevant backlight LEDs (always the "Forward" LED and the "Reverse" or "VSWR" as selected) are immediately turned on - but 30 seconds after RF is detected they are turned off.  As I found a "sudden turn-off" to be visually jarring, I decided to dim the LEDs slowly - but based on past experience with driving LEDs I knew that to make them visually dim "evenly" would require a bit of extra math.

The trick here - to set the dimming so that it seems to gradually fade out to nothing - is to use a fourth root and a bit of multiplication as follows:

  • Start with the brightness value of 0-127
  • "Invert" this value by subtracting it from 127 (now it's 127 to 0)
  • Multiply by 128 (this can be done by shifting the bits left seven times if using an unsigned integer)
  • Take the square root
  • Multiply by 128 again
  • Take the square root again
  • Subtract that value from 127
 The result of the above is a more visually pleasing "dimming" of the LED - one that appears - to the eye - to fade out "evenly" to extinction.

Calculating the RF power and VSWR

One advantage of using the AD8307 logarithmic amplifiers is that it gives us a reading in db per volt to the tune of about 25 millivolts per dB - and we can calculate return loss very easily - simply by subtracting the reverse from the forward readings.

Figure 4:
The ИН-13 neon bar-graph Wattmeter/VSWR bridge showing
the instantaneous forward and reverse powers, with the
neutral-density filter installed.  (Very difficult to photograph!)
Click on the image for a larger version.

Return loss - while representing reflected power - is not how most hams think about reflected power - and VSWR is voltage - not power.  What we need to do is to translate our return loss to VSWR and the easiest way to do this is with a table - rather trivial to do in a microcontroller.  As we don't really need a lot of resolution on our VSWR meter (it's enough to represent "tenths" of a VSWR reading between 1.0 to 3.0 - and subsequently lower resolution than that at higher VSWR) the table need only consists of a couple dozen entries in the form of cascading "if-then" statements that spit out the VSWR directly.

We could do it with logarithms and floating point math, of course, but that's overkill!

As for calculating power in watts, there's no need for this:  If you look closely at the Forward Power scale in Figure 1 you'll note that it is already logarithmic:  The A/D values are simply offset and scaled to the PWM values needed to drive the tubes to the designated markings!

Peak and average values

As the power level of an SSB waveform is very "peaky", most analog meters only provide something roughly resembling an RMS value since they cannot move fast enough to capture the peak.  As we get new forward and reverse values every eight ISR cycles our update rate for the power readings is around 3.9 kHz.

As the bandwidth of a standard SSB signal is on the order of 2.5 kHz, we are sampling our power more frequently than its fastest rate-of-change and this means that not only are we likely to be able to capture a reasonably accurate representation, but also be reasonably assured that our forward and reverse power reading samples - which are about 128 microseconds apart - will also represent the same part of the the waveform:  Were this not true the VSWR readings could be "smeared" with the power changing between the instants that the forward and reverse power samples were taken.

As it happens, we really don't need the ultimate in temporal resolution for VSWR, so the calculation of "return loss" can be averaged a bit with no ill effects - and, in fact, the VSWR reading is quite stable at the widely disparate power levels intrinsic to SSB, anyway.

The code itself does have "peak" and "average" modes and the former uses a "sliding peak" detection - that is, it has a bit of a "hang time" on the output sent to the forward and reverse power displays to better-indicate the peak value and visually hold it.  The "average" power is more of a "sliding average" over the past hundred milliseconds or so and results in a "busier" display, with more movement.

Tube calibration

A quick look at the data sheets for the ИН-13 tubes will reveal that they are not well calibrated in terms of "milliamps-per-millimeter" with a fair bit of variation being allowed.  The ИН-13 tubes have lines painted on them at the factory indicating the "low" end (near the wire pinch) and the "high" end (near the tip) and these represent the useful and linear range over which the current can be represented.

The firmware thus includes - for each tube - a set of calibrations, accessible by the "mode" buttons in Figure 2 - that can be used to set the bottom and top of the scale.  This process will yield the needed PWM values - and thus the current - for the low and high end of the display and in so-doing, our microcontroller will "know" how to scale each tube to indicate with the best-possible accuracy.

Having been using this device for several years, now, I have observed that the tube sensitivity changes more with temperature than aging - but as it's not intended to be a "precision" indicator of power:  I only check the bottom/top scale calibration every year or two and have resisted the temptation of including temperature compensation.

Final comments

The only change that I made to this device after its construction was to add a sheet of 70% (dark) theater gel in front of the display to improve contrast.  While the neon tubes themselves and the laser-etched plastic look cool on their own, the display looks a bit "cluttered" unless a somewhat dark piece of plastic covers everything:  While this does dim the display a bit, the dark plastic - since it affects both the incoming and reflected light - offers the illusion that the display is brighter as the contrast is improved.

If you have any questions about this project (including underlying code and/or hardware) please let me know via a comment, below.

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]








tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-5278971444595120031
Extensions
Adding ALC and overdrive protection to the MFJ ALS-500M "500 watt" amplifier
3db500 watt amplifierALCALS-500MattenuatordamagedistortionMFJoverdriveoverload preventionpad
Show full content

Figure 1:
The ALS-500M front panel.  Because this
this unit is equipped with the 10 meter low-pass
filter, the "AUX" position on the front panel
switch is used to select 10/12 meters.
Click on the image for a larger version.The MFJ ALS-500M is a (nominally) 500 watt amplifier that was produced by MFJ, capable of covering from 160 meters through 15 meters - and 12/10 meters if so-equipped.

If you own an ALS-500M, you may have realized that it is a bit awkward to use:  If you are using it with a 100 watt radio, driving it with this much power will not only cause it to be badly overdriven - causing terrible on-air distortion on an SSB signal - but it will likely cause damage to the amplifier itself by throwing about twice as much power at it as it needs to work properly.  For this reason one must use a 50 watt radio (does one even exist?), one that puts out much less power (not taking advantage of the full-power output of the amplifier) or, more likely, always remember to turn down the output of a 100 watt radio and hope that it doesn't have a problem with "overshoot" (an issue described later).

To understand the problem, a friend's ALS-500M was powered from a variable-voltage supply with known-accurate wattmeters - one on the input to measure drive power and another to measure the output power, the amplifier itself terminated in a known-good 50 ohm load.  This same test set-up included a known-accurate DC ammeter as it was determined that the ALS-500M's own ammeter wasn't particularly accurate.

With this set-up, the characteristics of a friend's ALS-500M were measured on most amateur bands in terms of input and output power, at both 14.5 and 12.5 volts from the power supply.  (The voltage at the amplifier was lower than this due to resistance of the factory-supplied DC power cable.)

Freq (kHz) PWR In PWR Out DC Voltage DC Current 1825 5 65 14.5 18
8 180 14.5 31
22 300 14.5 43
30 410 14.5 52
45 525 14.5 60
60 600 14.5 63.5
6 82 12.5 21
22 300 12.5 43
30 450 12.5 56
45 480 12.5 59
65 500 12.5 63




1975 6 90 14.5 23
20 350
45
33 480
56
45 560
63
60 600
66.5
33 425 12.5 53




3650 6 80 14.5 23
20 290
47
36 425
60
50 500
66
62 500
70




3850 6 78
22
19 300
45
33 410
57
50 450
61
63 490
67
33 370 12.5 54




5371 6 95 14.5 27
18 340
52
34 480
64
50 525
71
34 380 12.5 60




7050 4 85 14.5 22
18 350
47
30 400
53
52 460
59
33 350 12.5 50




7250 5 87 14.5 23
18 350
46
33 410
53
52 480
58
33 350 12.5 49




14225 4 95 14.5 26
18 310
47
34 380
53
52 400
56
33 290 12.5 47.5




18100 5 75 14.5 22
20 210
37
35 260
41
55 300
44
35 200 12.5 36




21250 6 95 14.5 23
24 210
35
37 275
38
56 280
39
37 200 12.5 33




28345 5 68 14.5 25
22 275
50
34 325
55
52 390
62
34 300 12.5 53

From this data we can determine several things:

  • There are no instances where more than 50 watts drive is useful.  If you were to graph the input versus output power in the above chart you would see that the curve "flattens" by the time you get to about 50 watts drive meaning that further increases of input power do not result in the same proportion of increase in output power.  It is at this point that the amplifier is becoming very non-linear and severe distortion of SSB and AM signals will result if one attempts to drive it to still-higher output power.
  • While described as a "500 watt" amplifier, this is clearly optimistic. While barely capable of about 600 watts at 160 meters, the maximum usable "clean" (non-distorted) output drops to about 400 watts at the highest band, 10 meters.  This effect is due to physics:  The transistors in the amplifier are simply less capable at higher frequencies.
  • The power output is lower with a 12.5 volt supply than a 14.5 volt supply.  This is also due to physics and clearly specified in the manual:  You'll get 25-100 watts less output at the lower voltage, depending on the frequency and drive power.

Too much power is NOT a good thing!

The ALS-500M manual clearly warns against driving with too much power for the reasons mentioned above, but in addition to producing a bad-sounding signal on the air, feeding too much power to the amplifier (more than about 60 watts) is significantly exceeding the specifications of the (expensive!) transistors and it will dramatically increase heating of the components:  On this test amplifier, even briefly driving it at 65 watts caused the input power resistors to overheat slightly, resulting in an obvious smell, not to mention completely "flat-topping" (severely over-driving) it.

Why no ALC?

Since at least the 1960s both amateur transmitters and amplifiers have included an ALC (Automatic Level Control) circuits.  In a typical amateur transmitter, this circuit monitors the transmitter's output power and if it exceeds the pre-set threshold (e.g. 100 watts for a radio rated at 100 watts) it will send a signal back to reduce the output power.  RF amplifiers have a similar circuit:  It detects the amount of RF being output and sends a negative voltage back to the transmitter driving it.  If the output of the amplifier gets too high, this voltage causes the transmitter to reduce its drive power.

In both cases this circuit does two important things:

  1. Prevents excess drive to the amplifier(s), which prevents distortion of the transmitted signal.
  2. Preventing damage.  All amplifiers have electrical and thermal limits above which they may be damaged and/or their operational lifetime may be dramatically shorted. 

Despite most commercially-produced amplifiers made for the past 60 years having a circuit to produce an ALC voltage to feed a radio the ALS-500M does not - which is all the more confusing as this circuit is not complicated at all:  Having this circuit would help in the prevention of grossly overdriving the ALS-500M and having bad signals on-air and it may have saved many ALS-500M's from damage.

Adding an ALC circuit

As it made sense to do so, an ALC circuit was added to my friend's ALS-500M:

Figure 2:
This is the schematic of the ALC circuit.  It develops a negative voltage related to the RF output
power that is fed into the transmitter driving it.  When properly adjusted, this feedback loop will
limit the maximum drive to the amplifier, reducing the probability of distortion and damage.
Click on the image for a larger version.

 The circuit is quite simple - consisting of just TEN components including the output jack.  Here's how it works:

  • J1 is the existing "RF Out" jack on the ALS-500M, an SO-239.
  • Resistor R1, attached to the RF Out connector, samples the transmit power.
  • Resistor R2 - with R1 - form a voltage divider:  At 500 watts into 50 ohms with R1 being 12k, there would be 447 peak-to-peak volts on the RF Output, but it is divided to 34 volts peak-to-peak at the junction.
  • Capacitor C2 couples the RF to diodes D1 and D2, blocking DC.
  • Diode D1 clips the positive-going voltage and together with D2, forms a voltage doubler circuit.
  • Capacitor C3 filters the output of diode D2 - a negative voltage -  removing residual RF.
  • Potentiometer R3 allows adjustment of the produced ALC voltage so that the proper threshold may be set for the transmitter being used to drive it.
  • Capacitor C4 further filters any RF from the ALC line.
  • J2 is a phono ("RCA") jack used to connect the ALC voltage to the driving transmitter.

Here are links to a few of the more difficult-to-get parts:

Frequency compensating capacitor C1

Capacitor C1 requires more explanation.  Real-world components aren't like their "ideal" theoretical counterparts and resistor R1 is no exception:  Even though it is a "resistor", it has some capacitance - albeit small - plus there is some stray capacitive coupling between the center pin of the RF Out connector and the nearby components.  Because of this, at higher frequencies, some RF energy "leaks" around R1, causing more voltage to appear at the junction between it and R2:  This higher voltage would cause more AGC voltage for a given power level and in testing, while 500 watts produced about -37 volts at the top of R3 on 80 meters, it took only about 150 watts to produce that much voltage on 10 meters.

Figure 3:
The as-built ALC circuit built atop the RF OUT connector,
using it for component support.  To the right of the large
resistor is the ALC adjustment potentiomteter and jack below.
Click on the image for a larger version.

We actually want this roll-off at higher frequencies to occur for the simple reason that the ALS-500M cannot output the same "maximum" power on each band - this level decreasing as frequency goes up - but as we can see from the table, whereas we could "safely" output about 400 watts at 80 meters at 12.5 volts, we'd probably want no more than 325 watts or so at 10 meters, so our ALC output voltage should be the same at those two power levels.

Capacitor C1 - placed across R2 - "compensates" for this:  Being a capacitor, it has lower impedance at increasing frequency and we can select its value to give us about the same ALC voltage at 400 watts on 80 meters as 325 watts would on 10 meters.  For the ALS-500M and our circuit, a value of 6.8pF turned out to be about right - but this would vary with components:  A variable capacitor (something adjustable over approximately the 2-15pF range) would allow easy adjustment of this compensation.  A suitable device is this

 Construction of the ALC circuit

Figure 4:
Another view of the ALC circuit.   R1 is the
large resistor, C2 in the foreground, C1 is the
large capacitor in the bacground.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Figures 3 and 4 show how the ALC circuit was laid out atop the "RF Out".  In the top-center of Figure 3 we see the "RF Out" connector and R1, the 12k resistor and clustered around R1 - and using the ground lug (plus an added lug) on the "RF In" connector we see the other components.  Just to the right of center in Figure 3 - between the RF Out connector and the DC connector we see R3, a 10k potentiometer and below it - partly obscured by R3 - is the "ALC Out" jack.

Figure 5 shows the rear panel of the amplifier - the "ALC ADJ" potentiometer (R3) near the top and the Phono (RCA) plug below it - both labeled.  Looking at the label of the ALC ADJ control, you will notice that the label shows that rotating it counter-clockwise will result in "minimum" power - but this corresponds with maximum ALC voltage.  While this may seem counter-intuitive, remember that the the more negative the ALC voltage, the more it will try to reduce the output power of the transmitter - but if the potentiometer were turned fully clockwise (no ALC voltage at all) it would be the same as disabling the ALC altogether.

In testing with an Icom IC-7300, setting the ALC control to "Min" (e.g. maximum ALC voltage causing the greatest amount of power reduction) resulted in no more than about 80 watts out of the amplifier, no matter the "RF Output" setting on the radio and this indicated that the ALC was doing its job.  Setting the ALC control for about 425 watts at 80 meters resulted in about 325 watts on 10 meters, maximum - both within the "linear" and safe range of the amplifier.

Figure 5:
The rear panel of the modified ALS-500M.  The ALC adjust
potentiometer is between the RF OUT and DC IN connectors
with the added "ALC OUT" jack below.
Click on the image for a larger version.

ALC Overshoot and other anomalies

In many radios, ALC isn't perfect:  There will be a slight lag in many radios between the appearance of the ALC voltage and the radio's cutting back in transmit power - some of this being due to the radio itself having "ALC Overshoot" and some being due to the ALC voltage from the amplifier being a bit slow to respond.  What this means is that it is possible for the radio to briefly output WAY more power than expected for a brief instant before throttling back.

On the air, this can cause a burst of amplifier overdrive at the beginning of words/syllables - often showing up as a "popping" (or "clicking" on CW during key-down) and over time, this burst of high power could damage the transistors and other components in the amplifier.  What this means is that you SHOULD NOT rely entirely on the ALC to limit the output power - you should, at the very least, turn down your transmit power to about 50 watts or so even if you have the ALC.

Figure 6:
Rather than remove the Filter board to get access to the
T/R relay, the cable that had connected to the input of the
amplifier deck was soldered to the ground plane to allow
splice a piece of RG-316 to reach the new attenuator on the
back panel.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Some radios have another problem:  They can do ALC overshoot even without an external amplifier - briefly driving their own amplifier  to much higher than expected power.  Some radios - even if you turn the power down - rely on feedback from their built-in wattmeter and will briefly output higher than the desired output power.  Both of these mean that you could still end up with a somewhat "dirty" signal on the air even if you believe you have taken steps to prevent it.

Overdrive protection:  Adding a 3dB pad.

While adding ALC to the ALS-500M is a "no-brainer", it would be easy to forget to connect the ALC - or your radio and amplifier combination could still cause the "popping" or "clicking" from brief overdrive conditions even if you turn down your power and/or connect the ALC.  To prevent this, it would be a very good idea to prevent too much power from ever reaching the amplifier circuitry itself.

Figure 7: 
The 3dB (actually 2.995dB)
"Pi" resistive attenuator.  At 100 watts
input approx. 16.7 watts is dissipated in R1,
around 24.5 watts in R2, and about 8.8 watts
dissipated in R3 - about 50 watts total.
Click on the image for a larger version.
As you can see from the chart above, there is never a frequency or band combination where more than 50 watts drive would yield clean output power.  What this means is that we could lose half of the drive power of a 100 watt radio and still push the amplifier to its useful limit - and protect its expensive transistors and other circuitry against an accidental "oops" should we accidentally overdrive it.

The addition of a 3dB attenuator would accomplish this, soaking up half the transmit power before it gets to the amplifier allowing the user to set their radio to 100 watts output.  The easiest place to install this attenuator would be on the input of the amplifier - but this would also affect the receive signal by about 1/2 "S" Unit:  If your S-meter reads well above S1 on even the quietest band, you won't "miss" any signals by doing so:  A 100 watt 3dB "pad" can be found commercially and on the surplus market if you look carefully.  The other down-side of having a 3dB pad inline would be that if your turn the amplifier off, you are still losing half of the transmit power.

Figure 8:
Holes drilled in the back panel in preparation
for mounting the power resistors used for the
the 3dB attenuator.
Click on the image for a larger version.
A technically "better" solution would be to place the 3dB attenuator right on the input of the RF power amplifier circuit, inside the amplifier.  Doing so avoids placing this loss in the receive path and it will also not affect the transmit signal when the amplifier is turned off.  Figure 7 shows this attenuator schematically.

These resistors must, collectively, be able to dissipate 50 watts of power and rather than trying to assemble a large mass of lower-wattage resistors, we can use thin or thick film power resistors in transistor-like package which may be bolted to a heat sink. For the ALS-500M, there is a flat area on the rear panel that is next to amplifier deck and large enough to accommodate these resistors and dissipate the power dropped.  Examples of suitable resistors include:

  • 18 Ohms, 100 watts:  Bourns (Riedon) PF2472-18RF1  (DigiKey P/N:  696-PF2472-18RF1-ND - link)
  • 300 ohm, 100 watts:  Bourns (Riedon) PF2472-300RF1  (DigiKey P/N:  696-PF2472-300RF1-ND - link)

Figure 9:
The three resistors comprising the attenuator, mounted on
rear panel of the amplifier for heat sinking.  The white
RG-316 coax from the T/R switch comes in from the left
while that going to the amplifier input goes to the right.
Thermal paste is used under the resistors' tables to enhance
thermal conductivity to the case.
Click on the image for a larger version.
These particular resistors are "Thin Film" and their construction is such that while not intended specifically for RF applications, they work perfectly well at HF and into VHF for a non-critical application like this - plus they are relatively cheap!  These resistors have metal heat sinks, but these are isolated from the resistor elements within, having only a few 10s of pF of capacitance coupling between the internals of the resistor and the ground when bolted to the case.

The coaxial cable from the T/R switch to the input of the amplifier will need to be extended (carefully splicing the two together, minimizing the length of the ground/shield connections) to reach the resistors when mounted on the rear panel:  RG-316 PTFE coaxial cable was used for this (but RG-174 would have been fine at this power level) and the short jumper that connected from the output of the attenuator, back to the input of the amplifier.

Figure 9 shows the attenuator, mounted to the back panel of the radio with a small amount of thermal compound:  The RF power from the T/R switch enters from the left and one leg of 300 resistor R1 is connected directly to the shield of that piece of coaxial cable.  The center conductor then connects to the junction of it and R2.  On the other side of R3, the process is repeated, the shield of the coax tied to the shield as well:  This cable then connects to the input of the amplifier module.  Between R1 (on the left) and R3 (on the right) is a piece of 12 AWG (2mm) wire that connects together the shields of the "in" and "out" coaxial cable at opposite ends of the attenuator.

Figure 10:
An internal view of the amplifier, showing all mods.  The
white cables in the foreground are to/from the 3dB rear-
panel attenuator and in the upper-left can be seen the
circuitry that was added for the ALC.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Final results:

While it might seem wasteful to throw away half of the drive power, doing so protects the power amplifier from being damaged by overdriving when one inevitably forgets to reduce the output from the transmitter.  It also protects those that might be listening on the air to a badly distorted signal:  Adding the ALC circuit is, I believe, a necessary addition as this helps prevent even mild overdriving of the amplifier that is still possible under some conditions - even with the added attenuation.

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]



tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-764818524749488179
Extensions
A "sharp" 160 meter receive-only band-pass filter
160 meter160 meter band-pass filterAM blockerAM filterband pass filtermedium wave filter
Show full content

Why the filter?

Several years ago I needed a "sharp" 160 Meter band-pass filter - one that would pass 160 Meters with little attenuation, but effectively block top-end signals on the AM broadcast band.

Nowadays, the AM (mediumwave) broadcast band goes up to 1700 kHz - but there are relatively few signals in the "new" portion (1610-1700) - yet Murphy's law would dictate that one of those stations would be located near your QTH - but that wasn't the case here.  The actual application was that this filter was to be used at the Northern Utah WebSDR (link) where we have several very strong (-20dBm, or about "50 over S9") signals coming across salt water (the Great Salt Lake) - one of which was, at the time, from a transmitter on 1600 kHz.

If you happen to live near an AM broadcast transmitter and operate on 160 meters, you may well have faced challenges, yourself:

  • A full-sized 160 meter antenna (dipole, vertical) will likely do a decent job of intercepting RF from any AM broadcast transmitter - particularly one near-ish the top end of the band.  This might mean that your receiver is subject to very strong signals from that transmitter even if the antenna wasn't designed specifically for that frequency.
  • The filtering in most HF transceivers and receivers isn't particularly "sharp" and will likely do little to prevent a significant amount of RF energy from getting into the sensitive circuits from AM broadcast signals that are even hundreds of kHz away.
  • Both of these can cause overload of the RF amplifiers, mixers and/or non-linear responses in the PIN diodes typically used to select filtering.
  • In a software-defined radio, a strong signal can also overload the same sorts of stages, but there's the additional problem of possibly overloading the A/D (analog-to-digital) converter - or at least, causing the receiver's gain to be reduced (to prevent A/D converter overload) to a point where it starts to become "deaf" to other, weaker signals.  This "gain reduction" also has the effect of reducing the number of A/D converter bits that are used to represent weaker signals - something that can also increase distortion products.

The effects of all of these can a general degradation of the receiver, the most obvious being the generation of IMD (InterMoDulation) products, often manifesting themselves as spurious signal being produced in the receiver that may be harmonics of an AM transmitter and/or "mixes" of two or more AM broadcast signals. 1  To a degree, these may be reduced by attenuating the input signal (e.g. the attenuator on the receiver) - and if these spurious signals' levels reduce in level more than the "real" signals on the band, that is a sure sign of overload within the receiver itself.

If the above are happening to you - and you care about 160 meters - a filter might help. 2

The challenge of such a filter

Achieving the combination of low loss at 1800-2000 kHz while providing a reasonable amount of attenuation at 1700 kHz - or even 1600 kHz - is a bit of a challenge as the percentage difference in frequency where you want signals to pass and and the frequency that you want to block is small,  but this made the project even more attractive.

As I wasn't going to be transmitting through this filter, a bit of loss was acceptable and this filter ended up losing about 3dB (half of the power - or about 1/2 of an S-unit) through it.  This may sound terrible, but if you have even a modest antenna for 160 meters, you will have way more signal+noise than is needed to deflect your S-meter significantly - even if you are lucky enough to be in an area with no man-made noise as the chart below indicates:

Figure 1:
"Typical" noise floor for various radio environments.  Because the above chart is based on a 500 Hz bandwidth, one would subtract 27dB from the power level to scale to a 1 Hz bandwidth.

As you can see, compared to 40 meters, the noise floor - due to natural sources (the "quiet rural" graph) - is 5-10dB higher on 160 meters than on 40 meters, so it's likely - in most cases - that losing 3dB through a filter will go unnoticed:  The ultimate test would be that of noting whether or not the S-meter read higher with the antenna connected (despite the loss) than without:  If the former, you are probably hearing everything that there is to hear! 3

A practical receive-only 160 meter filter

The schematic of the filter is here:

Figure 2:
Schematic of the receive-only band-pass filter for 160 meters.
Both "exact" and "standard" values for the capacitors and inductors are shown.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The filter isn't very complicated - using only ten components.  As can be seen from the above diagram the "exact" component values were computed - but I also recomputed using "standard" values of capacitors and inductors and simulated both - first, the "ideal" values using the "Elsie" program configured to take into account the limited "Q" of real-world inductors and capacitors:

Figure 3:
Plot using ideal values, from 1.5-2.5 MHz.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Now, using "standard" values for the capacitors - and some of the inductors:

Figure 4:
Plot using "standard" values over the 1.5-2.5 MHz range.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The result is that the response is somewhat less flat - but only by about dB or so, most notably at the upper end.  In both cases, the filter is attenuating signals at 1700 kHz by 15dB and at 1600 kHz by about 35dB.  15dB might not seem like much, but it represents a 32-fold decrease in signal level and this may well reduce IMD products to inaudibility. 4 (Note:  The plots in Figure 3 and 4 are simulated using ELSIE as I couldn't find the original filter sweeps from construction, which looked pretty much the same, and since I'd entered some typical "real-world" values for the Q of the inductors and capacitors in to ELSIE, so did the simulated insertion loss.)

Building the filter

In analyzing the schematic, you may note L1, L3 and L5 are paired with rather low-value capacitors (220, 150 and 220pF, for C1, C3 and C5, respectively for the "standard" value version) implying higher impedance.  Conversely, inductors L2 and L4 are paired with high-value capacitors (14700pF for C2 and C4) implying low impedance and higher current.

Figure 5:
As-built 160 meter band-pass filter on a piece of glass-epoxy
board using "ME" squares with in/out in the lower corners.
Click on the image for a larger version.
On the workbench, I first built the filter using toroid-wound inductors throughout and measured the loss - but I then replaced L1, L3 and L5 with small, molded inductors (which are lower "Q" and higher loss) and noticed only a fraction of a dB difference and no obvious difference in the filter response.  For L2 and L4, I stayed with wound toroids using as large a wire as I could fit on them to minimize the loss:  I briefly tried some 0.47uH molded inductors, but the filter's response was poorer and the loss was several dB higher, so do not be tempted to use molded chokes for L2 and L4.  The as-built filter is shown in Figure 5.

The filter was built onto a piece of glass-epoxy copper-clad circuit board, the landings using "Me-Squares" from the QRP.me web store (link) glued to the substrate using cyanoacrylate ("super") glue.  The in/out connections are in the lower left/lower right corners and the wound toroids are visible, glued to the board (to keep them from moving around - and to immobilize the windings to prevent mechanical de-tuning) using RTV ("silicone") adhesive.  The three molded inductors are clearly visible as well.  Precise alignment of this filter - mostly squeezing/spreading the turns on the toroids - may be easily done with even the most inexpensive NanoVNA.

Figure 6:
The filter installed in the chassis of one of the
filter modules at the Northern Utah WebSDR.
This filter was added on the port feeding the
160 meter receiver.
Click on the image for a larger version.
It's worth noting that the "small" value capacitors (C1, C3 and C5) are NP0 (a.k.a. "C0G") temperature-stable ceramic - but silver-mica capacitors would be an excellent choice as well.  For the larger-value capacitors (C2, C4) which are 14700pF total each consist of a parallel 0.01uF (e.g. 10000pF) and 0.0047 (4700pF) plastic dielectric capacitors:  Silver Mica capacitors would be "better" - but very expensive, but decent-quality plastic capacitors work fine at 160 meters, their internal inductance having minimal effect.

If you build this, DO NOT use disk ceramic capacitors for C2/C4 as 0.01uF and 0.0047uF are not likely to be temperature stable, low-loss NP0/C0G types - but rather they will probably be very temperature-unstable and lossy "Z5U", "Y5P", "X7R" or similar - and these types are completely unsuitable in this application.

As can be seen in Figure 6, the completed filter was installed in the filter module that feeds the 160 meter receiver at the Northern Utah WebSDR, but I could have easily put it in its own, shielded box.

Can a transmit-capable filter be constructed?

In theory, it should be possible to build a filter like this that would allow (survive!) being transmitted-through - but several things would need to be taken into account:

  • Low-loss inductors.  The loss through the inductors account for the majority of the losses here, mainly because - compared to capacitors - real-world inductors are terrible.  For L1, L3 and L5, it may be that larger-gauge wire (16 AWG or so) on fairly large toroidal cores would suffice, but for L2 and L4 - which will be carrying quite a bit of current, - very heavy wire (perhaps 10 AWG or larger) would be needed.
  • Low-loss capacitors.  Silver-mica capacitors would be used throughout.  For C1, C3 and C5 some high-voltage units (1kV) should suffice, but for C2 and C4, paralleling a half-dozen or so 1kV silver-mica units to attain the desired capacitance - and to divide the current and losses - would be recommended.
I've not been motivated to build a "transmit-capable" filter to test it out, but I suspect that the losses of a filter built as noted above could likely be kept down to about 1dB or so using practical, "real-world" components.

Using the filter

As this filter has a rather high loss - which isn't really important for reception - that is not the case for transmitting:  Running more than a watt or so through it would likely cause heating of the molded chokes - and even if lower-loss inductors were used, it would still have several dB loss and cause heating.  If the molded chokes were replaced with toroidal inductors, it would have slightly lower loss, but likely be capable of handling QRP power levels (5 watts maximum).  As with any filter, its response curve will only be "correct" if it is sourced and loaded at 50 ohms - something to keep in mind if you are using a non-resonant antenna.

What this means is that some mechanism would be required to assure that this filter was used only used in receive:  Some transceivers have connectors to allow the insertion of a filter in the receive signal path, but it may well be that "T/R" (transmit/receive) relays will be required to switch the filter in/out.

* * *

Footnotes

  1. IMD products resulting from more than signal source are common.  For example, if there are two local radios stations - one on 850 kHz and another on 1010 kHz they can mix together at the sum of the two frequencies - namely (850 + 1010 = ) 1860 kHz.  This "mixing" is very apparent in the resulting frequency because the signal at 1860 kHz would consist of the audio of both the 850 and 1010 kHz signals.  A harmonic of a transmitter - say one operating on 960 kHz - which might appear at twice the frequency (1920 kHz) would have only the audio of that transmitter - and it would probably be somewhat distorted.  Most of the time, these mixing products are created within the receiver itself and it is only those signals that filtering can reduce.
  2. A filter will help ONLY if the spurious signals are being generated within the receiver itself.  Low-level IMD (intermodulation) products can also be generated in strong RF fields by non-linear junctions in the vicinity - which can include metal fencing, rain gutters, rusty wires, corrosion, or even the "re-radiation" of IMD from another device that may have high-level RF energy on it.
  3. It is usually the case that modern receivers have way more gain than is necessary to receive signals at the noise floor - particularly at lower frequency where the natural noise floor is usually quite high.  What this means is that you can "throw away" signal on the input of your receiver and not actually "miss" any signals at all.  For example, if you have an attenuator on your receiver and without the attenuator the noise floor is S-6, but with the attenuator is still an S-3 - and the noise floor of your receiver without an antenna connected is S-0 - signals in the noise at S-3 with the attenuator switched in are not being lost:  It is only how far above the signals are above the noise that affects their readability.  As noted above, in the presence of very strong signals (as in the case of a very nearby AM broadcast transmitter) or even in the case of an event like Field Day where other transmitters are nearby - if you can still hear the "band noise" with the attenuator switched in, you may well be better off overall by using the attenuator - which can minimize the generation of IMD products within the receiver.  For more information about this, see the earlier blog entry "Revisiting the 'Limited Attenuation High Pass' filter - again" (link).
  4. As a general rule, IMD products resulting from nonlinearities within an amplifier (or receiver) will diminish by about 3dB for every 1dB of total signal reduction.  In our example where, at 1700 kHz, the band-pass filter reduced the undesired signal by 15dB, this could, in theory, reduce the IMD by 45dB or so - about 5-8 S-units, depending on the radio.  If this IMD was "only" about S-9 to begin with, reducing it by 40+dB may make it inaudible - even though the filter knocked it down by only 15dB in the first place.

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]



tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-4112660455027056369
Extensions
DXing distant SolarEdge PV optimizer modules (or long-distance propagation of PV system QRM)
200 kHzAmateur RadiocarriersDXHFHF noiseinterferenceoptimizerpropagated interferencepropagationPVqrmSolar QRMSolarEdge
Show full content

From how far away can you hear the spurious emissions from a known-noisy PV system?

Quite a racket!

Figure 1:
The spectrum of a SolarEdge PV system from several meters
away across the 6-8 MHz range showing "spurs" (clumps of
low-level carriers) at 200 kHz intervals and other places.
In the above plot the true nature of the individual peak -
the fact that each contain many carriers - is not apparent.
Click on the image for a larger version.
In a previous post (linked HERE) I described the interference produced by a SolarEdge PV (photovoltaic) system to an amateur from installations on neighboring houses.

The "take-away" from this analysis is that the current version of SolarEdge systems produce rather strong signals at 200 kHz intervals - each module on the back side of a solar panel producing its own carrier at its own frequency as depicted.  The peaks in Figure 1 show these groupings of carriers every 200 kHz (plus some additional frequencies) while the image in Figure 2 shows, in extremely high spectral resolution, many individual, narrow carriers that comprise each of these peaks.

In driving around with an HF mobile station in my vehicle I can hear these 200 kHz-spaced carrier groups almost everywhere around town during daylight hours - the roar getting much stronger in/near residential areas as you would expect.  If driving through a residential neighborhood, it is very easy to tell when you drive past a house equipped with a SolarEdge PV system - and it is easily audible from a block or two away.  Knowing the "fingerprint" of this PV system allows it to be identified uniquely - even at some distance.

Figure 2:
A "zoomed in" view of the spectrum of local SolarEdge
carriers recorded just below 7.4 MHz from my home.
See Footnote #3, below for detailed information.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Are they DX? 1

A question arose in my mind:  Does this "grunge" produced by the SolarEdge PV systems propagate long distances?

To answer this question I checked a KiwiSDR at the Northern Utah WebSDR (link) - a site with which I am very familiar 2.  This receive system is located about 3 miles (5km) from any residential area, bounded on three sides with mosquito-laden bird refuges (wetlands) and on the fourth side - the same as the closest houses - by a mountain.  Additionally, the antenna used for the reception in Figures 3 and 4 below was the TCI-530 omnidirectional log-periodic (with circular polarization) - which does not have good gain at very low radiation angles, further precluding the reception of "nearby" PV systems via "ground wave".

The quick answer to the above question is YES - the roar of SolarEdge systems is propagated when conditions are "reasonable" 4 as shown in the screen capture below:

Figure 3:
Propagated noise from myriad SolarEdge PV systems from the remote Northern Utah WebSDR's
remote HF receive site.  The "hump" in the middle is the combined energy of likely thousands of
SolarEdge PV systems that are being ionospherically propagated.  Amateur signals are
visible at 14.200 MHz and above.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The signals represented by the "hump" in the highlighted portion in the center of the analyzer plot in the top part of the image - and the "band" of noise on the waterfall display - between 14.199 and 14.200 MHz are the sum of the propagated low-level PV system carriers from... who knows where?  To be clear, this energy is not likely to be from just one SolarEdge PV system and its individual optimizers (one for each panel) but more likely from the many thousands of such devices that are each, individually, radiating energy.  What we are seeing is the total energy of the propagated systems, the frequency spread being centered around 14.1993 MHz.

It's worth noting that the fact that these signals do not land on exactly the same frequency 5 - hence the Gaussian-like distribution of energy - and this has interesting implications.  Even though the signal from each, individual optimizer is (more or less) a CW (unmodulated) carrier, the fact that there are so many of them clustered together means that, for statistical purposes, they might as well be a distribution of noise energy:  Unlike with a single coherent CW signal, the DSP filtering on modern radios will be able to do little/nothing to reduce their effects if they were to cause interference due to its similarity to white noise.

A quick power and spectral analysis of the signal above showed that if the signals above were a single, coherent CW signal, the total amount of energy contained in the "hump" in Figure 3 would have easily been at least 15-20dB above the noise in a 50 Hz detection bandwidth:  A CW signal of this strength would certainly be cause for complaints!

I also looked at other 200 kHz multiples around 14.000 and 14.400 and the same, exact types of signals were present on those frequencies - and similar bunches of energy fitting this profile were noted at least as low as 10.200 and as high as around 18.200 MHz as well (probably higher) and every (otherwise) clear frequency in between - this range being related to current ionospheric propagation at the moment that I checked (e.g. around 1845 on September 10 UTC, 2025)6

To verify that these signals were propagated and were likely from SolarEdge systems, several things were done:

  • The presence at many 200 kHz multiples/intervals across the HF spectrum is telling!  Their being slightly below exact 200 kHz multiples as noted in Footnote 5 adds to their "uniqueness".
  • On days with poor propagation overall, these signals were absent - or limited to frequencies commensurate with the MUF (Maximum Useable Frequency).
  • These signals disappear at night.  (This test is somewhat complicated by the fact that propagation on these bands also changes at night - but sunlight is still illuminating the ionosphere well after sunset on the ground.) 
  • An "S-meter" plot was run over the period of several minutes:  A propagated signal(s) would show variations in signal strength - but this can be foiled to a degree by the fact that many, many individual point sources would each be propagated differently and unlike a single source, would not experience as deep a fading as the plot below shows:

Figure 4:
Propagated signal strength variations caused by ionospheric variations.  This would seem to indicate
that the signals are propagated - but the magnitude of the fading would be mitigated by the large
number of point sources, each being affected individually along the signal path.
The top/bottom of this chart represents 10dB.
Click on the image for a larger verion.

As noted in the original article analyzing a system close-up (linked above) the SolarEdge optimizers produce other signals 6-10 dB weaker at various points above each 200 kHz interval - these are visible in Figure 1.  When the above plots were made these signals weren't readily apparent - but I suspect that they will be visible during "excellent" propagation conditions rather than the "mediocre-to-average" conditions that were present when Figures 3 and 4 were produced.

Conclusion:  They do get propagated!

So yes, you can DX SolarEdge PV systems - it's just that there are so many of them each doing their own radiating that you probably won't know from where those signals originate, so it's hard to know from how far away you might actually be hearing them!  To be clear, it's difficult to determine if a the radiated RF from a single optimizer would be audible via ionospheric propagation, and with many thousands of them out there this may be impossible to determine - but it is clear that the summation of many thousands of them does produce an audible signal.

Do these signals actually cause QRM 7 ?  As noted in the earlier post (liked above) they most certainly do if you live within a city block or two of one of the SolarEdge PV systems and operate on or near any of the frequencies occupied by the spurious radiation represented in Figure 1.  If your receive system is located well away from a SolarEdge installation, the above shows that you may still experience interference from these systems - even from a significant distance.

Figure 3 also shows that the emissions do propagate over long distances:  The 20 meter band's optimal "single skip" distance would likely place the majority of these signals in a 700-1500 mile (1100-2400 km) radius of Northern Utah - and this includes quite a few populated areas in parts of the U.S. where the number of solar installations is quite high. 

You, too, can check for QRM at your station

If you have an HF station with a receiver with a waterfall display you might want to check the various amateur bands just below the 200 kHz multiples 8 during daylight hours:  If there is a SolarEdge PV system within a couple city blocks of you 9 you will most likely see and hear it - but don't blame me if, after finding that you can see those signals, you can't "un-see" them!

* * *

Links to related pages (about solar power) on this blog:

  • Analysis of a SolarEdge system (link) - This is the article linked at the top of the page where careful measurement was done to characterize the interference created by a SolarEdge system neighboring a local amateur.

Footnotes:

  1. The term "DX" means distance.  Generally speaking, if a signal is "DX" it is understood that it must be being propagated over much more than a line-of-sight distance - in this case, via ionospheric propagation at distances of hundreds or thousands of miles/km.
  2. The author of this post is one of the original founders and current maintainers of the Northern Utah WebSDR which has a remote HF receive site about 80 miles (94km) north of Salt Lake City.
  3. Figure 2 shows a "close-up" spectral view of the signals emitted by several SolarEdge PV systems within a mile/kilometer or two of my house - the closest system being about a block away.  The center frequency of this cluster of signals was approximately 7.39965 MHz and a 256k-point FFT with a bin width of 183 mHz (milliHertz) - along with some averaging - was used to create this plot.  Clearly visible are a large number of individual carriers along with a background "roar" of many more weaker carriers that are not individually distinguishable in this plot.  This plot was purposely done on a frequency above the 40 meter amateur band during daylight hours (the local time is visible in the image) and during this time there is no strong, long distance propagation (a fact verified by the absence of a similar set of signals on the remote Northern Utah WebSDR site) indicating that this energy is, in fact, originating from systems proximate to my own receive site.  At sunset, these carriers will gradually disappear - often "blinking" out - as the solar panels lose their light and will reappear the next morning:  This "blinking" can be heard as individual tones flicker on/off during the day<>night transition by listening on an ordinary SSB-capable receiver at one of the frequencies noted above.
  4. The frequencies mentioned have also been checked when ionospheric propagation is poor (comparatively few strong signals) and the characteristic SolarEdge carriers were absent at the remote receive site.  This further illustrates the fact that the signals described above are not local to the remote receive site and reinforces the likelihood that they are, in fact, being propagated. 
  5. Observation of a SolarEdge PV system at very close distance (less than 50 feet/15 meters) indicates that each, individual optimizer - a device attached to the back of every individual solar panel - will radiate the signals at 200 kHz intervals.  Due to the slight variations in oscillator frequencies (e.g. quartz crystals or MEMs devices) the precise frequencies of these signals - and their harmonics - will vary, but the mean frequency separation appears to be around 199.9901 kHz which puts them slightly below a precise 200 kHz multiple which is why the peak of the distribution shows up around 14.1993 MHz on 20 meters, 7.19965 MHz on 40 meters and so on.  As noted in the text, the actual frequency spread of the individual modules is such that it has a Gaussian-like distribution above and below the mean frequency.
  6. I also checked several remote receive systems around the world during their local daylight hours and could see the same "humps" of energy at frequencies just below the aforementioned 200 kHz multiples on some of them.  One such system was that located at the University of Twente in the Netherlands:  It is not known to what degree the signals that were radiated (likely) from PV systems were propagated and which might be within a few kilometers of this receive site, but they are certainly "there".
  7. "QRM" is a "Q" signal referring to "Man Made Interference" and the magnitude of this interference in comparison to the desired signals determines if this is harmful interference.  If QRM makes it difficult/impossible to receive a signal on frequency, that would fit the definition of harmful interference.
  8. The frequencies on which the radiated signals from a SolarEdge PV system (every 199.9901 kHz) will likely land within an HF amateur band are clustered around the following:  3.5998, 3.7998, 3.9998,  7.1996, 14.1993, 21.1990, 21.3990, 28.1986, 28.3986, 28.5986, 28.7986, 28.9986, 29.1986, 29.3986 and 29.5986 MHz plus similar frequencies in the 6 meter band:  They can also be heard on non-amateur frequencies at the same 199.9901 kHz intervals as well.  As the above frequencies are the actual frequencies, you will need to tune above or below the frequencies (using LSB or USB, respectively) by 1.5 kHz or so to hear the "roar".  Of course, you will only hear these signals during daylight hours when the PV systems are active.  Note that the combination of naturally-higher noise levels on the lower bands (80, 40 meters) and the likely lower efficiency of the PV system's component ability to radiate RF there - plus the tendency for nighttime propagation on those bands (when the PV systems are inactive) - means that observing this phenomenon on those frequencies via the ionosphere is much less likely.
  9. If you do some remote operation like POTA or SOTA at a significant distance from any likely PV system, you might want to take a look at one of the 200kHz-interval frequencies mentioned above during daylight hours and good propagation:  You'll probably see the propagated PV signals there, too.

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]





tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-5994317709482648534
Extensions
Exploring the Ameco PCL-P Nuvistor cascode preamp/preselector
6CW46DS4amecocasecodenuvistorpcl-ppreamppreamplifierpreselector
Show full content

"And now, for something completely different!"

This past January - at Quartzfest - there was a table covered with "junque" and taped to it was sign with the word "FREE" on it.  That's how I ended up with this box.

Figure 1:
The front panel of the Ameco PCL-P preamp.  The left-hand
control tunes the front end of the preamp while the right-hand
control selects the "band".  The in/out switch is on the right.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The Ameco PCL-P

The PCL-P - which went on sale around 1965 - seems to have originally cost around $32.95 according to the RadioMuseum web page (link) - equivalent to around $300 today!  Footnote 1. The specifications say that it has about 20dB of gain and can be tuned for any frequency from 160 through 6 meters.

But what's it for?

Back in 1965 many amateurs still used separate receivers and transmitters - and it was often the case that this gear would, itself, be at least a few years old - likely WW2 surplus and/or gear from the 1950s.  Similarly, shortwave listening was still in its heyday and it's likely that many of the receivers used by SWLs (ShortWave Listeners) were also likely to be "vintage".

In those days, tube (e.g. "valve") based gear was still the rule and this - particularly for older gear (from the mid-late 1950s and earlier) - often meant several things were likely true about the receivers:

  • Insensitivity on higher bands.  On the higher bands - namely 15-6 meters - it was often a struggle to attain good sensitivity at these higher frequencies.  This is particularly true on "simple" (e.g. inexpensive) gear where sensitivity would be fine on lower bands, but drop off precipitously with increasing frequency where signals levels were generally lower, anyway  Remedying this is surely the main purpose of this device.
  • Image rejection may be marginal.  Most receivers of this vintage were single conversion - that is, they converted from the receive frequency to a lower-frequency IF (Intermediate Frequency) - typically around 455 kHz.  Some "fancier" receivers converted to something in the lower MHz range (often between 1.6 and 2 MHz) and then down-converted to something even lower - often in the 40-100 kHz range - where the final band-pass filtering was done. 

A device like the PCL-P might be touted as an aid to mitigate both of the above:  Its gain and low-noise amplification should help a "deaf" receiver and the fact that this device is somewhat selective may help the image problem as well - although that last point is debatable.

Whether or not a device like this was really helpful or not isn't strictly relevant to our discussion - rather, this article mostly is about the device itself.

Inside the PCL-P

Let's first take a look at the schematic diagram of PCL-P:

Figure 2:
Schematic of the Ameco PCL-P preamplifier.
Additional component annotations were added to add clarity of the description below.
Click on the image for a larger version.

First, notice S3a and S3b on the input/output terminals:  This allows the user to bypass the amplifier entirely - most useful when the unit is turned off - but note that this switch does not power down the unit when set to "out" (bypass) mode.  Immediately following S3a is S2a which is a rotary switch used to select the frequency range:  As can be seen from Figure 1, above, this switch has four overlapping frequency ranges:  1.8-4, 4-10, 10-23 and 23-54 Megacycles Footnote 2.

L1 is a coil (actually an autotransformer)  - tapped at 50 ohms - that covers the lowest frequency range (1.8-4 Mc) and is the large coil visible in Figure 3, below, but the higher bands' couplers - in the form of T1-T3 - are transformers (actually axially-wound coils with another winding over the top) clinging to the rotary switch, the turns ratios of the primary to secondary providing the impedance transformation from the 50 ohm input to the tuned grid circuit:  All of these, switched by S2b, connect to C1, an air variable tuning capacitor across the grid of the first of two vacuum tubes (valves), V1.

It's worth noting that the fact that this preamplifier is tunable is more of an artifact of the necessity of the technology used:  While it would, in theory, be possible to construct a "no tune" broadband amplifier to make its use slightly more convenient, but doing so - and maintaining equivalent performance over this wide frequency range - would have been a technial challenge.  The obvious advantage of making it tunable is that rather than amplifying the entire HF spectrum at once, it's limited in its amplifying to the vicinity of the frequency at which the input network is resonant meaning that by rejecting frequencies elsewhere, it's less likely to be overloaded by RF energy that is well away from the frequency of interest (e.g. strong shortwave broadcast stations on other bands).

There are two identical tubes here - 6DS4s in the case of my preamp  (other units may have been equipped with the similar 6CW4) and these are Nuvistor tubes:  About the size of a very large pencil eraser, these were some of the smallest vacuum tubes that were mass-produced - most Nuvistors being triodes like V1 and V2, above.  Being very small, they were well-suited for high frequency operation, finding their way into the UHF tuners of many contemporary televisions:  It was at about the same time as this unit was made that U.S. Federal law mandated the inclusion of UHF tuners on all new TVs so Nuvistors were widely available and comparatively inexpensive owing to the economy of mass production.  (Wikipedia article about Nuvistors - link).

Figure 3:
Top view of the Ameco PCL-P chassis, the variable capacitor
visible near the upper-right, L1 the big coil in the center and
the two Nuvistors visible just below/left of center.
While this was originally equipped with RCA (phono)
 "Motorola" type connectors,
it has since been retrofitted with BNCs.
adsfadsf
Click on the image for a larger version.

To some, the connection between V1 and V2 may look a bit odd, but the description on the front panel (seen in Figure 1) gives a clue:  They are connected in cascode configuration - possibly a portmanteu for "cascaded triode/pentode" or similar.  In this configuration the "bottom" tube (V1 in this case) gets its plate voltage via the cathode of the "upper" tube (V2) - but you might notice something else:  The grid of V2 is at RF ground via C3 - being somewhat neutrally biased at DC by R2 which allowed current from V2's plate to get to V1's plate via V2's cathode.

This cascode circuit has a distinct advantage for higher frequencies:  As the current through V2 (effectively running in "grounded grid" configuration) is somewhat proportional to its grid-cathode voltage, when V1 conducts more - trying to pull the cathode of V2 lower - V2 conducts harder in response.  As V2's grid is "grounded" at RF via C3, pulling its cathode lower effectively increases the grid-to-cathode voltage:  V2 also tries to counter this by conducting more, trying to pull the cathode back up.  Because of this arrangement, the voltage on V2's cathode (and, of course, V1's plate) changes relatively little compared to the change in current through it.

What this means it that the effect of Miller capacitance is minimized Footnote 3.  Here we are concerned with the capacitance between the grid and plate of the tube - V1 in this case - and this capacitance couples the two together lightly, but this has the bad side effect of somewhat cancelling out the tube's amplification action:  As the grid voltage tries to go up with the input signal, the plate voltage would - in a typical single-tube circuit - go down by a comparatively large amount as the tube conducts more in response - and the capacitance between the two will cancel out the signal on the grid to a degree:   This is one of the reasons why it can be difficult to get a single-tube RF amplifier to work well at high frequencies.  If we prevent the plate voltage from changing as much and convey the signal more as current instead - as we are doing with the action of V2 in this cascode circuit- we can significantly reduce the Miller effect. 

Figure 4:
The underside of the PCL-P chassis prior to repair - the 2-
section yellow capacitor and the diode on the left.
Click on the image for a larger version.
With the cascode configuration, the swing of the plate voltage of V1 is minimized - and so is the Miller effect, resulting in better gain, flatter frequency response and potentially, lower amplifier noise overall.  As such, we get varying current on the plate of V2 which, via transformer T4 (visible on the far right in Figure 4 as several turns of enameled wire on what appears to be a threaded, ferrite transformer core) is coupled to the output.  Resistor R3 was likely added to help ensure stability of the amplifier both when it is being bypassed (the input and output having nothing connected to either) and also in the event that the input impedance of the receiver connected to the (un-tuned) amplifier output is a poor match at some frequencies.

The rest of the circuit is a pretty straightforward power supply:  The PCL-P used a silicon diode (D1) to half-wave rectify the plate supply, filtered first by C8 - the neon power-on indicator (V3) is connected to this point via R5 - and then decoupled by 1k resistor R4 and filtered again by C9:  The ultimate result is a nice, clean source of about 145-155 volts for tubes when this is operated from a modern 123 volt U.S. mains source Footnote 4.

Construction quality

I'd say that the Ameco PCL-P is constructed "well enough":  It looks as though a bit of thought and refinement occurred to assure stable operation at 6 meters - a frequency range that was above what the average amateur of the mid 1960's had for equipment - while maintaining low cost and simplicity.  A nice touch is the use of a feedthrough capacitor (C4) as a component mounting point/stand-off (not actually "feeding through" the chassis, though) and bypass for the plate supply feeding the bottom of the output transformer, T4:  This is surely the one place where the use of a somewhat expensive component was absolutely necessary as a lowly disc ceramic would probably not have sufficed owing to the comparatively high ESR and self-resonant properties that type of capacitor.

From what I can tell, the PCL-P was originally fitted with "RCA" (phono) "Motorola" type connectors (like those found on older car radios) on the input/output - a somewhat common practice back then on HF, VHF and even UHF amateur and commercial radios - but they have clearly been replaced with more-common BNC types by a previous owner.

Refurbishing

Figure 5:
This time, with a new diode and capacitors on the left.
Output transformer T4 is visible near the right edge,
supported by feedthrough capacitor C4.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Although I don't really have any intention to put this device into regular service, I did want to get it into operational condition.

Carefully powering it up on a current-limited mains supply, I noted that the dual-section power supply capacitor (C8/C9 - in the same yellow tube visible in Figure 4) was bad with about 10 volts ripple on the plate supply - but I was able to verify that the unit had good gain, indicating that both of the Nuvistor tubes were working properly despite receive signals being overlaid with 60 Hz "hum".

As the line cord was in very good shape the only thing I had to replace was the yellow dual-section capacitor (C8/C9) with individual 22uF, 200 volt units (partly to accommodate the somewhat higher mains voltage these days) - but I also replaced the diode (D1) with a more modern 1N4007 with a 1kV rating.  Ultimately, the ripple on the plate supply was well under a volt - as it should be!  (Sharp-eyed readers may have noticed that the PCL-P is sitting atop the defunct filter capacitor in Figure 1.)

Not surprisingly, I noted that the transformer in this amplifier "buzzed" quite a bit - but with a half-wave, capacitor-input rectifier conducting on the peak of every half-cycle, this isn't unexpected:  The addition of a resistor (I used 470 ohms) in series with the diode (D1) reduced this somewhat by limiting the peak current on the top of the AC waveform while resulting in about 4 volts drop of the DC voltage - still slightly above the 145 volts noted in the schematic with today's (slightly) higher mains voltage.

Performance

It's worth noting that any amateur receiver made by a major manufacturer since the 1980s - when it is working correctly - will very likely have more than adequate sensitivity on all bands to hear the local receive noise floor, so the PCL-P amplifier probably has little place in the modern ham shack - but for a "deaf" radio from the 1950s and 1960s, of which there were many - particularly if they were in need of alignment - it would have likely been useful.

The one place where this unit might be useful in the modern ham station - if only for nostalgic purposes - might be for a low-gain wire antenna (e.g. Beverage-On-Ground (BOG), Loop-On-Ground (LOG) or Loop-Under-Ground (LUG)) for the 160 and 80 meter band.  Nevertheless, I decided to check the gain and selectivity of this device in the (non-WARC) amateur bands 160 through 6 meters:  I have included these plots and comments below the conclusion of this article.

According to the official specifications of this amplifier, its gain is about 20dB - and my measurements - with 50 ohms in/out - corroborate this, more or less:  At 10 and 6 meters it fell slightly short of this figure, but not dramatically so and this variance can be forgiven given the vagaries of manufacturing differences and age.  It's worth noting that the 6DS4 triodes used in this copy have a very slightly lower rated gain than the nearly-identical 6CW4 triodes (an amplification factor 63 versus 65) that the schematic notes as an alternate, but the difference would likely be negligible in the real world as the in-circuit gains would surely be much lower - or in the case of this amplifier, it's around 20dB (e.g. voltage amplification factor of 10 and a power gain of 100).

Unfortunately, I don't have a means of accurately measuring the noise figure, but testing and comparing with a "modern" radio (a Yeasu FT-817) across HF and 6 meters indicates that this amplifier is NOT noisier than the FT-817 implying that its noise figure is at least as good as it needs to be to be able to hear above the atmospheric noise level - even in an RF-quiet environment.  These Nuvistor tubes are capable of a noise figure of as low as 3dB on 6 meters, but mismatch and losses in the input (and, to a lesser extent, the output) networks would surely degrade this - but a noise figure of only about 9 dB  Footnote 5 is likely to be sufficient in 6 meter work for anything other than, perhaps, EME (Earth-Moon-Earth).

Above, I touched briefly on the idea of IF image rejection being slightly improved by a device like this that offers a bit of band-pass filtering:  With a single-stage L/C filter, any improvements afforded by it are likely significant only at the lowest frequencies where the width of the peak is at its narrowest - but negligible on the  higher bands as noted in the comments below the response plots.

Conclusion

As noted earlier, the PCL-P Nuvistor preamplifier is probably not a useful addition to a modern-day ham shack with radios made since at least the 1980s:  The issue that it solves - notably that of addressing the lack of sensitivity of some older radios on the higher bands - is simply a "non problem" these days.  If you have some old "boat anchor" radios - particularly of the less-expensive variety - this sort of device may help pick up weak signals - particularly on a mostly "dead" band.

The noise floor of this preamplifier appears to rival that of a modern radio - but this doesn't mean that it would improve the sensitivity of a such a radio, but only that it would simply make the S-meter read higher without improving the signal-to-noise ratio:  If a radio in question can already hear the noise floor on a given band when connected to your antenna, further amplification will not improve absolute sensitivity and may simply degrade receiver performance by feeding it with too much signal!

As it is, this unit will sit on a shelf with some other "vintage" gear, always ready for some possible future use.

* * *

Footnotes:

  1. If you think about this for just a second, you can buy some really nice accessories for $300 these days such as an automatic antenna tuner, a low-end laptop, or even one of several very nice QRP radios - some of which are software-defined radios.  How times have changed!
  2. Until somewhere around 1970 or so, it was common - at least in the U.S. - to use "cycles" (e.g. Cycles per second) rather than Hz (Hertz) which is why older equipment may show "kc" (kilocycles) and "Mc" (Megacycles) rather than the modern "kHz" (kiloHertz) and "MHz" (MegaHertz), respectively.  And no, you don't need a special "Mc to MHz" converter to use your old receivers!
  3. As noted, the Miller capacitance is often a limitation of the performance of high-frequency/high speed electronic components which is why the cascode configuration is used - and a similar reason why transimpedance amplifiers are the norm for interfacing with photodiodes in high-speed optical detectors  The Wikipedia article on the Miller effect is here:  link.   
  4. When this unit was made the nominal residential mains voltage in the U.S. was closer to 110-115 volts and now it is more typically in the 120-125 volt range.  It's unclear when this (gradual) change occurred - and it didn't seem to happen everywhere in the U.S. all at once - but the shift from "about 115" to "around 125" likely happened over the period of the mid 1960s into the 1980s.  "Vintage" gear - that being from the 1960s or earlier - likely was designed to operate closer to 110 volts (especially devices from the 1940s and earlier) than 120 volts meaning that the supply voltages (filaments, B+, etc.) are going to be higher as will the magnetization current/losses in the transformers - something to consider if you routinely operate such gear:  The use of a Variac TM or a "buck" transformer in series (e.g. an out-of-phase 9-12 volt filament transformer wired to reduce the 120 volt mains) is suggested to prevent overvoltage of filaments, capacitors, transformers, etc. to maximize the lifetime of those components.
  5. The article "Measurements on a Multiband R2Pro Low-Noise Amplifier System, Part 2" by Gary Johnson, WB9JPS, discusses the effects on noise figure on real-world performance and concludes that a receive system noise figure of 9dB is likely to be adequate for typical 6 meter operation:  Link (from the Web Archive)

 * * * * *

Frequency response plots of the Ameco PCL-P preamplifier/preselector

The following plots were taken using a DG8SAQ VNA with 20 dB of attenuation on its "Output" port (connected to the input of the PCL-P) and 6 dB of attenuation on its "input" port (connected to the PCL-P's output) to prevent overload of both the preamplifier and the VNA as well as present a nice, resistive 50 ohm source and load impedance.  (Ignore the S11 and Smith plots as I forgot to turn them off).  These plots cover the range from 1 through 80 MHz, overlapping all of the HF bands (plus 6 meters).  I did note that all of these bands overlap slightly, leaving no "gaps" in coverage and as expected, the gain and the "sharpness" of the filtering in these overlap areas (e.g. top end of the lower band with the tuning capacitor near minimum and the bottom end of the next higher band with the capacitor near maximum) were slightly different:  None of the amateur bands tested below fell  entirely within an "overlap" area.

For the response plots there is a marker (#2) indicating the center (peak) frequency while other markers indicate the -10dB and -20dB responses (relative to the peak) - the numbers in the upper-left corner indicating the forward gains at those frequencies.

The final plot shows the insertion loss of the unit when the "in/out" switch is set to "out" (bypass).

Click on any of the plots below for larger version.

Tuned to 1.9 MHz (160 meters) in the 1.8-4.0 MHz position, the peak gain being about 23dB.  The preselector does a decent job of rejecting a possible IF image (910 kHz above the center frequency for a 455 kHz IF).  Note also that the input preselector does a decent job of attenuating much of the AM broadcast band - although it might still be overloaded by a local transmitter operating near the top end of that band.


Tuned to 3.7 MHz (80 meters) in the 1.8-4.0 MHz position, the peak gain being a bit short of 28dB.  On 80 meters and higher there is only minimal image rejection for 455 kHz IF radios.


Tuned to 7.2 MHz (40 meters) in the 4-10 MHz position, the peak gain being just under 24dB.

Tuned to 14.2 MHz (20 meters) in the 10-23 MHz position, the peak gain being just under 23dB.

Tuned to 21.2 MHz (15 meters) in the 10-23 MHz position, the peak gain being just under 23dB.  At these higher bands the limitation of the simple, single-stage L/C filter starts to show up as an asymmetrical response - the filtering above the center frequency being less effective that below it.  Note also that at the marked 20dB point above the center frequency (marker #5) the gain of the amplifier is still about 2dB!

Tuned to 28.5 MHz (10 meters) in the 23-54 MHz position, the peak gain being just under 19dB.

Tuned to 52 MHz (6 meters) in the 23-54 MHz position, the peak gain being just a bit more than 19dB.  Its worth noting that the input network does appear to attenuate signals in the FM broadcast band by more than 20dB - something that may have been useful for receivers that suffered from ingress from a strong, local transmitter.

The "through" loss when switched to bypass ("out") mode.  Loss is measured at 0.53dB at 53.5 MHz and 0.16dB at 28.1 MHz as indicated by the markers.

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

 [END]




tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-8783142364376599954
Extensions
Reducing RF susceptibility for the HamGadgets "Ultra Pico Keyer" - and mimizing RF issues on portable HF stations in general
bypasscapacitorHam GadgetskeyerpaddlePico KeyerPOTAradio frequency interferenceRFIstuckstuck key
Show full content

Note:

While this article describes a modification of the Pico Keyer to reduce RF susceptibility, it also talks about general methods to minimize/reduce RFI-related issues for both portable and "base" stations:  This specific topic is covered near the end of this blog entry.

POTA operation 

Over the past several years I've done a bit of POTA (Parks On The Air) operating, racking up "about" 1000 contacts as an activator in a number of parks - usually as an "activator", and mostly on CW.  Typically, I have operated from a campsite using a portable antenna - usually the JPC-7 loaded dipole (discussed in this blog entry) or the JPC-12 loaded vertical (discussed here) - but I have also used an end-fed half-wave and a simple dipole on occasion - and even the Yaesu ATAS-100 on my vehicle.

Figure 1:
Operating CW POTA from US-0004,
Arches National Park in Utah
Click on the image for a larger version.

In the recent past there has been a revolution in portable power sources in that a LiFePO4 battery - which can supply 20-ish amps - is both light enough to be practical and fairly inexpensive.  For those instances where I may be staying at one location for several days the advent of inexpensive solar to maintain the power budget - and the solar controllers can be made to be RF quiet to make it compatible with HF operation (see this article).  With this in mind it's practical to operate the transmitter at 100 watts much of the time, something that makes it as easy as possible for those who wish to work me.  Despite the ability to run 100 watts, I have occasionally operated QRP (5 watts or less) - again, usually on CW.

A memory keyer

Having used a number of different radios for POTA operation (Yaesu FT-100 and FT-817, Icom IC-706MK2G and even a RockMite) - none of them with a memory keyer - I decided that an "Upgrade" was in order so I got the Ham Gadgets "Ultra Pico Keyer" (Link here).  This device is small, powered by a single CR2032 lithium coin cell and costs about US$40 as a kit (not including shipping) including a (partially) 3-D printed case.  For portable use, I couple it with the "Outdoor Pocket Double Paddle" (with magnets!) from CW Morse (link).

This is a nice, little device in that it provides a consistent interface to the user - no matter which radio you might use - and it has a number of message memories (up to eight), perfect for an activity like POTA where a message (e.g. "CQ POTA") may be repeated many, many times during the course of the operation.

Getting "stuck" 

Figure 2:
The Ham Gadgets "Pico Keyer" (left) along with the
CW Morse Outdoor Paddle.
Click on the image for a larger version.

While the Ultra Pico Keyer works as advertised, I did notice a problem on the first trip out while using a portable antenna:  It would get "stuck".

Clearly, this was an RF susceptibility issue - verified by reducing transmit power and observing that it no longer happened.  In short, at 5 watts there was usually no issue, but at 100 watts  the radio would stay keyed continuously after the first Morse element whether it was sent from a stored message or via the paddle:  While it was "stuck", I could still hear the sidetone - via the keyer's internal speaker - sending the message or what was keyed via the paddle indicating that it was not the microcontroller that had crashed but the circuitry that keyed the radio that was the problem.

Further testing showed that when the unit got "stuck" due to RF and simply unplugging the paddle from the back of the keyer would cause it to release (get "un-stuck").  The fact that this happened using a portable antenna provided further evidence of potential RF sensitivity.

Analyzing the problem

As I'm wont to do, I decided to take a look at the Pico Keyer's schematic to see if there was something about its design and construction that might make it more susceptible to RF interference - and I was surprised at what I found.  Here's the diagram found in the manual that is freely available online on the web site (link):

Figure 3:
Annotated diagram of the Pico Keyer with RF current paths shown.
The components in question are Q1 and Q2, in the upper-right corner.  The lines highlighted in yellow are those through which RF currents will flow (between the radio chassis and the paddle/cable) if no bypass capacitor is installed. 
The added capacitor is shown below the "OUTPUT" jack near the upper-right with the resulting RF current path around Q1/Q2 shown in magenta.
Click to get a larger image.

While there are protection capacitors on the paddle input (C1, C2) my eye was immediately drawn to the output keying (upper-right) where I was, at first, confused as to the arrangement with an N-channel MOSFET in both the keying line and the "common" (ring) of the "OUTPUT" connector (e.g. Q1 and Q2) - but then I remembered that the manual stated that this device would key both positive and negative voltages, explaining the "unusual" arrangement.

While admittedly clever, I could immediately see a susceptibility issue here - the problematic RF current path highlighted in yellow in Figure 3, above:  The "OUTPUT" jack more or less will "float" compared to the "ground" of the keyer itself, which is also connected to the "ground" lead of the cable to the paddle as well as the external paddle itself.  This configuration almost guarantees that there will be at least some RF current flowing from the radio and through the keyer's output circuit for several reasons:

  • If you are using this in a portable situation, the radio will surely have some RF on its chassis.  As noted in the final section of this blog entry, it's almost impossible to prevent all RF current from getting onto the feedline - even if you do use a common-mode RF choke and a very nearby antenna is likely to immerse the radio and its interconnecting gear in a rather strong radio-frequency field.
  • The paddle and the cable that connects it to the keyer should be considered as part of an antenna - and this situation is made worse if one is sitting at, say, a metal table and also if you, the operator, place your hand at/near the paddle/cable, further encouraging a "through" path for RF.

What this means is that there will be at least some RF current flowing from the radio chassis, through the keyer and then, as indicated by the yellow-highlighted lines - via transistor Q2 (and Q1) and then through the cable to the paddle.  I didn't really investigate the exact mechanism by which RF current through this path was causing the keying line to get "stuck" - but here are a couple of possibilities.

  • RF may be coupling from the drain of Q2 into its gate - and subsequently into Q1's gate as well, which is tied in parallel with it with the peaks of the RF voltage turning on the FET.  Even if RF through the FET was causing it to conduct only on half of the RF cycle, this would surely be enough to key the radio.  It's also possible that the transistor was turned, on average, only "partially" on by the RF energy - not enough to completely shunt out the RF, but enough to key the radio.
  • The RF could also be getting into the output pin of the microcontroller via the FET, causing its totem pole output to get "stuck" on while it was present.

Figure 4:
The added capacitor(s) can be seen soldered between the
"sleeve" pins of the "OUTPUT" and "PADDLE" jacks,
on the bottom of the board.  As you can see, I've made this
modification to both of my Pico Keyers!
Click on the image for a larger version.
Regardless of the cause, the fix was clear:  Add a capacitor to bypass RF current around Q1 and Q2 and the output pin of the microcontroller.  In Figure 3, above, the magenta highlight shows how the added capacitor conducts RF currents around the sensitive components.

When this occurred, I happened to be on a POTA activation, but I had my "electronic toolbox" in the car which included a number of useful items such as a soldering iron and a smattering of useful electronic components (a some common resistors, capacitors, etc.).  Grabbing a 1000pF capacitor, I connected one end to the "sleeve" (ground) pin of the "PADDLE" jack and the other end to the "sleeve" of the "OUTPUT" jack - effectively providing a bypass to RF energy on Q2's drain to the circuit "ground" to eliminate any RF voltage potential between the cable connecting the radio and that going to the paddle.  

This modification completely solved the problem:  It is my opinion that this capacitor should be supplied with the kit.  Additionally, Q2 could be eliminated completely and its source/drain leads jumpered if negative keying is not needed.  See Footnote 1

Since the topic of "RF on the rig" was already broached, the rest of this article will describe how to reduce it.  It's worth noting that the susceptibility of the memory keyer was such that even with the measures described below, it was affected at 100 watts.

* * * * *  

Suppressing RF on the gear and connecting cables

Some readers of this may immediately say "You are obviously doing something wrong with your set-up if there's enough RF on your gear to cause a problem".  

The problem of RF going somewhere other than out the antenna has been known for many decades and is sometimes referred to as "Hot Mic", a situation where there is enough RF on the radio - and the microphone - that the operator can even get an RF burn from touching the gear.  When this happens RF can get into the radio itself and cause undesired operation (malfunctions, distorted audio, etc.) but accessories connected to the radio - most notably sound interfaces, computers and even keyers - can be adversely affected.

While in the case above there was apparently some RF present on the gear to cause a problem, there isn't anywhere near enough to cause issues with the radio itself, and the radio+microphone (when running SSB) seemed immune.  Some types of antennas - typically ground-plane verticals, random-wires and end-fed half-wave antennas can, by their nature, put RF on the feedline - and thus the radios - unless extra steps are taken to minimize this problem in addition to properly installing/configuring the antenna, namely:

  • Common-mode choke on the feedline.  Typically placed near the antenna, this usually consists of coaxial cable wound on a ferrite toroid - typically 6-12 turns on an FT240 or FT140 core with either Mix 31 or Mix 43 as the material - the latter being generally more useful/preferred for portable operations where the higher bands (40 meters and up) are most likely to be used.  Sometimes operators wish to have the feedline itself act as part of the counterpoise/ground - something that can risk a "hot mic" situation and in this case placing the common-mode choke farther along the coax - often near the radio - is the better choice.  (Some operators will put a choke at the antenna and near the radio.)
  • Use of a "balanced" antenna.  A balanced antenna like a dipole is generally more likely to induce less RF current on its feedline than a purely end-fed antenna (a vertical is included) as it contains its own counterpoise - but having a perfectly-balanced antenna is not really possible and the feedline itself will usually participate in conducting/radiating RF along with the antenna to some degree.  A high-impedance antenna like an end-fed half-wave can sometimes reduce the probability of RF currents on the gear, but note that current can peak at every odd-numbered quarter-wave interval along the feedline and if the radio happens to be at one of these current nodes, issues are more likely to arise:  Placing a common-mode choke at a current node can help.
  • Counterpoise/ground plane at the radio.  If you are operating in a metal vehicle it's less likely that RFI will be a problem as one is likely to be surrounded (e.g. shielded) - plus the fact that the shield of the coaxial cable feeding the antenna can be electrically bonded to its chassis.  Barring being in a Faraday cage like a vehicle, having a counterpoise connected at the radio (particularly if it's 1/4 wave long at the operating frequency - and if there is more than one of them) this can siphon off some of the RF that might be present owing to its lower impedance.  The use of a common-mode choke prior to the counterpoise at the radio will help to raise the impedance of the conducted RF and will usually improve the efficacy of a counterpoise/ground plane.
  • Ferrites only go so far.  At HF, a simple "snap on" choke will probably do very little for the simple fact that there does not exist a common ferrite material that will offer a reasonable degree of choking impedance at, 14 MHz with just one turn (e.g. wire passed through it).  What is required is that multiple turns of a conductor be passed through the device (snap-on choke, toroid, etc.) as the impedance/inductance is proportional to the square of the number of turns.  Even so, there's a practical limit as to the choking impedance of a piece of wire around a ferrite (probably in the hundreds of Ohms for a "casually-wound" device).  As in the case of the keyer, I chose to use a capacitor, instead:  It is a tiny, inexpensive device able to fit inside the keyer rather than a large lump in a cable and it directly addresses the issue at hand by making the circuit intrinsically RF-tolerant.  In other words, it's the correct component for the job!
  • Place the antenna far away from the radio.  As noted, this isn't always practical - or even desirable during portable operation.  In my opinion, equipment used with a radio transceiver should already have a modicum of resistance to stray RF energy so that even small/moderate amounts of RF on the gear will not cause any problems.

If you are operating portable, there's one thing that you probably aren't going to get very faraway from:  The antenna itself.  Almost by definition, portable operating implies being near the antenna owing to the need to have a feedline of manageable length and also due to practicalities of not wanting to lug a long feedline along or taking up more real estate than necessary.  What this means is that it's likely that you and your radio will be immersed in a rather strong RF field - and this also means that anything made out of anything that is conductive (the radio, power cables, microphones, interconnect cables to your paddle and keyer - and even you) are likely to intercept RF energy this will get into everything.

* * * * *

Footnote

  1. A 1000pF capacitor has theoretical impedance of about 23 ohms at 7 MHz and it did the job here, but a 10000pF (e.g. 0.01uF or 10nF - ideally about 2.3 ohms at 7 MHz) capacitor would to just fine as well.  For positive keying (which is what likely what any modern radio uses) values as large as 0.1uF (100nF) would work as well - but this large of a value may cause issues with radios that use negative keying (e.g. high-impedance lines on some vintage radios).

 If you never plan to use a radio with negative keying, you could simply short together the source and drain leads of Q2 together to reduce RF susceptibility.

This kit is actually supplied with an "extra" capacitor:  The user can select between a 0.01uF (10nF) and a 0.047uF (47nF) capacitor (C3) on the "headphone" jack to set the loudness.  As I installed the 0.047uF capacitor, I had the 0.01uF left over.  Unfortunately, the specific capacitor supplied was thick enough that it prevent the board from sitting in the bottom of the case, raising it up and preventing the lid from fitting properly.  I could have probably connected this capacitor to the same circuit points on the top side of the board, but as I was home when I made this modification to my second keyer I simply found a lower-profile capacitor that didn't interfere with the board clearance.

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]


tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-267912407038270641
Extensions
A 15 (and 10) meter high-pass filter for Field Day
10 meters15 metersARRL Field Dayfield dayhigh-pass filterinterferenceNoiseoverloadqrmreceivertransmitter
Show full content

QRM from a transmitter to receivers on lower bands

[Go to the end of this article for an "After-Field-Day follow-up" about this filter] 

A friend of mine belongs to a club in a town north of me and he was describing an issue that they've been having for the past several years during ARRL Field Day:  A station on an upper band (e.g. 15 or 10 meters) degrading reception on 20 or even 40 meters when transmitting.  What was needed was something that could be used on both 15 and 10 meters and protect the lower bands (e.g. 20, 40 and 80) meters - and this protection would go the other way, preventing the 15/10 meter station's receiver from being overloaded by transmissions on the lower bands.

Figure 1:
Exterior of the 15 Meter high-pass filter,
built into a die-cast aluminum box with single-hole
UHF connectors on the sides.
Click on the image for a larger version.

First, a bit of background.

The ARRL Field Day event is held on the fourth (but not last) full weekend every June.  During this event thousands of clubs and individuals go forth into the wilds to set up and operate an event where they attempt to contact as many stations as they can in a 24 (or 27) hour period.  In the case of club stations - or where multiple individuals are involved - it's very common to have more than one transmitter at a given site.

As the Field Day rules stipulate that all antennas/radios be within a 1000 foot (305 meter) circle it isn't possible to provide much geographical separation between different transmitters.  This separation is important because a transmitter produces a very strong signal and the received signals are very weak by comparison:  Receivers can be easily overloaded by these nearby strong signal sources and transmitters can produce low-level signals on frequencies other than those on which they are operation - ones that are too weak to cause problems under normal situations but when placed in close proximity to a receiver these weak emissions can block out/interfere with other receivers - even on different frequency bands.

Other-band signals can cause problems

The degree to which a transmitter radiates these low-level spurious signals - and that to which a receiver is able to tolerate a very strong signal - depends considerably on the transmitter/receiver itself.  Some high end makes of radios (e.g. Elecraft, Flex Footnote 1) can be very clean in terms of transmitted spectra and higher-end receivers of all makes may be capable of tolerating a very strong signals - perhaps even in the same band - and this strategy works as long as the potentially-interfering transmitter itself is clean:  If that "other" transmitter is producing noise at any frequency of reception, there's nothing that can be done at that receiver to fix the problem other than to quiet or clean up the errant transmitter.  Meanwhile, even a "good" radio - such as an Icom IC-706MK2G or IC-7300 Footnote 2 or a Yaesu FT-757 - which works well by itself - may not "play nice with others" when immersed in an environment with multiple transmitters and receivers in very close quarters for reasons largely related to their design architecture.

What this means is that if one uses directional antennas (e.g. Yagis or beams) they are often placed north-south of each other and pointed parallel  Footnote 3 so that there is some isolation off to the sides of these antennas - and it goes without saying that antennas of any sort are separated as far as the rules - or the operating space (e.g. park, yard, forest clearing) allows.

Sometimes, this isn't enough:  Interference can result despite the precautions (e.g. transmit/receiver separation) so additional filtering may be necessary.

The use of Band-Pass filters

Barring the ability to separate antennas or place them in each others' nulls, there are other options:  From a number of manufacturers Footnote 4 there are available band-pass filters that - as the name implies - are designed to pass one specific amateur HF band with low attenuation (loss) while offering significant rejection of other bands above and below.  By placing one of these filters inline with the radio and the antenna, it not only will reduce the probability that a very strong signal from another band might overload the receiver (a particular problem with a radio like the Icom IC-7300 and certain models of other radios from other manufacturers) but it also attenuates the broad-band noise Footnote 5 that almost all HF radios produce that can encompass frequencies other than the band on which they are operating.

This low-level interference - often in the form of a white noise (or hiss) is produced by the amplifier stages in the transmitter itself.  Most modern HF transceivers - while equipped with low-pass filters that attenuate harmonics at multiples of the transmitted signal and generally prevent this noise from being emitted on the next-higher non-WARC band - do NOT have an equivalent high-pass filter in them that prevents low-level spurious signals or broadband noise from being output to the antenna on frequencies below that on which it is operating.  What this means is that a transmitter operating on, say, 15 meters, can produce a "hiss" that may degrade reception on 20, 40 or even 80 meters whenever it is keyed up - in this example, depending on how well that 15 meter antenna can radiate such signals and how close the two antennas are to each other.  (I discussed this very problem in an early article of this blog:  Getting the rigs ready for Field Day - Link).

For this reason it is often preferable to use a band-pass filter on every transmitter that is used, for the specific band on which it will be operated:  This will not only protect that receiver from the other bands' signals but also prevent the low-level energy from being emitted on bands other than that on which it is being used.

Note:  If you are experiencing interference from another transmitter that is actually producing noise on your receive frequency (this, given the presumption that your receiver isn't being overloaded) the addition of a filter on the station receiving interference will do no good at all since it cannot possibly filter out interference that is already there, on-frequency.  In this case, the only appropriate remedy would be to filter the offending transmitter.

As an aside:  In some cases simply enabling the radio's built-in antenna tuner - or using an external tuner - may significantly reduce the amount of out-of-band energy that the transmitter emits as well as adding to the attenuation from "other-band" signals during receive. Footnote 6 

A high-pass filter

While band-specific filters are preferred, my friend presented a case where a high-pass filter (one that blocks signals below a certain frequency) may be appropriate.  In his Field Day environment there has always been a station operating on 20 meters and usually another operating on 40 meters as well - but a third station was available to operate on 15 or 10 meters - depending on propagation conditions.  The problem was that when this third station transmitted, 20 and 40 meters were often degraded - likely by the broadband noise mentioned earlier.

While it would be possible to obtain separate 15 and 10 meter band-pass filters at some expense, I decided on a different approach:  A 15 meter high-pass filter.  This filter - which could be made to strongly attenuate frequencies on the non-WARC amateur bands below 15 meters (e.g. 20, 40 and 80 meters) - it would have the advantage of also being usable on both 15 and 10 meters.  Since it was unlikely that they would have stations on both 15 and 10 meters this strategy seemed sound for their application.

Using the ELSIE program (from Tonne software - link), I first calculated an "N=5" pro-forma high-pass filter using the "Elliptical" (e.g. "Cauer") circuit topology observing that I could get low attenuation at 15 meters and above while achieving more than 40dB on 20 meters and below.  Using the ability of the ELSIE program to do Monte-Carlo type optimizations, I then tweaked the filter topology from a pure Elliptical filter to a hybrid one and this resulted in even better attenuation at 40 meters than the original:  The schematic diagram of this filter is shown below:

Figure 2:
The 15 meter high-pass filter as iterated by the ELSIE program.  The circuit topology - originally
Cauer (Ecliptic) was modified by using simple inductors in sections 1 and 5 and a capacitor at
position 6 and then re-iterated to optimize performance.
Click on the image for a larger version.

As can be seen from the diagram, there are three capacitors in series with the signal path with two inductors directly to ground:  The center inductor is in series with another capacitor, forming one of the "notches" typical of the Elliptical filter topology - and it so-happens that it's possible to tweak the filter so that this notch just happens to land in the middle of the 20 meter band to maximize attenuation there.

Rummaging around in my junk box I found several 500 volt silver-mica capacitors:  For some reason I have a lot of 160pF units, so that was placed at section #2 and three of them were put in parallel for the series capacitor in section #3.  I found a 200pF capacitor for section #6 and I paralleled a 120pF silver mica and an NP0 disc ceramic for that in section #4.

Many people doing homebrew construction seem to intensely dislike toroidal inductors - but while they would be more compact, there is no need to use them here, so large-ish air-core inductors were used.  As the inductors are all "about" the same value (in the 225-300nH range) I wound 7 turns of 17 AWG (but anything 14-18 AWG would do) wire on a 13/32" drill bit for each of them, the precise value being unimportant as their turns would be stretched/compressed while using a VNA to "dial in" the filter response.  As mentioned earlier, I'd added one more inductor from the initial design because the inductors were the cheapest of all of the components (they are just wire!) and they are very adjustable - simply by compressing/spreading the turns which meant that by picking capacitor values that were just "pretty close" to those called out by ELSIE, the coils could be used to tweak the filter's response.  Note in Figure 3 that the inductors that are close-ish to each other are placed at right-angles, or in parallel with each other:  Avoid placing two adjacent coils "end to end" with each other to minimize coupling between them.

Figure 3:
Inside the 15 meter high-pass filter.  Copper-clad PC board
material is used as the backplane (ground) with small pieces
used as "islands" for connection and support points.  The
added capacitor and inductor are those on the right-hand side.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The filter was built on a piece of copper-clad PC board material as a back-plane and ground and small pieces of that circuit board material were cut out to form "islands" - the so-called "Manhattan" construction:  These islands would allow the junctions of the various circuit components to be connected together and with these islands glued to the back-plane and mechanically support the components soldered to them.

The piece of circuit board used as the backplane was sized to fit in the bottom of a die-case aluminum box that I had handy (about 6" x 3.25" x 2" or approx. 15 x 8.3 x 5 cm - but it could have been a bit smaller) onto which I'd installed two chassis-mount UHF connectors:  These connectors were placed rather close to the bottom of the box so that their ground lugs could be soldered to the backplane, providing both the "ground" connection to the copper clad and for mechanical support

Using a VNA, I first adjusted the inductor in section 3 to provide a notch at about 14.24 MHz and then iteratively tweaked the inductors in sections 1 and 5 to provide the lowest insertion loss and lowest VSWR at 15 and 10 meters.  When I was done, the insertion loss was just fine - less than 0.5dB - but the VSWR was about 1.45:1 at 15 and 10 meter so I added two more components (the 30pF capacitor in section 7 and the inductor in section 8 of the diagram) to act as a bit of a "tuner" to improve the match:  In the figure above you can see an inductor (in section 8) that goes to the right-hand UHF connector (6 turns of the same wire as the other coils on a 13/32" drill bit) and a 30pF disk-ceramic capacitor (section 7) between the PC board "island" to which it connects and ground:  With a bit more adjustment of all four inductors this brought the VSWR at 15 and (most of) 10 meters down to about 1.25:1 or better - plenty good enough!  The response of this filter is shown below:

Figure 4:
Insertion loss and VSWR plot of the 15 MHz high-pass filter as plotted by a VNA.
As can be seen, attenuation at 40, 30 and 20 meters is well over 45dB with less than 0.5dB
at 15, 12 and 10 meters:  The VSWR is also acceptably low on these band as well.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Not shown in Figure 3, I later used RTV (silicone) adhesive to stabilize the coils and add support - after tuning, of course:  This reduces the probability of the coils being detuned by the filter being jarred or dropped.  RTV is fairly low loss (at least at HF) and far superior to "hot melt glue" in this case (it's lighter - and it won't melt!) and unlike hot glue or cyanoacrylate (e.g. "Super") glue, it can withstand mechanical shock without breaking loose - even when cold.

This filter should easily handle 100 watts - and the low loss is largely due to the use of silver-mica capacitors:  After all, 500 volt silver mica capacitors - such as those used here - may be found in wide-range antenna tuners made by LDG and the like where they would be exposed to more stress than in the filter.  If you are wondering about the use of the small, disc-ceramic capacitors, they are used in "low stress" parts of the circuit - to "trim" the capacitance to the needed value (e.g. a NP0 ceramic in parallel with a 120pF silver mica to get about 130pF) or used to "tune" the filter as in the case of the 30pF capacitor on the output.  While it might seem risky to use these tiny ceramic capacitors at 100 watts, a quick look at almost any Japanese-made amateur HF transceiver - particularly those made up until fairly recently - you'll find them sprinkled with these capacitors in the low-pass filters and even for matching in the final amplifiers - both at HF and VHF/UHF - for matching:  If it works for them, I'll not worry about using them here in the right places.

Don't forget to change the filter when you change bands!

One hazard with outboard filters of any type:  Be sure that the filter is removed if you attempt to transmit on a frequency for which it is not designed!  After nearly every Field Day I hear/read reports where someone - say, originally on 20 meters - then tries to QSY to another band with the 20 meter filter still inline using the radio's built in antenna tuner or an outboard tuner:  The result is is often that the filter is damaged!  Footnote 7 

Final comments

As can be seen from the response plot of Figure 4 this filter will attenuate signals on the bands 20 meters and below by more than 45dB and this should be enough to quash to inaudibility any low-level noise produced by the transceiver at these lower frequencies that might degrade reception on these bands.  Similarly, energy from transmissions on 20 meters and lower from other stations will be at a much lower level prior to reaching the front end of the radio using this filter, further reducing the probability that they could overload/cause noise.

One thing that has not been discussed thus far is the fact that harmonically-related frequencies (e.g. a transmitter on 7.05 MHz would have harmonics at 14.10 and 21.15 MHz) are likely to be audible on other receivers, despite heroic attempts to fully-filter them.  The reason for this is that these harmonically-related signals will be fairly strong compared to the noise floor of the amateur bands and, unlike the low-level noise discussed earlier, would have their energy concentrated into a small bandwidth.  

Such signals are also likely to be radiated not only from the antenna ports, but from other cables connected to the radios themselves - namely the power cables, audio/microphone connections, data and PTT lines which means that a filter on the output won't suppress those other leakage sources.  Other than wide-spaced separation (e.g. not placing radios in the same location and moving them as far apart as possible) there's no way to completely prevent harmonically-related QRM other than to coordinate efforts and simply avoid operations that could result in harmonically-related interference.

As it is not yet Field Day, I don't know if this filter will "fix" the problem that my friend was reporting, but  should help, and it was quick, cheap and easy to throw together. Footnote 8

* * * * *

After-Field-Day follow-up

A few days after 2025 Field Day I spoke again with the friend for whom I constructed the filter described above. While 10 meters was mostly dead, 15 meters was reasonably productive at times and operation on that band was successfully carried out - mostly using digital modes.

There was time to do a bit of A/B testing and it was noted that without the high-pass filter, the 15 meter transmitter did produce a very audible "hiss" on lower bands - most notably 40 meters - when it keyed up, but this was totally absent with the filter in placeAdditionally, a slight amount of QRM from the lower-band stations (on 80, 40 and 20 meters) transmitting was noted in 15 meter reception without the filter - likely due to strong signals impinging on the radio's internal switching diodes - but this was also absent with the high-pass filter installed.

It's also worth noting that several other tactics were employed to minimize the possibility of QRM (interference) between stations, including:

  • Separating antennas as much as practical.  Depending on the site - not to mention the "1000 foot" rule - you can do only so much, but it helps to carefully consider the layout of the site to maximize distance between antennas.
  • Using band pass filters.  These go a long way toward preventing interference to and from radios on other bands. 
  • Use of mains filters.  L/C filtering (e.g. filters using inductors/capacitors) were installed on the long extension cords that fed the individual stations to prevent RF from being conducted on the electrical power leads and for this, "Isobar" plug strips were used.  Alternatively, putting a half-dozen or so turns of the extension cord through an FT-240 or "Monster" toroid (using 31 or 43 material for either one) would work as well - but it's recommended that the toroid be protected from damage by putting it in a box (e.g. a plastic electrical box with notches to allow the cord to pass).
  • The use of "balanced" 4:1 baluns.  As it turns out, most "4:1" baluns are NOT very balanced - and as such they will put significant RF current onto the radio and feedline, not only reducing antenna efficacy but also potentially improving susceptibility of RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) both TO the radio and devices connected to it (e.g. computers, other radios) but also allow RF interference (from generators, switching supplies, lighting, computers, etc.) to find their way onto the feedline.  This "un-balanced" nature of most baluns can be proven by noting signal strength of a consistent off-air signal and disconnecting only one side of the feed to the balun:  With a truly balanced balun you should see signals reduce by 20dB (3-5 S-units, depending on the radio) or more, but with most baluns you will see only a small (6-10 dB - 1-2 S-units) at most.  Of all of the commercial offerings, one of the very few truly "balanced" baluns is the Balun Designs "Hybrid" balun (Model 4116 - link) - but most 4:1 baluns can be made to be balanced by immediately preceding it with a common-mode current choke (e,g, 8-14 turns of coax on an FT240-31 or FT-240-43 toroid).

 * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.com

[END]

Footnotes:

  1. Unlike most radios, Flex radios do include filtering to prevent low-level noise from being emitted on bands lower than the one on which it's being operated:  Specific models of other manufacturers may also include this - although most do not.
  2. Direct-sampling receivers such as that of the IC-7300 have "different" problems in the presence of very strong signals compared to more conventional superheterodyne receivers:  Any signal that hits the analog-to-digital converter can cause overload, no matter the frequency.  While a conventional receiver can have a very "strong" mixer and some "roofing" filters in its IF (Intermediate Frequency) stages, this is not possible on a direct-sampling receiver.  Instead, it must rely on a rather large number of individual, overlapping band-pass filters to cover its intended frequency range and the ultimate attenuation of these filters may not be "strong" enough to prevent a nearby transmitter on another band from adding to the already-strong melee of signals on the crowded bands during Field Day and causing overload - or, at least, significant de-sensing (e.g. reduction in sensitivity).  This property is also what almost certainly makes them very poor candidates for being able to tolerate another local transmitter on the same band (e.g. a 20 phone and a 20 CW/digital station at the same Field Day site).  There are strategies that can improve the probability of two stations co-habitating on the same band - mostly having to do with picking the "right" radios (e.g. Elecraft K3S or the K4HD are known to work in this environment as are a few others) - as can the use of parallel-pointed Yagi antennas (see the next section, below) - or very "sharp" band-pass and notch filters can be constructed as described in two articles on this blog, namely:  A 100 watt "Helical" resonator bandpass/notch filters to increase isolation of 20 meter stations during Field Day (link) and Revisiting the 20 meter "helical resonator" band-pass/notch filters (link).
  3. Being able to point beams parallel to each other is at least partly a matter of geography.  A station on the east coast is likely pointing their antennas west while the situation would be reversed on the west cost:  A station in the middle of the country - with signals coming from potentially all directions - would be less-likely to be able to use this tactic, at least not without a degree of coordination among the individual transmitters/stations.
  4. A number of different manufacturers make band-specific filters for HF.  Depending on the design, these can offer modest (>=30dB) adjacent-band suppression - which is usually enough to solve most interference problems - or much higher degrees of filtering, even more than 50dB.  In addition, individual-band "Notch" filters are available from some suppliers that reject a specific band of frequencies which can be used several ways - on a transmitter to suppress any low-level noise that it might be generated on a specific band, or on another station to reduce the levels from a transmitter on that other band to prevent overload - and it can also be used to further-improve performance of a band-pass filter and increase attenuation on that specific band.  One of the companies that supplies such filters is Morgan Manufacturing (link)Full disclosure - I know the person that runs this company and am quite familiar with the products.  Other manufacturers also make similar, excellent products as well.
  5. This "hiss" can usually be detected without any sort of special equipment.  To do this, one would set up two transceivers in a relatively RF-quiet location (perhaps NOT a suburban home), each on its own antenna spaced within a few hundred feet/meters of each other.  On the radio doing the transmitting turn down the microphone gain all of the way after verifying that the RF power output would otherwise yield 100 watts peak when talking.  On the receiver, tune in the next band lower than the transmitter and note the noise floor with and without the transmitter keyed up.  In many cases, a "hiss" that can mask weak signals can be observed - particularly if using a resonant antenna on the transmitter without an antenna tuner.  If you couple carefully into the transmitter (using attenuators or directional couplers) this noise floor can be measured directly with a spectrum analyzer - even the $50-ish "TinySA" is up to the task!  It also goes without saying that a transmitter that IS outputting full power will also be prone to producing such hiss as well - not only above and below its actual transmit frequency, but on the "lower" bands as well.
  6. Testing to determine the efficacy of the built-in tuner as a band-pass filters was done using a Kenwood TS-450SAT, a radio from the 1990s.  When the tuner was switched in and "tuned" - even if the load was already matched - it functioned as a low-Q band-pass filter that reduced the broadband noise and adjacent band signals by at least 8dB - and typically 20dB or so.  Whether or not this strategy is likely to work on specific radios (e.g. some may switch out the tuner if there is already a good match) would require testing as described above.  (These measurements were discussed in a very early entry of this blog - link).
  7. The most likely components to be damaged when trying to "force feed" RF on the "wrong" band are the capacitors, followed by toroidal inductors being somewhat less-likely - and this will often happen when transmitting is attempted at full power (100 or more watts) rather than at the low power level used for tuning.  Usually, the operator realizes the mistake after the tuner fails to find a match, or it does find a match but signals are weak or absent.  For this reason, if you are using a filter with a radio and an external tuner it's strongly recommended that you place the filter between the radio and the tuner:  This will prevent damage to the filter as the radio will protect itself if it's used on the wrong band, presumably alerting the operator to the problem!
  8. It took far longer to put together this article than it did to design, gather parts, assemble and tune the filter!

 

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-2764487531093261320
Extensions
The construction of a hybrid ring combiner: Using the same duplexer, feedline and antenna for two repeaters/links/transmitters
band-pass cavitycirculatorcombinercombining two transmittersdummy loadhybrid ringhybrid ring combinerisolatorrate-race combinerwilkinson combiner
Show full content

Two transmitters, one antenna

There are occasions when it is desirable to combine two transmitters - and receivers - onto a single antenna - perhaps at a busy repeater site where more than one link or repeater is required.

The most obvious answer to this would be to have a separate antenna - and duplexer - for each of the links - but there are potential problems with this:

  • Antennas are expensive
  • Feedline is expensive
  • Duplexers are even more expensive
  • If you are on a shared site, you may have difficulty installing - or even getting permission to install - another antenna - and if you are renting tower space, this "other" antenna will be an ongoing expense.

If you have the luxury of planning ahead and you have a bit if extra link margin Footnote 1 (e.g. you have "excess" signal and can afford a bit of loss), by placing two repeaters and/or link radios on adjacent - or nearly adjacent - frequencies, you can probably use a single antenna, feedline and duplexer - potentially saving money and hassle in the long run.  Let's take as an example as a hypothetical pair of full-duplex links at a single site in the U.S. on the 70cm amateur band:

  • Transmit frequencies:  421.000 and 421.100 MHz
  • Receiver frequencies:   434.500 and 434.600 MHz

As these pairs of frequencies are only 100 kHz apart from each other, they will handily fall into each others' notches in their duplexers meaning that neither transmitter is likely to bother either receiver.  What this means is that you could use a single duplexer along with a bit of extra gear (more on that later) to put both radios on the same antenna.  This same technique could also be applied if, for some reason, you had two repeaters at the same site (say an analog and a digital) as will be mentioned a bit later.

Note:  While this article describes usage on the 70cm band, there's no reason why it could not be applied to other bands - higher and lower - as well.

First, let's briefly cover using a single antenna to feed more than one receiver.

Receive:  Splitting the receive signal path

Receiving is pretty easy:  Just use a splitter.  If you are using a 2-way splitter this will result in 3.0-3.5 dB loss on receive, and there is - in most cases - likely to be enough link margin so that this won't be a problem, but if not, placing a preamplifier of modest gain (say, 10dB) in front of the splitter will overcome these losses:  Avoid the temptation to use a higher-gain amplifier than this to minimize the probability that it might make the problem even worse due to overloading (desensing) and producing intermodulation products that will cause other interference issues.

In a pinch, a 2-way "Cable TV" type of splitter - with appropriate adapters - will work fine for 2 meter and 70cm even though they are designed for 75 ohm system:  They will have reasonably low loss (less than 4dB for a good-quality unit) and a port-to-port isolation of 20dB or better.  For more information see the article on this blog:  Using TV (F-connector) 75 ohm splitters and taps in 50 ohm systems on the amateur HF, VHF and UHF bands (link).

Methods of combining closely-spaced verses more-distantly spaced transmitters
 
When combining transmitters, there are two general situations that arise:  Those that are very closely-spaced in terms of frequency, and those that are spaced farther away from each other.

For two transmitters whose frequencies are separated by a reasonable distance (say, 5-10% of the frequency) it is usually practical to use a combination of notch cavities and phasing lines to separate them from each other - not unlike the way a duplexer allows both transmit and receive at the same time on a given antenna:  There's no reason why one couldn't have two transmitters on a duplexer.  If done carefully, such combination can incur additional losses of only a couple of dB.

The problem changes if the two transmitters are quite close in frequency:  Eventually, the separation is so small that it is not possible to use resonant cavities to separate them from each other:  For 2 meters, this spacing is about 400kHz or narrower while on 70cm a spacing of less than 1.5-2 MHz starts to become more difficult.  As the spacing gets narrower and narrower, losses go up and in the case of combining just two transmitters, if the losses exceed about 3 dB, it may be better to simply use a hybrid combiner like those described here rather than potentially large, expensive notch cavities.  If there are more than just two transmitters to be combined, everything gets even more complicated and careful system design and frequency planning are of paramount importance to minimize losses.

You can also find on the surplus market (e.g. EvilBay) splitters - typically made by Mini-Circuits - that are native 50 ohm.  It's worth noting that Mini-Circuits tends to rate their products very conservatively and even a splitter/combiner rated for "only" 200 or 250 MHz at the top end will work just fine at 450 MHz.  One device frequently found on the surplus market is the Mini-Circuits ZFSC-2-1(+) which is rated for 5-500 MHz and is suitable for all repeater bands 10 meters through 70cm.

Transmit:  Combining multiple transmitters onto a single feedline

This is a bit trickier.  

If your frequencies are very near each other (within 1-2 MHz at 70cm, closer than 500 kHz at 2 meters) it's not likely to be practical to use complicated band-pass/notch schemes to isolate the two transmitters with less than about 3 dB of loss.  Again, we are presuming that your link budget will tolerate an additional 3dB of loss - and in most cases in the "real" world, this is likely to be true.

The "easiest" way to combine two transmitters - whether the frequencies are close to each other or not - is with a hybrid combiner.  If the frequencies are quite close together - as in our example above - then the same duplexer, feedline and antenna can be used.

Note:  On 2 meters, frequencies closer than 100 kHz can likely be combined and mutually filtered with a single duplexer/band-pass cavity while on 70cm you may be able to get away with up to 500 kHz of separation - and both may require a bit of careful tuning of the duplexers/band-pass cavities and - at the wider spacings noted above, the possible need to tolerate a bit of extra loss or reduction of isolation.  Clearly, the closer the better!

Wilkinson Power Combiner

There are two common types of combiners that would be suitable for this, both of which having the property of being useful only "near-ish" their design frequency - say, less than +/- 10% or so.  The simplest of these is the Wilkinson type, depicted in Figure 1.  This circuit is frequently used in power amplifiers when there are multiple gain stages in parallel that are phased identically, being fed from the same source and combined to get more output.See Footnote 6  However, if you are combining different transmitters at different frequencies you will theoretically lose half the power - but there's really no way around this.  Again, it's quite likely that a loss of half of the transmit power (3 dB) at the antenna will have little actual effect on the coverage of the transmitter/link in a real-world situation.

Figure 1:
  Wilkinson combiner diagram (from Wikipedia)
In a 50 ohm system, this uses 72 ohm line and a
100 ohm resistor between P2 and P3.

How it works

Ports P2 and P3 represent the connections to the two transmitters and P1 is the combined output.  As can be seen, there is a total of 1/2λ (half  wavelength) between P2 and P3:  Any signal from P2 will arrive at P3 180 degrees out of phase and vice-versa, the ultimate result being that the signal from P3 is cancelled out at P2 and the signal from P2 is cancelled out at P3, effectively isolating the two transmitters from each other - which is important, as we'll later see.

Note that there a resistor between P2 and P3 which has a resistance of twice the system impedance - or in the case of a 50 ohm system, it should be 100 ohms.  Additionally, half of the TOTAL transmit power will be dissipated by this resistor if the signal sources are dissimilar (e.g. NOT being used to combine two parallel stages in an RF amplifier).  Finding a 100 ohm resistor suitable for 70cm that is also capable of handling 10s of watts of RF with a good return loss is tricky - and then placing it across two terminals that are "hot" with RF - makes the Wilkinson less attractive in this application.

Note that this device requires transmission line that is √2 * Zo - or in the case of a 50 ohm system, it's 50 * 1.414 = 70.7 (e.g. 71 ohms).  For our purposes, "75 ohm" cable like RG-59 or RG-11 would be fine if we were to construct one but most implementations at UHF use stripline on circuit boards.

Note that the Wilkinson may also be used to divide (split) power equally to two loads should that be required.  This is most commonly done in a power amplifier where two, separate amplifier stages need to be fed with the same signal after which another combiner would be used to sum the outputs again. 

Hybrid ring combiner

Another type combiner that will fit the bill is the so-called "Hybrid Ring" (a.k.a. "Rat Race") combiner, depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2: 
Hybrid Ring Combiner (from Wikipedia)
a.k.a. "Rat Race" combiner.  Like the Wilkinson,
this uses 72 ohm feedline in a 50 ohm system, but
the terminator (usually at P4) is 50 ohms.

Referring to Figure 2, our two transmitters are connected to ports P1 and P3 while output P2 contains the sum of the P1 and P3 signals and P4 contains the difference of the P1 and P3 signals.  All ports must be sourced/terminated at 50 ohms and we would typically connect 50 ohm transmitters at P1 and P3 and 50 ohm loads (antennas or dummy loads) at P2 and P4 as appropriate.  

If we look carefully, we can see that between P1 and P3 (via P2) there is 1/2λ of feedline between the two if we go clockwise around the circle - but if we go the other way around the circle we have 1/4λ plus 3/4λ - or a total of 1λ - which which means that there is 1/2λ difference in feedline length between them - thus a 180 degree phase difference - any RF being input to P3 are cancelled out at P1 and vice-versa.  With P2 being halfway between P1 and P3 - and going the other way we have 1.5λ of feedline between the same points and no cancellation we get the sum of the two transmitters.  Like the Wilkinson, you could also use the Hybrid ring to split power between two loads:  To do this the transmitter (source) would be applied to P2 and the two loads would be connected at P1 and P3.

If we were combining two in-phase RF amplifiers from the same transmitter - as we might if we had two identically-phased amplifiers that we wanted to combine for more power, we would get zero power at P4 and the combination of the two amplifiers would appear at P2:  A dummy load - connected at P4 - would see little or no power if the two two amplifiers were operating with equal power and phase.

In our case, we are combining two different transmitters - on different frequencies - and this means that half of our power will end up each on P2 and P4, so we would typically connect our dummy load at P4 and our output to our antenna (via the duplexer) at P2.

Figure 3:
Andrews FSJ1-75 75 ohm Heliax - unfortnately
no longer being made, but other types of 75 Ohm
cable may be used as well as described in the text.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Like the Wilkinson power combiner, the ring combiner requires transmission line that is √2 * Zo (e.g. 71 ohms) - and again, 75 ohm cable is fine for most purposes in a 50 ohm system.  A distinct advantage of the ring combiner is that unlike the Wilkinson, the dummy load in the ring combiner is ground-referenced rather than having a resistor across two "hot" RF terminals - simplifying design.  Additionally, because the load that we would connect to P4 is the same as our system impedance - 50 ohms - finding a suitable device on the new or surplus market is quite easy.

Either the hybrid-ring or the Wilkinson combiners should yield well over 25dB of isolation between ports when properly constructed over a wide frequency range (8-10% or more) - and values of over 50dB are attainable on the workbench with known-good loads and sources across narrower frequency ranges.  Having good isolation between ports is vital when combining transmitters:  Not only does good isolation imply lower loss  (e.g. closer to the theoretical 3dB) but in the case of two different transmitters, minimizing the amount of energy that transmitter "A" gets from transmitter "B" reduces "wasted" power due to this cross-coupling, but more importantly it reduces the likelihood of the generation of IMD (Intermodulation Distortion) products that could cause receive performance degradation and interference - more on ways to prevent this will be discussed later.

Again, the reader is reminded that both the Wilkinson and Hybrid Ring combiners - unlike their counterparts that use transformers - are not inherently broadband:  They are typically used within less than +/-10% or so of their design frequency for best performance as this is the limit of efficacy of the quarter-wave phasing sections.  Later in this article we'll analyze the constructed hybrid ring combiner and demonstrate its frequency range.

Choice of transmission line

As noted, the impedance of 75 ohm feedline is "good enough" for these two types of combiners on a 50 ohm system in most cases and this sort of coaxial cable is readily available:  RG-59 and RG-11 types are suitable - as are some RG-6 cables such as Belden 1694A that have tinned-copper shields and solid copper center conductors to which we can easily solder - but note that most RG-6 cables use aluminum shields and copper-covered steel center conductors:  In theory these would work, but making a good connection to the shield is a complication.

NOTE:  There are PTFE (Teflon) 75 ohm coaxial cables available - see Footnote 2 at the bottom of this article for more information.

Figure 4: 
A hybrid-ring combiner, constructed as a "ring" using
FSJ1-75 Heliax and "N" type connectors on pigtails with bits
of brass tubing at the joints.
Click on the image for a larger version.

While I had all three of the typical 75 ohm cable types available to me, I found - while rummaging around - some Andrews FSJ1-75 1/4" Heliax tm coax.  Unfortunately, this cable hasn't been made since 2011, but it may still be found on the surplus market occasionally - and the data sheet for it is still online (link).  This cable is lower loss than any of the other options mentioned - but this is probably not important as such short lengths of it are used:  Reactance losses due to the construction itself are likely to be greater than the cable losses, anyway - and I would have gotten very similar results with the other choices.  The use of the smaller cable also implies a smaller bending radius - which will be important as we'll soon see.

In theory, one could construct a hybrid ring like this using RG-11-type coaxial cable, N-type connectors and known-good See Footnote 3 N-type "tee" connectors - but you will have to carefully calculate the added lengths of the connectors and adapters when doing so.

Form factor

There are several ways that this ring combiner could be built.  The most obvious is in the form of an actual ring as depicted in Figure 4 - a combiner that I built over 25 years ago, also using the same Andrews FSJ1-75.  This uses short pieces of brass tubing to connect the segments together and holes in the sides of the tubing allow solder connections to be made between the segments and to the short "pigtails" with "N" connectors on them:  It measures better than 35 dB TX port isolation at its intended frequency.   This particular combiner had been used to combine a two UHF repeaters - an FM voice repeater and a 9600 baud packet repeater, on frequencies just 25 kHz apart - onto the same duplexer/antenna for several years with excellent results using the methods described below. 

Figure 5: 
For the ring combiner on this page, it needed to be a bit more
compact and rugged, housed in a Hammond 1590D box.
Click on the image for a larger version.
For the combiner that I recently built there was the need for something more "compact":  The "ring" described above (in Figure 4) is about 10" (25cm) in diameter and the connectors are awkwardly spaced, on flexible leads - and the entire thing is a bit fragile. For 70cm, the feedline lengths are short enough that the sections can be put into a large-ish die-cast box - particularly if the cable used has a fairly tight allowed bending radius, which would rule out RG-11. In this case I had on hand a Hammond 1590D which is 7.4" (18.8cm) x 4.7" (11.95cm) x 2.2" (5.6cm).  I also happened (as one does) a number of chassis mount "N" connectors with short lengths of UT-141 (hardline) already connected to them which would allow (literally!) some flexibility as to how the internal phasing sections of feedline could be oriented and connected.  It's worth nothing that if RG-179 were used (see Footnote #2) a smaller-still metal box could be used - even for a 2 meter combiner! Running the numbers

First, calculate the wavelength at the desired center frequency.  In our case, we need 421.0 MHz:

300 / F (MHz) = Wavelength

300 / 421.0 = 0.713 Meters - The wavelength at 421.0 MHz.

Figure 6:
Preparing and measuring the cable pieces.  For the ring
combiner there is one 3/4λ and three 1/4λ pieces.  They are
intentionally cut slightly long to allow stripping and soldering.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Now, we need to find the velocity factor of our particular cable, a number which indicates the tendency for electricity to move slower than light when it is conveyed through conductors in the presence of a dielectric.  For best results, find the manufacturer of the specific cable that you are using as this varies - particularly between solid and foam dielectric cables and the precise type of dielectric.  For our FSJ1-75, the stated velocity factor is 0.78 (78%).  Knowing this, we can calculate the length of one electrical wavelength of our cable:

Vf * Length = Electrical length  So we plug in the numbers:

0.713 * 0.78 = 0.556 Meters

Figure 7: 
The stripped/prepped end of a cable segment as described in
the text.  The calculated lengths are measured between the
ends of the dielectric, where the center conductor protrudes.
Click on the image for a larger version.
As we can see from the diagram of Figure 2, we need four pieces of cable:  One that is 3/4λ (0.75λ) and three more that are 1/4λ (0.25λ), so we multiply the above to get those:

0.556 * 0.75 = 0.417 Meters for 3/4λ section  - approx. 16-3/8"

0.556 * 0.25 = 0.139 Meters for the 1/4λ sections  - approx. 5-1/2"

Prepping the cable

As we need a bit of extra cable to expose the center conductor to which we solder we need to make the sections slightly longer - about 1/2" (13mm) at each end - or about 1" (25mm) longer overall for each piece.  After cutting the pieces of cable, put a mark at the center of each and measure about 1/2" (1cm) less than half the length that we calculated above to the end strip back the outer jacket:  This will leave a section of bare shield to which we can later solder.  Now remove the shield at a point about 1/4" (0.5cm) less than half the length that we calculated above and remove the dielectric, but leaving a couple of mm (about 1/16") out from the end of the shield:  And example may be seen in Figure 7.

Note that when we calculate the length of the cable - 0.139 meters for a 1/4λ section in our example - we are measuring at the points where the center conductor protrudes from dielectric.  As can be seen in Figure 8, the center conductors are then bent over level with the top of the dielectric to be soldered to to the other cable segments and the distances are measured from the points where they are bent over.

Figure 8:
The junction of the three cables, with the center conductors
bent over and soldered - and with the shields firmly soldered
together as well, using 26 AWG bare wire during assembly.
Click on the image for a larger version.

At this point it would be a good idea to consult the specifications of the cable that you are using and determine the minimum bending radius.  For FSJ1-75, this is specified as being 1.25" (31.75mm) and for Belden 1694A this is about 2.75" (70mm):  Try to bend it less than this if you can:  Cut a piece of cardboard or paper with a circle of this radius as a comparison.

To get an idea as to how everything should be routed inside the box, the connectors+cables were first installed and tightened and the four pieces were laid out and moved about to determine what made sense.  As can be seen from Figures 8-11, each of the cables were bent at a gentle right angle so that the center conductors all came together at one point and the shields in parallel with each other - all without bending the cables at too-tight a radius.

Once the orientation of a cable end was determined, the center conductors were bent over - leaving a gap of about 1/16" (2mm) between it and the shield and the connections tacked together.  After this, some tinned 26 AWG wire was wound tightly around the shield and then soldered, making a both a very short-length electrical connection and providing mechanical rigidity as can be seen in Figure 8.

Figure 9: 
A better view of the cables being assembled in the box,
showing how the 26 AWG bare wire first used to tie the
springy cables together and then flooded with solder.
Click on the image for a larger version.
A very hot soldering iron is a must here as it allows connections to be made very quickly and prevent melting of the dielectric. If you have it, use tin-lead solder (e.g. 60/40 or 63/37) as it melts at a lower temperature than "lead free" solder and is less likely to melt and damage the cable's dielectric. Additionally, a few drops of either "no-clean" or rosin flux will help make good, clean joints with minimal heat.

As it turns out, the FSJ1-75 is relatively forgiving in terms of heat if you use a hot iron and work quickly - but if you use something like 1694A or other flexible coaxial cable, you may want to tin the braid prior to assembly - starting with a few bits of "practice" coaxial cable to avoid melting pieces that you have already cut to length and prepared.

Figure 10:
The cable segments were originally fitted in the box and
tacked together as seen in Figure 9, but were carefully removed
so that the connections could be fully soldered on both sides.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Testing

A NanoVNA is a good tool to test the combiner - but you will also need TWO known-good 50 ohm terminators (dummy loads).  For this, you probably won't want to use anything but good-quality units - which are available surplus - and you will want to use an ohmmeter to verify that they are in the range of 50-52 ohms - and don't forget to take into account the resistance of your ohmmeter leads!

Before proceeding, be sure to do an "SOLT" (Short-Open-Load-Through) calibration of your VNA for the frequency range of interest.  In our case, it's 400-500 MHz. 

As you will be measuring "through" loss, I suggest that for measuring this device that you use the "receive" (second) port of your NanoVNA instead of the termination when doing the SOLT calibration as it will likely not be quite as good as the load that came with the NanoVNA and would otherwise make VSWR/return loss measurements "appear" to be worse than they are:  If you are interested in single-port (S11) measurements only, use your SOLT load for calibration and either it or a known-good load when testing..

Referring again to Figure 2, note which of the four connectors correlate with P1, P2, P3 and P4 (mark them with a pen or label) and connect the dummy loads to P2 and P4.  Then, connect the "In" and "Out" leads of the NanoVNA (or similar) to P1 and P3 - it doesn't matter which way.

Figure 11: 
Initial testing of the combiner, showing the NanoVNA
connected to ports P1 and P3 and the dummy loads on ports
 P2 and P4.
Click on the image for a larger version.
If all goes well, the VSWR should be below 1.25:1 and the "through loss" (which is the isolation between the two transmitters to which P1 and P3 will be connected) should be well above 25 dB.  At some frequency - probably a bit above the intended design frequency you may see the through loss dramatically increase (a "dip" in amplitude) of port-to-port isolation between P1 and P3.  If you do not see significantly more than 25 dB of isolation between P1 and P3, re-check your connections:  If you see way under 20dB you have probably misidentified your connections and should check again - but if you think that you have properly identified everything, re-check your math from when you calculated the cable lengths - and don't forget to include the velocity factor. As we'll see later, a device like this should yield in excess of 30dB transmit-transmit port isolation over a very wide frequency range - even without any "adjustments".  In Figure 11 you can see the initial testing of the ring combiner and in the background on the NanoVNA - on the blue trace - the "dip" showing the frequency of the best port-to-port isolation - which, before tuning, was near 435 MHz.

Having verified that the isolation between P1 and P3 is good, connect one of the NanoVNA leads to P2 and move the dummy load onto the to which the NanoVNA had been connected:  If the unit is working properly, the insertion loss will be about 3dB, which is exactly correct.

Figure 12: 
A "tuning strip" used to make slight adjustments.  The
"grounded" strip is moved closer to the exposed center
conductors to increase capacitance.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Making adjustments

While the "ring" depicted in Figure 4 is elegantly simple, it can't be adjusted:  Scrunching it into the box as shown in Figures 10 and 11 allow a bit of tweaking to optimize both isolation and matching by virtue of the exposed center conductors.

When I built the combiner pictured I noted that the best insertion loss between P1 and P3 appeared as a "dip" around 435 MHz with the lowest VSWR occurring around 440 MHz.  I observed that very lightly touching my finger at the junction of P4 caused this "dip" to shift down in frequency, indicating that a very small amount of capacitance might better things at our 421.0 MHz design frequency.

Rather than connect a small variable capacitor - which would need to be of very low capacitance values (possibly less than 1pF) I did something simpler:  I cut a small strip of brass sheet and soldered one end to the shield of the coax at the junction of the cables as depicted in Figure 12.  This strip was then bent around the exposed junction - but kept at 1/8-1/16" (2-3mm) away from the center conductors to avoid shorting:  This added a bit of capacitance at that point and shifted the "dip" down in frequency, and by adjusting this brass strip closer/farther away from the center conductors of the cables, I was able to "dial" it in at 421 MHz.  If you can't get the strip close enough to the center conductor to bring the frequency down, solder a smaller strip of metal to the center conductor to form a larger capacitor plate, allowing more capacitance with greater distance.

Figure 13:
Inside the combiner - tuning strips installed on P1 and P4
which are used to slightly tweak the performance at the
intended operating frequency.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Similarly, I noted that lightly touching the connection at P1 reduced the VSWR slightly (which had started at around 1.2:1) and a similar brass strip was installed there.  The two interacted slightly with each other and I was able to get both a lower VSWR (under 1.1:1) and very good isolation (more than 50dB) at 421 MHz.  Note that when connected to the "real world" (e.g. actual transmitters and an antenna) which will probably have some reflected power and will NOT likely have precisely 50 ohms of impedance, the isolation will likely be less than what we measure on the workbench.  The lack of a really low VSWR (e.g. higher return loss) anywhere across the frequency range can likely be attributed to the fact that we used nominally 75 ohm feedline for the construction of the combiner rather than "70.7 Ohm" feedline - which is difficult to find in the form of coaxial cable!

With a bit of finessing I was able to get the port-to-port isolation and VSWR shown in the plot below:

Figure 14:
Port-to-port isolation (blue line) and VSWR (green) with a Smith chart in the background
and a legend in the upper-right corner showing the readings at the marked frequencies on the plots.
There is well over 50dB of isolation between P1 and P3 at the intended frequency.
Click on the image for a larger version.

As we can see from Figure 14, the port-to-port isolation at our target frequency is quite good - in excess of 50 dB - while the VSWR is around 1.1:1 as noted in the upper-left corner.  It's worth noting that the port-to-port isolation is better than 30dB between 400 and 445 MHz - a span of about 10% - and it's better than 20 dB from somewhere below 400 MHz to 491 MHz - and no-where on this plot does the VSWR exceed 1.4:1.  What this means is that if your goal is 30dB isolation, the design is quite forgiving.  As can be seen from the Smith chart in the center, the matching is pretty well-behaved.

What about insertion loss?  This plot gives us the answer:

Figure 15: 
TX port to antenna insertion loss (blue) and VSWR (green) - again with a Smith chart in the
background and the legend in the upper-left corner.
This plot shows just 0.05dB above the theoretical at the 421 MHz design frequency and a
good VSWR as well.
Click on the image for a larger version.

This graph shows the measured insertion loss and at our target frequency of 421 MHz, it is around 3.05 dB - very close to the theoretical 3dB loss and getting very near the uncertainty of our measurement.  Over the same "30dB port-to-port isolation" frequency range that we measured above (400-445 MHz) we see that the insertion loss is lower than 3.2 dB and that the VSWR over this range never exceeds 1.2:1.  Even up at 491 MHz where we had only about 20dB port-to-port isolation the insertion loss is a bit over 4 dB with a VSWR of 1.4:1 - not great, but still usable in a pinch.

Putting it into practice

Figure 16:
A two-stage UHF isolator with loads - a Ma-COM 7R011,
owned by the author, designed to work at UHF Footnote 5.
Although the two loads are only rated for 12 watts, the
 unit itself can handle 125 watts if the load on the left
(nearest the "output") were sized accordingly.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Being able to bash two transmitters on "nearby" frequencies together is a good thing - but we do need more than just the combiner to do so effectively and "cleanly".  (Note:  If the transmitters' frequencies were spaced farther apart, a different scheme would be required - see Footnote #4).  The entire point of having a ring combiner with good port-to-port isolation is to minimize losses - here, we limit them to about 3dB - but it also prevents the RF output power of one transmitter from getting into another where mixing can occur, producing low-level IMD (intermodulation distortion) products that could cause interference to your own gear and - more importantly - other users on site.  As the port-to-port isolation is likely to diminish with "imperfect" sources and loads, we need to do more to prevent these mixing products from occurring than just the combiner.

To minimize the probability of this occurring it is also a very good idea to install a ferrite isolator on the output of each transmitter, prior to the ring combiner as depicted in Figure 18.  These devices - one of which is pictured in Figure 16 - can be through of as a sort of "diode" for RF:  They will let transmit power go through them, toward the antenna, but any power that comes the other way - reflected due to VSWR or RF energy from another transmitter - will end up in its dummy load(s) - effectively preventing RF from getting back into either of the final amplifiers:  Figure 17 shows what a properly-functioning isolator does to block RF coming back from the "load" port - in this case it reduces that energy by around 60dB at the frequency to which it is adjusted.

Figure 17:
The reverse (isolation) plot of the 2-stage isolator of Figure
16.   At the frequency to which it is tuned (450 MHz)
it has over 60 dB of reverse isolation. In the other direction
(not shown in this plot) its loss is only about 1dB.
Note that +/-25 MHz from center, the isolation drops below
30dB which is why a pass cavity is suggested!
Click on the image for a larger version.
These isolators (which are "circulators" with included "dump" loads) generally come in two flavors:  Single stage and double stage - the latter having two devices in the same package like the one in Figure 16.  Typically yielding 20-30 dB of reverse isolation per stage, a double stage device typically has between 40 and 60 db reverse isolation as shown in Figure 17.  This plot also shows something else:  While the reverse isolation is very good at its tuned frequency, it decreases as you move away:  If you have other users on site - and you are not using a pass cavity between the isolator and antenna - these "off-frequency" signals will not be as well-attenuated by the isolator as at the design frequency and its efficacy will be reduced while the probability of IMD being generated in the transmitter's output will increase.
 While isolators can be quite expensive when new, they are frequently found on the surplus market.  Most isolators are tunable, and this will need to be done to optimize performance on your operating frequency - but this can easily be accomplished with a NanoVNA and instructions as to how to do this may be found on the Repeater Builder web site (link) as well as on videos on YouTube.  Even the extra expense of isolators and a band-pass cavity may well be less expensive than and preferable to the installation of two separate antennas, feedline and duplexers - particularly if another antenna were to incur recurring costs such as maintenance and tower rent!
 If your combiner had a rather "average" 30dB of port-to-port isolation and you were using a two-stage isolator on each of your transmitters this would mean the RF energy from one transmitter getting into the other would be down between 70 and 90dB - and this nearly guarantees that IMD products will be extremely low and likely undetectable.

To further reduce the probably of harmful IMD product escaping your system, a band-pass cavity should be inserted between the output of the combiner and the "transmit" port of the duplexer as depicted in Figure 18:  As noted in another article on this blog (See the article:  When Band-Pass/Band-Reject (Bp/Br) duplexers really aren't band-pass - link) almost all duplexers used in amateur repeater service will NOT offer much filtering once you move a few MHz away from their tuned frequency.

Figure 18: 
A typical application using a ring combiner, along with isolators and a band-pass cavity in the TX leg.
The isolator on TX #1 - and the ring combiner - minimize the amount of energy that it "sees" from
TX #2 and vice-versa while the band-pass cavity limits off-frequency energy that can enter the system.
Click on the image for a larger version.
 By including a band-pass cavity in the "transmit" leg of the duplexer - prior to the duplexer - energy that is away from the operating frequency will be attenuated significantly.  This is important as many isolators have a rather limited frequency range over which they are most effective as seen in the figure above.  Additionally, if there are very low-level IMD products produced by mixing within your two transmitters even with isolators and the port-to-port isolation of the combiner, these will be significantly quashed by the band-pass cavity, practically eliminating even the possibility of self-generated interference. Figure 19:
The completed UHF ring combiner.
The labeling on the sides of the box
identifying the ports is not visible in this photo.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Conclusion:

With a bit of planning and foresight is is possible to combine multiple transmitters - or even full duplex link radios or repeaters - onto a single antenna.  The techniques described here are most useful if you are able to do frequency planning by placing the transmit/receive frequency pairs quite close to each other, permitting the use of a common duplexer and single band-pass cavity in the TX and another in the RX leg.  Even if the frequencies are separated a bit and a common duplexer is not possible, these techniques can still be adapted.
 In most cases, the extra 3dB of loss on receive and transmit can be ignored as such a reduction in sensitivity radiated power is likely to be unnoticed - and it well may be worth the trade-off in terms of minimizing infrastructure and even cost. * * * * *

Footnotes:

  1. Link margin refers to the amount of signal between a transmitter and receiver - and specifically, the degree to which it could degrade and still produce acceptable results.  Consider the following:  Let us suppose that your goal is to have a link with 20dB SINAD or better and your receiver was capable of producing a signal of this quality with -110dBm at its input terminals.  If the strength of your receive signal from the other end of the link was -90dBm, it could be reduced - via fading or other path degradation - by 20dB before it would be considered to be "faded".  If - in the process of putting two radio systems on the same antenna you were to reduce either the transmitter at the far end or the receiver at the near end by about 3dB, in our example we would still be left with about 17dB of "fade margin".
  2. RG-179 and RG-302 - both being 75 ohm available with PTFE (Teflon) and similarly-resistant jacket - would be excellent choices in the construction of a ring combiner owing to their flexibility and heat resistance.  RG-179 is available from  both Mouser Electronics - link -and Digi-Key Electronics link at the time of writing and while rather expensive, it doesn't take a lot of cable to construct a ring combiner.  While the PTFE is preferred, it's also available with other types of dielectric/jacket which will work, but care would be required to avoid melting it during soldering.  The PTFE cables' velocity factors are typically around 69% while the polyethylene versions are around 79% - but always check the manufacturer's data sheet!
  3. If you ever use "Tee" type adapters, be extremely careful what you get - particularly if you are using type "N".  Many "foreign-made" N-type connectors are very poorly built - both mechanically and in terms of RF - and some of them having been found to use springs to make contact (highly inductive - VERY BAD!) and/or compression-type connections that tend to oxidize.  If you can afford it, such "Tee" connectors from Pasternak (link) will likely be good - as are genuine old mil-spec devices from reputable manufacturers (Amphenol, Kings, etc.).  If you don't know their quality, be prepared to measure them carefully using a VNA - and better yet, buy an extra so that you can cut it apart and see for yourself if it resembles anything like a "constant impedance" device with solid, reliable construction.
  4. Note that since in our example the two transmitters' frequencies are very close together (only a few hundred kHz at 70cm) there would be little point in putting a band-pass cavity between the output of the isolator and ring combiner, but if the transmitters were several MHz apart - a spacing at which the cavities would offer reasonable rejection - it might make sense to do so.  If one did have several MHz spacing, it's less likely that the band-pass cavity in Figure 18 would be appropriate and that one could get away with using a single duplexer, either. 
  5. The two-stage UHF isolator in Figure 16 was bought by the author "as is" - with the pair of 12 watt loads - at a swap meet for about $20 - the low price being due to the fact that it had clearly been submerged in water for a while and was showing some corrosion.  It was very carefully being disassembled and thoroughly cleaned - which included washing the trimmer capacitors with denatured alcohol to remove any contaminants - and resoldering the internal connections as it was reassembled, it once again worked, more than meeting the manufacturer's specifications for both reverse isolation and forward insertion loss.
  6. The Wilkinson divider/combiner is often seen in high-power amplifiers - both to split drive power to identical amplifier stages, and to combine them again after amplification - and in this case, the same signal in terms of frequency, phase and power is being combined/split.  In cases like this where the inputs and outputs are operating at identical power levels (e.g. combining two, signals or putting two identical signals together) the 100 ohm load across P2 and P3 in Figure 1 sees NO (or very little) voltage difference and dissipates little/no power.  If, however, the two signal paths become different (e.g. one of the two amplifiers fails) this resistor will then dissipate a significant percentage of the remaining signal power.  Anyone who has had to repair a power amplifier that uses such a combiner/splitter arrangement knows that in addition to needing to repair the amplifier stages - and make sure that their outputs are phased equally (there's often a capacitor to do this) that equalizing resistor will have been "smoked" (destroyed) almost instantly when one of the amplifier sections failed as they typically use a resistor that is rated for a fraction of the power output:  If everything is fine, the resistor survives - but if not...
* * * * *This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com
[END]








tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-3686298954476152444
Extensions
Refurbishing a CIR Astro 200 HF amateur band transceiver
Astro 200Astro 200ACIR IndustriesCubic SwandigitalHFrebuildrefurbishrepairSwansynthesizedsynthesizertransceiverWWV
Show full content

The Astro 200

The CIR Industries Astro 200 is a compact, synthesized 100 watt HF transceiver from the mid-late 1970s that covers the 80, 40, 20, 15 and 10 meter bands.  Intended for both home and mobile use, it is quite small - 9.75" wide, 12.5" deep and 3" tall (24.8 x 31.8 x 7.6cm) - including the rear heat sink.  Back in 1977 - when this unit was made - it seems to have cost around $995 for the version without the CW filter - about $5000 in 2025 dollars!

Figure 1:
The front panel of the CIR Astro 200.  While advanced for
its day, the radio is pretty simple by today's standard.
The lack of a tuning knob seems a bit odd.
Click on the image for a larger version.

I don't know too much about CIR Industries, except that it was around only for a few years, apparently absorbed by Cubic-Swan in about 1978 where it was rebadged with the name of the new company and - with very minor changes - became the "200A".  The history of Cubic-Swan becomes a bit muddy after the early 1980s and appears to have fizzled entirely by the mid-late 1990s.  Much of the design of the Astro 200 - and other Cubic-Swan radios - was apparently done by Don Stoner, W6TNS (who was also the "S" in SGC).

The later version of this radio, the Astro 200A, sported a 6 pin round microphone connector, black knobs, slightly different switches, a lighted meter and very slightly modified scales on the meter itself:  I suspect that the electrical differences - some of which are noted below - may have evolved during the production of the original Astro 200.

The radio's history

This unit was purchased new in 1977, with the extra-cost CW filter option, and owned by a friend of mine, having first resided in his International Scout II - and then his Jeep CJ-7 - until about 2020 (when it was removed during vehicle maintenance) seeing many hours and miles bouncing around rough, 4WD roads.  Despite having banged around for about 40 years in a vehicle, it's in remarkably good physical shape, the case having only a few minor scratches.  Unfortunately, my friend became a silent key in 2022 and the radio ended up in my hands.

A "unique" radio

The advertisements for this radio tout it as being the very first completely synthesized amateur transceiver:  Whether or not it's actually the "first", I can't be sure, and this can vary depending on what you mean by "synthesized" - but in this case the local local oscillators are referenced from a single crystal while the BFOs were independent - a common practice even into the early 2000s.  Being an early synthesized radio, it does have a few interesting quirks:

  • There's no tuning knob.  Tuning is accomplished by a pair of "up/down" momentary toggle switches.  At first, this seems awkward, but one can quickly become adept to tuning a radio this way.  My friend (the one who'd owned this radio) noted that this tuning method was more convenient when bouncing about on a bumpy Jeep road than trying to use a conventional knob.
    • Operating the "fast" switch moves the frequency up/down by about 20 kHz/second after a brief pause.
    • Operating the "slow" switch moves the frequency up/down about 400 Hz/second after a brief pause.
    • A brief up or down push-and-release of either switch moves the frequency by 100 Hz.
  • 100 Hz tuning steps + Fine Tuning.  The radio tunes in 100 Hz steps, but it has a "Fine" tuning knob that moves the frequency up/down by a bit more than +/-65 Hz to allow one to get the frequency as close as you wish.  With the tendency for most amateurs these days to set their radios to an integer number of kHz (and occasionally to "0.5", 100 Hz steps are just fine and this control can be left centered most of the time.
  • The synthesizers are a bit slow to lock.  As one tunes the radio - particularly in the "fast" mode - the synthesizers may take a second or so to catch up as it "swoops" in onto the correct frequency.  This also means that after power-up, the radio is unusable for about 30 seconds, or for up to 15 seconds after changing bands.  As the synthesizers "land" within about a second during normal tuning with the up/down switches, the radio is on frequency by the time normal human reaction time has "locked in" to what is on frequency.
  • The "WWV" mode.  You'll note that the mode switch includes a "WWV" position.  This is actually a completely separate, direct-conversion receiver - with no AGC - that is tuned only to 10 MHz. Since it uses the (doubled) 5 MHz reference as its local oscillator, it provides an easy way to check/set the radio precisely on-frequency.

Despite having a digital readout and a synthesizer, it does not have a computer of any sort.  "Programming" is done using PROMs (Programmable Read-Only Memory)  to look up the synthesizer tuning information and "74LS" type logic as counters for the frequency dividers and tuning - but this also means that when it's first powered up, it always defaults to the bottom edge of the band to which it is tuned.  This is a bit of an inconvenience - but in the mid 1970's, prior to inexpensive single-chip microcontrollers with onboard program memory along with affordable development tools there was no real way around this without adding significantly to complexity and cost.  I'm looking into a simple way for the radio to "remember" the last-tuned frequency on each band - perhaps the topic of a later article.

About this radio

Figure 2:
The radio's tag - Serial #8, apparently!
Click on the image for a larger version.This radio is apparently a very early production unit - somewhat different from that depicted in the manual:

  • The Microphone connector is a standard 1/4" TRS (headphone) jack rather than a 6-pin round connector apparently used later in the production run and in a later revision, the 200A.  The additional pins on the 6 pin connector provide up/down tuning and 11 volts, allowing one to do tuning via the microphone.
  • It was lacking the "ANL Board".  This is a very simple circuit circuit (two pairs of back-to-back diodes and an electrolytic capacitor) that reduces, according to the manual, "excessive popping or AGC pumping".  As this circuit is very simple, it was trivial to add to this radio and this somewhat reduced the tendency for the receiver to be momentarily deafened when changing modes or bands.
  • Upon inspection of the PA (Power Amplifier) module I noted that the driver transistors were Motorola, marked with "604/438 Sample" which further implies an early production radio.  The PA transistors themselves - which are shown as being of type MRF454 in the service manual - were CD3435 made by CTC. 
  • There are a number of doubly-balanced diode-ring mixers used throughout.  Based on the manual and photos of other units, these seem to be implemented with some sort of module.  On this unit these modules are not used as the corresponding areas on the PC boards are populated with a pair of trifilar transformers and individual diodes comprising the mixer.
  • The serial number of this radio is "706008".  Based on other photos that I've seen online, this is apparently serial number 8 - likely having been made in June of 1977.  The date codes on internal components are consistent with the possible June 1977 assembly date.

Figure 3:
The inner synthesizer board - a bunch of counters.  LS-TTL
circuitry is used extensively, along with a few diode-type
PROMs for frequency/display lookup and counter set-up.
Click on the image for a larger version.Evaluation

As I had other projects in the queue, it was only recently that I pulled this radio off the shelf.   Prior to setting it on my workbench, I blew the dust off it and carefully cleaned the front panel and around controls, throwing the knobs into an ultrasonic cleaner.

Powering it up, the unit worked - sort of:  I could hear noise, but it seemed a bit deaf - but the sensitivity changed wildly with a bit of thumping on the case, an indication of a dirty transmit/receive relay.  Even with a massively strong signal into the antenna connector - which produced a deafeningly-loud tone in the (external) speaker - I got no S-meter reading.  Many years ago, my friend and I used this radio (when it was still in his Jeep) and noticed this same problem and that it was also mitigated by a "percussive repair" and/or clicking the PTT several times, indicating that the Transmit/Receive relay may have problems.

Figure 4:
The main RF/AF board, post repair.  The layout is a bit
crowded, but pretty clean on a two-sided, glass-epoxy board.
This radio includes the optional 400 Hz CW filter.
Click on the image for a larger version.Popping the top cover I could see that I had some work to do.  While it was remarkably clean inside for having been in a dusty Jeep for decades, I could see evidence of a few problems:  I saw at least one "blowed-up" capacitor near the audio amplifier.

Fortunately, the synthesizer itself seemed to be OK:  The tuning controls did their jobs properly, the tone in the speaker indicating that the radio was landing on the same frequency as the display.  The only "digital" problem seems to be that one of the segments of each digit on the display was constantly illuminated, weakly, possibly indicative of a problem with a segment driver.

Refurbishing

The first order of business was to replace the electrolytic capacitors.  As a few of them had clearly failed as evidenced by inspection, they all had to go - particularly since the radio had spent many summers in a closed vehicle during hot, Utah summers - plus, this radio is nearly a half-century old (which seems amazing when you consider that it's "digitally synthesized") so time would saved to simply "shotgun" them all.  Furthermore, many of the boards are "tethered" with soldered cables:  There is just enough slack to pull them out and work on the boards unsoldering only a wire or two, but doing so many, many times would not only be tedious, but risk fatiguing and breaking them - another reason to replace the capacitors in just one session.

Figure 5:
VCO/Synthesizer board.  There are two synthesizers - one
for them provides the 100Hz tuning steps.  Again, LS-TTL
logic is used, along with a few op-amps.
Click on the image for a larger version.Capacitors, and more capacitors!

I took inventory, inspecting the entire radio and come up with the following list of capacitors - including those found in the PA module and places other than on the PC boards:

  • (5) 470uf, 10 volt
  • (2) 330uF, 16 volt (axial) 
  • (2) 220uF, 16 volt
  • (14) 100uF, 16 volt
  • (13) 33uF, 16 volt
  • (2) 10uF, 25 volt
  • (4) 10uF, 16 volt
  • (8) 4.7uF, 25 volt
  • 1) 4.7uF, 16 volt
  • (9) 1uF, 25 volt
  • (4) 1uF, 50 volt
  • (3) 1uF, 50 volt (axial)
  • There are several dipped tantalum capacitors in low-level voltage and signal filtering lines that seem to be OK for now.   As none of these are on power rails there's no chance of a catastrophic failure (e.g. flames) should one short out.  These capacitors will be replaced in the future.

I suspect that the differing voltage ratings of some of the same-value capacitors was likely to save space (lower-voltage capacitors are generally smaller) and allow the use of less-expensive capacitors, but these days, capacitors are much smaller (and cheaper, in equivalent money) than their decades-old counterparts.  When ordering replacement capacitors I simply got same value rated for at least the voltage of the highest in the list above, but the new capacitors also had a temperature rating of 105C rather than the 85C of the original - and since modern capacitors are smaller than those from about 50 years ago, even a higher-voltage new capacitor was smaller than the lower voltage devices of the same value.  Since the electrolytic capacitors were pretty inexpensive - typically less than US$0.10/each for the smaller values - I ordered more than just the number above (in some cases, many more) in the event that I missed something.

Figure 6:
The pile of electrolytics removed from the radio.
Replacing every capacitor was the right choice!
Click on the image for a larger version.

Removing capacitors en masse is best done with the appropriate tools - particularly on an older circuit board.  Fortunately, I have a Hakko FR-300 desoldering iron/pump which made removal much easier and I was able to avoid damaging any traces on the board.

When replacing a bunch of capacitors, I prefer to do so methodically, moving from section to section on the circuit board - noting the polarity orientation of the capacitor before removing it and if there was any doubt as to which way it went, referring to the board layout diagram in the service manual - particularly since the circuit boards have neither solder mask or silkscreen as a visual reference.  Once a capacitor is replaced, I typically mark the top of the can with a colored permanent marker to help make sure that I don't miss any.

One possible "gotcha" was that unlike modern electrolytic capacitors which are typically marked only on the negative lead, many (but not all) of the original capacitors in this radio had only their positive side marked - which was the custom of some manufacturers of the day - so I had to be particularly careful to identify the polarity correctly as I replaced each capacitor.

When I was done, the receiver seemed to be more "alive" than before, but it was still a bit deaf - and the synthesizer seemed to be a bit "wobbly", being very sensitive to slight changes in power supply voltage.  The biggest change was the WWV receiver which was profoundly deaf prior to the capacitor change-out, but "normal" afterwards.

Capacitor brand implies longevity

After replacing the capacitors I went through the pile and found that most of them were "OK" - or at good enough that their respective circuits would have worked.  The brand seemed to be a pretty good indicator of which was likely bad:  The Japanese blue-label Nichicon and gray "Sun" and "Elna" brands were generally OK, the silver and gray Taiwanese "T.I." brand were all over the map, the "Sam Hwa" and "Towa" capacitors were marginal, but  all of the "Temple" branded capacitors (which seemed to have 1970 date codes - apparently already a few years old when the radio was made) were extremely bad.

After doing this I still believe that replacing all of the electrolytics was, in fact, the correct choice as I would have probably spent more time finding and diagnosing capacitors individually - and possibly suffered near-term failures - than simply swapping them all out.

A wobbly power supply

With all of the electrolytic capacitors replaced, I systematically went through the adjustment steps found in the user and service manual (which can be found online) - more or less.  Knowing that before you make ANY adjustments that you must make sure that the power supply is correct, I probed about with a volt meter noticing that the 11 volt supply was actually just below eight volts, likely accounting for its seeming deafness.  Locating the 11 volt regulator on the synthesizer board, I noted that the act of slightly adjusting the potentiometer resulted the voltage jumping, indicating that it was somewhat "stratchy", with the wiper likely not making good contact.  A bit of cleaning spray and exercising of this control resolved the issue and I reset the voltage to precisely 11.0 volts.

Figure 7:
Original S-meter coil.  It would seem that the coil winding
was broken in several places - hence, unsalvagable.
Click on the image for a larger version.With the correct voltages now applied to the circuits in the radio, its sensitivity seemed to be much better and the synthesizer was no longer sensitive to fluctuations in the power supply, being able to tolerate a drop to about 11.25 volts at the radio's DC input before the synthesizer "wobbled".  

No S-meter!

Going through the alignment steps I applied a signal from my generator and noted that while the sensitivity seemed to be about right - and the AGC was now working as it should - the S-meter did not move.  It's worth noting that the S-meter on this radio works ONLY when the meter switch is set to the "ALC" position - but I was getting no reading on any setting.  Using a voltmeter, I could see that the voltage across the S-meter's movement was increasing with the signal strength indicating that the AGC was working (which was also obvious by listening to off-air signals) but a quick check with an ohmmeter - after disconnecting one of the meter's leads - indicated that it was open circuit.

This was bad news, particularly since it was likely that I would never find a meter of the same, exact physical size - and even if I did find a replacement, I'd probably have to re-create the scale in the meter.  This wasn't impossible to do, but I took another path.

Figure 8:
The meter with its rewound meter coil using #30 wire.
As many turns were wound as would fit - the coil shaped to
prevent mechanical interference and then covered with
varnish to hold it in place.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Carefully disassembling the meter and inspecting it I noted that it was of the inexpensive "moving vane" type, the coil wound with very fine wire - probably around 46 AWGIn probing very carefully I noted that one of these hair-thin wires was disconnected at the base of the coil.  Further probing showed that the wire itself was frayed where it was wound onto the phenolic paper stator - probably a victim of both temperature cycling and (possibly) some corrosion.  A bit of later inspection of the wire showed that it seemed "brittle" - something that I've seen on older gear:  I don't know if it's the copper hardening in some way or some sort of reaction between the wire, enamel and its environment that causes this.

Since the meter's coil was a total loss I decided to do something a bit drastic:  Rewind it.  Rather than trying to use #46 wire, I chose, instead, to use less-fragile wire - #30, which is about 10 times larger diameter:  I'd have used a smaller - but not overly fragile - wire (likely #36) if I'd had it on hand to get more turns and better sensitivity.  Of course, I was not going to get nearly as many turns on the stator as the original - which meant that it wasn't going to be as sensitive as it had been originally and would be unlikely to work properly in the circuit - but I had a plan for this.

Carefully winding the #30 wire into the phenolic stator until it was "full", I scrunched the coil down to reduce its height and then pushed it sideways to clear both the meter's axle and the moving magnets on the rotor before covering all of the windings with urethane varnish.  With the varnish dry, I reassembled the meter and using a variable bench supply with a series resistor to vary the current through it I found that it operated nonlinearly, particularly near the upper and lower ends of meter travel.

I quickly realized that the screwdriver that I'd used was slightly magnetic - and the two screws used to hold down the phenolic stator had become magnetized as well from using that screwdriver.  Using a TV picture tube degaussing coil (I could have used a soldering gun's magnetic field instead) I demagnetized the two screws and the screwdriver, solving this nonlinearity problem.

Re-zeroing the meter and using a series 470 ohm resistor and a variable bench power supply I found that the meter's full-scale sensitivity was about 23 milliamps - very much higher than the 500-ish microamp sensitivity that I'd calculated it to be originally.  In looking at the circuitry I noted that the negative side of the meter was grounded in all three of the front panel meter switch settings which meant that all I needed was to come up with a circuit to multiply the current linearly - and with one end of the meter being connected to circuit ground, that task was greatly simplified:  Here's the circuit to do this:

Figure 9:
Schematic of the circuit used to drive the re-wound meter on the CIR Astro 200.

The circuit shown in Figure 9 is the classic "precision current source" using an op  amp to drive a transistor and then the meter.  The input voltage is scaled with the trimmer potentiometer (R3) and applied to the non-inverting (+) input of the op amp with R4 in parallel to set an input resistance of about 250 ohms - which is my guess of the resistance of the original meter movement.  By its nature, the op amp will attempt to adjust its output to make the voltage on the inverting (-) input the same as the non-inverting (+) input and to do this, it turns on the transistor, causing current to flow through the meter and the current sense resistor, R2.  Resistor R1 is there to limit the maximum current to a "sane" value to prevent the meter from being slammed too hard in the case of an "oops".

Figure 10:
The as-built circuit from Figure 9 constructed on some
prototyping board.  This circuit is adhered to the top of the
meter itself.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The result of this is that this circuit will happily convert the voltage through R2 into a proportional current, the magnitude set by the adjustment of R3, allowing our now-rebuilt meter movement of arbitrary sensitivity to be used.

As the schematic shows, this circuit was built using the venerable LM324.  This device was chosen mainly because I have plenty of them, and it's one of the most common op amps that has an input and output voltage range that includes "ground" (V-):  Many "standard" op amps don't work near one or the other power supply rail and will work incorrectly if the input voltage is the same as the "V-" lead (ground, in our case) and about as many cannot output voltage down to the negative rail, either.

Since I needed only one of the four LM324's op amps, the other three were simply strapped to the power supply to keep them from floating and possibly causing noise issues:  It's possible that I could have used one or more of the op amp sections to directly drive the meter, but the single transistor was cheap and easy.  The circuit was built onto a small piece of glass-epoxy perfboard and attached to the top of the meter movement - the power supply from this circuit stolen from a trace containing the +11 volt supply found on the front-panel circuit board - but even the 13 volt, unregulated supply would have been fine.

Setting up the "new" meter

While the actual sensitivity of the original meter - which is believed to be around 500 microamps - is not known for certain, there is one step in the manual that is revealing in that it has no actual circuit adjustment, relying on the sensitivity of the meter itself and fixed components for accuracy and calibration.  Because of this, we must do this step first and calibrate the sensitivity of our new meter circuit.

In the section of the manual about "Power Meter, Reflected Power Meter Adjustment" it describes connecting a 2:1 VSWR load (25 ohms using two 50 ohm dummy loads in parallel) and using an external power meter connected between the radio and the load:  The radio should be set for 40 meters for this step.  Switching to "CWW" (CW Wide - using the SSB filter) mode, set the Mic Gain to maximum (fully clockwise), key the radio and then increase the power (turning the Mic gain counter-clockwise to increase power) and adjusting R312 to limit the maximum power to 90 watts even when the Mic gain control is fully counter-clockwise (maximum power): These adjustments should be done quickly to avoid overheating the power amplifier.  The manual notes that with the meter set to the "REF" position, the meter should read "2" (for 2:1 VSWR) - and we quickly adjust R3 in Figure 9 for a reading of "2" on the meter.  Again, the key point here is that the REF meter gets its output from the reverse power detector amplifier - but since its threshold is fixed, when the power is being reduced by this circuit, it will always output the correct voltage/current to make the meter read "2".  In other words, this is fixed reference and we can use it to calibrate the meter for all other modes.

After this, the procedures for adjusting the S-meter, ALC and forward power readings outlined in the manual should be applied without further adjustment of R3, the 10 turn trimmer potentiometer on our meter-driver circuit from Figure 9.

It's worth reiterating the point that as the AGC, ALC, FWD and REF signals feeding the meter are ground-referenced, the circuit design was simple.  If the meter was driven by a "floating" circuit - one in which the negative side of the meter was at some potential other than ground - I would likely have used several sections of the LM324 configured as an "instrumentation amplifier" - one that measured the voltage drop across a fixed resistor (in lieu of current through the original meter coil) regardless of the actual voltages.  This circuit would have been somewhat more complex, but not overly so.

Radio alignment

With the capacitors replaced and the meter working, I went through the alignment steps outlined in the manual.  Fortunately, I had reviewed the manual in its entirety and noted a few "inconsistencies", notably:

  • The listing of the carrier oscillator frequencies in the alignment steps shows the same frequency for LSB and USB.  The correct frequencies are shown on the previous page.
  • When adjusting the ALC using potentiometer R296, the manual says to do so at mid-rotation in one place and and fully CW (clockwise) in another:  I presume that they meant fully CW.

Additionally, I would suggest the following additions to the procedure at the beginning of the procedure.

  • Verify/adjust the setting of the 11.0 volt regulator on the synthesizer board (R92).
  • Verify/adjust the 5.0 MHz oscillator on the synthesizer board using C52.
  • If you had to re-wind the meter and add the circuit described above, I would do the reverse power meter calibration (described above) before the other meter calibration steps:  This is noted in the procedure at the end of this article.

After this, proceed with the alignment/calibration as described in the manual.  There is a revised/annotated alignment procedure at the end of this article.

Power cable

As I was unable to find the original power cable (it may still be in the Jeep) I needed to find the mating power connector.  Recognizing it as a "Jones" connector, I did a bit of research and found that I needed to get a Cinch-Jones S-306-CCT, which is a 6 pin female connector.  Unfortunately, this line of connectors was discontinued by the manufacturer several years ago, but EvilBay came to the rescue and I found a "new" one with the inline cable shroud and strain relief.

Using 12 AWG wire and an inline holder with a 30 amp blade fuse I put together a power cable with an Anderson power pole connector on the far end.  This allowed me to connect it to a high-current power supply so that I could get on with testing the radio's final power amplifier.

"Final" problems

With the radio otherwise aligned, I noted that I was unable to get anywhere near full power out of the power amplifier - about 35 watts on 80 meters, nearly 50 watts on 40 meters and 10-15 watts on 10 meters.  Checking the output on the main RF/AF board, I noted that the voltages were equal to or higher than noted in the manual so I removed the PA module from the back via its ten screws.

I immediately noticed something that further indicated that this was an "early" unit:  The PA driver transistors were Motorola, but marked as "604/438 Sample" and rather than using MRF454 outputs, they were CTC CD3435.  In poking around with an oscilloscope with about 10 watts of output on 40 meters I noticed that the waveforms on the collectors of the driver transistors were not equal - and neither were the corresponding waveforms on the output transistors:  This indicated that in each stage, at least one of the transistors had failed - or was badly degraded.

While annoying (the transistors aren't cheap!) it didn't surprise me.  It is (apparently) common for RF transistors from the 70s and, perhaps, into the early 80s to fail - even when not being used - due to internal defects that seem to "grow" over time.

Figure 11:
The repaired PA board with the new driver and output
transistors.
Click on the image for a larger version.For the driver transistors, the originals were 2N6367, but the equivalent is the MRF433 or the 2SC2395 - but the MRF455 may work OK.  Rummaging around my bin of RF transistors I found a pair of pulled 2SC2395s (I don't recall where I got them) and put them in, saving me from spending about $100 for them.  Greeted with only about 80 watts on 40 meters - and much lower power than that on 10 meters - I could still see from the waveform on the 'scope - probing the collector leads - that one of the output transistors was still an issue.

While I could get a pair of MRF454 transistors from RF Parts, I noted that they were available from Mouser Electronics for a lower price (about $55 each at the time of writing) and when they arrived, I saw that they sported a recent date code.  Plopping them in I saw that the PA was now capable of well over 125 watts on 80 and 40 meters - working as it should - allowing me to complete the adjustment procedures related to the ALC and power metering.

In testing the two original PA transistors out of circuit I noted that both their beta and "diode drop" voltage were radically different.  I suspect that at least one of these devices had lost some "emitter sites" or tiny bond wires on the die, making it "less of a transistor" than it once had been.

With the final board now repaired, the radio met the specifications outlined in the manual:  100+ watts on all bands except 10 meters where the output was a bit over 85 watts.

A few loose ends...

The "stuck" LED segment

I also noted that the "stuck" segment on the LED display seemed to have fixed itself during a toggle of the "bright/dim" switch:  In looking at a YouTube video reviewing this radio I noted that it, too, had this exact problem with the same segment being stuck - but I have no idea if it's common (e.g. happened on at least two different radios) or why it fixed itself - nor is there an obvious clue from the schematic diagram why that one particular segment would be affected on my radio and the one in the video.

Adding the clipper/limiter

As for the receiver, the sensitivity is good - but I decided to make a modification that apparently became standard in production just after this unit was produced.  I noted that when changing modes and bands, the S-meter would "pin" with the very loud "pop" that occurred, the AGC taking 5-10 seconds to recover

Figure 12:
The clipper circuit in tubing, installed in the radio.  One end
is connected to a leg of R290 - the other end to ground.
Click on the image for a larger version.Noting that the manual included the description of a "Limiter" board - and that the radio in the YouTube channel - which had a serial number of about a dozen units higher - also had this board, I figured that this might be one of the reasons why it was added.

The circuit itself is simple:  Two pairs of diodes - one silicon and one germanium in series (for a clipping voltage of about 0.9 volts) - were placed in anti-parallel configuration and AC-coupled with a 10uF capacitor.  This circuit was placed between ground and input of the AGC detector.  Rather than make a small circuit board as was done in the production units I simply wired the components in free space and covered them with PTFE and heat-shrink tubing, connecting the assembly between the AGC circuit and a handy ground pin as can be seen in Figure 12.

My suspicion about its later addition was confirmed:  While there is still a loud "click" when changing modes, the AGC now recovers much more quickly and the radio's AGC is also very much less prone to being badly deflected with a long recovery time when there is a loud static crash.

The T/R relay and filter module

Mentioned briefly, there was the problem with the intermittent T/R relay.  This is contained within a module that sits along the right edge, inside the radio that extends from the front panel to the back of the radio along with the band switch.

This module - in addition to the T/R relay - contains the receiver pre-selector filters, the transmit mixer filters and the transmit low-pass filters on a compact, shielded assembly.  To pull this assembly out of the radio would be quite a job, requiring the partial removal of the front panel, disconnecting (mostly unsoldering!) a number of wires, connectors and signal cables and pulling it out of the radio - something that I have not attempted to do.

Fortunately, the designers provided an access hole near the back panel of the radio (on the bottom side) that is covered with tape where one can burnish the relay's contacts and apply contact cleaner.  After both burnishing and the application of cleaner, the T/R relay is now working perfectly.

Using the radio

Tuning with switches

With the use of toggle switches instead of a round, "spinny" tuning knob, operating the Astro 200 is decidedly different than using a conventional radio.  As mentioned before, the previous owner told me that he thought using toggle switches was a bit better for tuning while bouncing along bumpy roads than a large knob - and in the days of analog radios, this was likely the case.

In perusing online references to this same radio, the users also noted that one quickly becomes accustomed to this method of tuning - but everyone had the same comment:  It's slow to tune across the band.  When powered up, this radio always starts at the bottom of the selected amateur band - and on 10 meters, this particular radio starts at 27.0000 MHz (transmit is inhibited below 28 MHz) which means that it takes about a minute to even get into the 10 meter band!

The AGC

The radio's AGC is not adjustable and the time constant is fine for CW, but a bit fast for SSB in my opinion.  As is common with many analog radios, the apparent AGC time constant gets shorter with more AGC action (e.g. higher S-meter reading).  This is a result of the "dB per Volts" curve getting steeper with many gain reduction schemes (e.g. more dB gain reduction per volt of change) effectively shortening the time constants.

Since this radio has a front panel RF attenuator control, switching this in to reduce the signal level helps with this effect somewhat.

Noise blanker

The noise blanker (enabled by pulling the "Squelch" control knob out) seems to work pretty well, operating in the wideband IF prior to the crystal filters.  As is typical with noise blankers in analog receivers - and some modern digital radios - its efficacy is somewhat affected by very strong, adjacent signals which "desense" the noise detector - a difficult problem to overcome.

CW usage

As is common for radios of that era, the sidetone frequency in the CW mode has little to do with the frequency offset.  This radio uses USB and a positive transmit frequency shift when in CW which means that neither the display or the tuned frequency changes when going from USB to CW mode.  This was pretty common in the era (many makers - including Drake - did it this way) which meant that if the operator wanted to know the actual frequency of their transmitted signal that they would have to do some mental math.

One "quirk" that I need to investigate is that if this radio's heterodyne oscillator is set precisely according to the manual, the receive (and transmit) frequencies do not match the display, being offset by a bit more than 100 Hz.  This is easily corrected by setting the display to a known frequency, inputting a signal 1 kHz above and below (for USB and LSB, respectively) and adjusting for an audio tone of 1 kHz, but doing so shifts the passband of the crystal filters audibly - and in CW mode, it puts the center of the passband at about 1200 Hz.  This slight shift does not result in either "tinny" or "muffled" audio when using SSB on either sideband, and the radio sounds quite good on air!

As this offset - which is mentioned in the manual as being around 1000 Hz - appears to be programmed into PROMs, it does not seem possible to shift the local oscillator to overcome this issue - and while there's a difference between the USB and LSB passband, it is not a "show stopper" but a 1200 Hz-centered passband for CW is too high in my opinion.  I suspect that this being a very early production radio may have something to do with this issue and I'll have to think about possible ways to address it.

When a "Mic Gain" control isn't really "Mic Gain"

Another unusual design feature of this radio is the transmit audio path.  From the microphone input the signal path goes directly to the amplifier (there's no level adjustment preceding it) and into the clipper/compressor stage.  Interestingly, the clipper/compressor takes the form of a logarithmic amplifier which has less of a sharp "knee" than a typical clipper, making it quite effective in functioning very much like a compressor-type speech processor.

The designers made an interesting choice here:  The control marked "Mic Gain" is placed in the signal path after the clipper/compressor - but this has some important implications.  In testing, I used an old Sure 440SL high impedance dynamic microphone which has a fairly high output level, but this caused the clipper/compressor to be "hit" very hard:  On-air reports indicated that that I was readable, but that my speech processing was very "heavy" and off-air recordings from a remote WebSDR verified this.  Since the "Mic Gain" control is between the clipper/compressor and the radio's balanced modulator, it affects only the RF output power and how hard one is "hitting" the ALC and doesn't affect the amount of audio compression at all.

What should really have been done was to include a means of adjusting the microphone level into the clipper/compressor stage and this could take the form of having a level control on the microphone itself or in a box between the microphone and the radio, or, if the same microphone will always be used with the radio, put such a control inside the radio.

To accommodate this need, I rummaged around my parts box and found a 500k vertical chassis-mount trimmer potentiometer. This potentiometer was wired such that the "CCW" (counter-clockwise) end was grounded and the opposite end connected to the microphone jack with the audio to the radio on the wiper.

Figure 13:
A 500k potentiometer - reachable using a long, thin blade
screwdriver is accessible through the 1/4" TRS MIC/KEY
connector on this radio.  See text for more details.
Click on the image.

As depicted in Figure 13, behind the 1/4" MIC/KEY jack is a 5 volt regulator in a TO-3 case - but this doesn't line up with the connector, so I glued the potentiometer to a small piece of circuit board to allow it to be offset.  When I glued the pot to this board, I took care to avoid fouling the adjustment knob and after curing.

I then glued the small piece of circuit board to the top of the 5 volt regulator, taking care to offset it so that the potentiometer was aligned such that a long, thin blade screwdriver through the MIC connector could be used to adjust the level from the microphone being applied to the MIC amplifier.  

The adhesive that I used was "Shoe Goo" which remains flexible:  I would not recommend epoxy, cyanoacrylate ("super") glue or hot-melt glue as none of these are a good choice in this application (e.g. the bonds will fail with temperature cycling and/or mechanical stress.)

Adjusting this new "MIC Level" control is an iterative process:  Plug in the mic - check the ALC deflection and output power, unplugging, and then making the necessary adjustments and doing it again.  The goal here is to have enough audio to activate the compressor, but not so much that it sounds very "heavy" on-air.

As noted earlier, THIS radio uses a 1/4" TRS connector rather than the round, multi-pin connector used on later production models:  If this radio had this latter connector, blocking access to an adjustment behind it, I would have mounted the potentiometer facing down and drilled an access hole in the bottom of the chassis, probably making a right-angle bracket on which it could be mounted.

Carrier balance

One interesting omission by the designers is the lack of a "carrier balance" control.  When SSB is generated, the "balanced modulator" - which literally mixes the audio with RF - this carrier is nulled on most radios via one or two adjustments to minimize the amplitude of the original carrier - but not on this radio.  This radio uses a diode-ring type of doubly-balanced mixer and by themselves these typically have a "bleedthrough" of between 25 and 35 dB- much less than the 40-50dB of a typical balanced modulator in an analog SSB transmitter after it has been carefully nulled.

What this means is that on 40 meters there is a carrier bleedthrough of about 200 milliwatts (which varies depending on whether you are using USB or LSB, with band and operating temperature) when keyed down with no transmit audio.  Compared with a 100 watt output level, this represents a level that is 25-30 dB below peak power that cannot be adjusted.  This is nowhere near enough to impair efficiency of the transmitter by "wasting" power in the carrier but it is enough to be easily visible to the "waterfall police" using a modern digital radio with a spectral display if the conditions are good.

Frequency (in)stability

When it came out, this radio was remarkable compared to its contemporaries in that it didn't really drift:  You set the frequency and it just stayed there, within a few Hz.  Unlike most radios of the day, it moved only a few Hertz from the instant that it was turned on while most others at the time would change by hundreds of Hz in the first half hour or so - particularly if operated in a cold environment.

Compared to today's radios, the synthesizer is a bit crude - it has large (100 Hz) tuning steps and a bit slow to lock.  As the radio uses rather low reference frequencies (100 and 163 Hz) for its two synthesizers, their oscillators are rather slow to respond - but this also means that they are easily disturbed by slight changes in power supply voltage, mechanical vibration and just the physics of electronic circuits.

What this means is that the frequency can easily "wobble" a few Hz - or even 10s of Hz - around the nominal frequency in the short term.  This is generally unnoticeable for SSB usage or even RTTY - and most people will likely not even notice this when running CW - but it does make this radio unsuitable for some of the very narrow digital modes that are seen today, like FT-4, FT-8, WSPR, PSK31 or similar - a trait that it shares with some of its non-synthesized (VFO-only) predecessors.  These modern digital modes require that the radio be stable within 1-2 Hz at any given instant over the duration of the transmission/reception window - and this radio simply may not be able to do that.

Mechanical work

If you look very closely at Figure 1, you'll see aluminum brackets on either side of the front panel that were used to screw it to the underside of the dash on the CJ-7 in which it was mounted.  During my refurbishment, I drilled out the pop rivets on these brackets and filled the holes - and a few scratches - with metal-filled epoxy and sanded them down.

Even though the exterior of the case was in reasonable shape, it did show a bit of the wear of having been in a vehicle or two for over 40 years, so I decided to repaint it.  Having been in the vehicle for so long, the original light blue color was varied, depending on how much sun had faded it, but inside the top cover - out of sight - was a "virgin" section of paint to which I was able to find a very close match at the store:  Rustoleum satin "French Blue".  Just in case I - or someone else - wanted to match the original color, exactly, I masked off and left a patch of the original paint inside the lid.

Aside from a bit of wear on the knobs and slight yellowing of the panel meter's clear plastic - most of which was removed with the application of a bit of elbow grease and Novus plastic polish - the radio looks almost brand new.

On the air

I've made several contacts on the air with this radio and and have gotten good reports.  Even with the prevalence of waterfall displays these days, few people mention the slight carrier leakage - but I also wonder how many people actually look at their waterfall not to mention how many others would immediately recognize carrier leakage, anyway?

The addition of the "MIC Level" potentiometer was a good one.  When properly adjusted, the radio now sounds "normal" rather than very heavily "compressed" as before.

I haven't used the radio enough to become very adept at quickly tuning across the band using the UP/DOWN toggle switches, constantly overshooting signals - but I'd guess that this would be a skill that could be readily acquired.  At the risk of sacrilege, I'm considering the addition of a small, PIC-based microcontroller board that will track the button presses and the current band selection to "pre-set" the frequency when the unit is powered up and band is changed, making it a bit more convenient to use:  Such a modification would be completely reversible

Final comments

One should treat this radio in a way similar to "vintage" radios of decades gone by.  It's remarkable in its capability and design considering that it's nearly a half-century old and it needed relatively little repair - and even more remarkable in that most of the parts that it uses are still available from electronics suppliers at the end of the first quarter of the 21st century - not something that is likely to be true of today's radios in 50 years!.

As a general-purpose radio for SSB, CW and even RTTY operation, it's still very usable:  It's small size belies its capabilities, particularly in context with its vintage.  Being made prior to 1980, it obviously lacks the WARC bands (30, 17 and 12 meters) - but so do other radios of that time period.  Once the radio was restored - mostly a matter of replacing electrolytic capacitors - it operates pretty much as it did when it was new and it would not seem out of place on the air among modern radios on the air.

Given its quirks (no tuning knob being the most obvious) it is a bit of curiosity, reminding the user of a time just before completely analog radios gave way to synthesized radios becoming the norm - a revolution not too dissimilar to the more recent trend of "analog" radios giving way to those that are almost entirely digital from the antenna port to the speaker.

* * * * * * * 

Alignment notes

Here are notes related to aligning the Astro 200 (Non "A" version) - although they should be generally correct for the "A" version as well.  These should be used to augment the instructions noted in the operation/maintenance manual.

Power supply check - IMPORTANT!

  • Verify 11.0 volt power supply - adjust R92 on synthesizer board as appropriate.
  • Verify that 11.0 volt supply will remain stable down to a supply voltage of at least 11.5 volts as measured on the radio's voltage input.
  • Verify 8.0 and 5.0 volt supplies (each being +/- 0.25 volts of nominal).  Note that there are two separate 5.0 volt regulated supplies.

Reference (Master) oscillator:

  • Frequency counter to set to 5.000000 MHz or use WWV setting (which listens to 10 MHz via a direct-conversion receiver) and listen for zero beat
  • Set C52 for 5 MHz, exactly.  This is accessible via a small hole in the bottom cover.

Carrier oscillator:

  • USB/LSB
    • MIC Gain CCW
    • RIT and FINE at 12:00 position
    • MODE to USB
    • Key radio and adjust C180 for 5.601650 MHz
    • MODE to LSB
    • Key radio and adjust C174 for 5.598350 MHz
    • MODE to CWN
    • MIC Gain fully CW (for minimum CW TX power) and connect radio to dummy load.
    • Key radio and adjust C204 for 5.60060 MHz

RX Delay adjustment - used to delay time between release of PTT/VOX and RX activation

  • Adjust R239 for desired delay time preference in switching from TX back to RX when PTT is released.

VOX Trip and Anti-Trip

  • Turn on VOX and set volume to desired level using your typical ham shack speaker/audio environment.
  • Adjust R181 for VOX activation level with normal speaking voice.
  • Adjust R158 for anti-VOX level with signals/static present to prevent unwanted triggering.

Meter adjustments.  Be sure to view meter "straight on" and consistently to minimize parallax for the readings below.

  • VSWR shutdown/reflected power:  R312 calibrates the VSWR shutdown of power.  DO THIS STEP AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.  Be sure to view the meter "straight on" to avoid parallax in the following steps.
    • NOTE:  As mentioned earlier in this article, I had to "repair" the meter by re-winding its coil and using an external driver circuit.  If you restore the meter in this manner, do THIS step before the other "Meter adjustment" steps.
    • Connect two 50 ohm loads in parallel for 2:1 VSWR (25 ohms) - use the shortest length coaxial cable possible.
    • Set to a mid-band frequency on 20 meters.
    • Set meter switch to REF
    • In CWW mode, turn MIC gain fully CW, key transmitter.
    • Increase power.  Quickly adjust R312 so that the forward power can not be increased to more than 90 watts on the forward meter and unkey.
    • In VSWR mode, the meter should read about 2.
  • Forward power:  R306 calibrates forward power reading.
    • Connect 50 ohm dummy load and power meter.
    • Set the radio to a mid-band 40 meter frequency and pre-set the MIC gain control fully CW to set minimum power.
    • In CWW mode, turn MIC gain CCW, key transmitter and adjust for 100 watts on the power meter.
    • Adjust R306 for full-scale indication indication (to the "Set" marking) on meter.
  • ALC Setting.  Be sure to view the meter "straight on" to avoid parallax in the following steps.
    • Connect 50 ohm dummy load and power meter.
    • Set MIC gain to 12:00 position, meter mode to FWD. (CONFLICT:  Manual says says fully CW in earlier section about adjustment)
      • Note:  Since the transceiver has no actual "Microphone Gain" adjustment prior to the clipper, the fully-CW adjustment setting would make sense as it will maximally drive the ALC (worst-case).
    • Key transmitter and whistle or produce tone into the microphone.
    • Adjust R296 for a reading of an average of 40 watts on the power meter.  This should correspond roughly with a reading of "30 over" on the meter.
  • ALC Meter setting.  Be sure to view the meter "straight on" to avoid parallax in the following steps.
    • Connect to 50 ohm dummy load.
    • Set mode to CWW, meter to ALC and set MIC Gain fully CLOCKWISE
    • Key transmitter:  There should be low/no power.
    • Adjust R291 for FULL SCALE ALC meter deflection.

AGC set-up.  Be sure to view the meter "straight on" to avoid parallax in the following steps.

  • Connect signal generator to antenna input and mode to CWW.
  • Set front attenuator switch to OFF (down)
  • Set for 20 meters and tune to a frequency mid-band and adjust the signal generator so that there is a tone of about 1 kHz
  • Set the signal generator for an output of 1.5 microvolts (-103.4dBm)
  • Adjust R280 for an S-meter reading of S3.
  • Increase the signal to 50 microvolts (-73dBm)
  • Adjust R272 for an S-9 meter reading
  • Re-check the steps above for 1.5 and 50 microvolts and adjust as necessary.

Sidetone Level set

  • Connect to 50 ohm dummy load, set to CWN and adjust MIC gain control fully CLOCKWISE (minimum power)
  • Key transmitter and adjust R257 for desired sidetone level in speaker.

In-depth alignment:

Carrier oscillator peaking

  • Using and oscilloscope or high-impedance RF voltmeter, measure the amplitude at the base of Q60
    • Adjust L11 for maximum amplitude.  Use only a plastic adjustment tool to avoid breaking the core.
    • Check carrier oscillator frequencies as noted above - adjust as appropriate.

TX mixer and ALC attenuator

  • Connect 50 ohm dummy load.
  • Set to CWN and adjust fully CCW (max power)
  • Key down and adjust L6 for maximum signal on collector of Q20 using an oscilloscope or RF voltmeter.  Use only a plastic adjustment tool to avoid breaking the core.

WWV receiver adjustment

  • Set MODE switch to WWV and turn AF gain all of the way down.
  • Apply signal generator at 50uV (e.g. -73dBm - equivalent to S9) to antenna, offset from 10 MHz by about 1 kHz so that a tone will be heard.
  • Connect AC voltmeter to speaker and adjust level to indicate on meter, but keep it well below clipping.
  • Tune L15 for maximum speaker output.  Use only a plastic adjustment tool to avoid breaking the core.
  • Remove input signal.
  • Using a high-impedance RF voltmeter or oscilloscope, adjust L16 for maximum 10 MHz at collector of Q77.  Use only a plastic adjustment tool to avoid breaking the core.
  • A signal of 5uV (-93dBm) should be audible.

Noise blanker adjustment

  • Connect a signal generator to the antenna input.
  • Adjust receiver and signal generator for a mid-band 20 meter frequency and adjust for a level of 100uV (-67dBm) and an approx. 1 kHz tone in the speaker.
  • Adjust L9 and L10 for maximum voltage on D30.  Use only a plastic adjustment tool to avoid breaking the core.breaking the core.

SWR Bridge adjustment

  • Connect two 50 ohm loads in parallel for 2:1 VSWR (25 ohms) - use the shortest length coaxial cable possible.
  • Set MODE switch to CWW and set MIC Gain control fully CW (minimum power) and set to mid-band on 20 meters.
  • NOTE:  Do the following measurements as quickly as possible to minimize stress on power amplifier.
  • Key down.  Increase power (MIC gain turned CCW) and note that SWR protection limits to 90 watts as adjusted in SWR protection steps noted above.
  • Note power reading on front panel meter and external wattmeter (if used) and then un-key.
  • In the same manner, check the maximum power into the same 2:1 VSWR on 80, 40 and 15 meters.
  • Adjust C3 as necessary for flattest (most consistent) power reduction on all bands:  Power should be between 80 and 105 watts.
  • On 10 meters, power into a 2:1 VSWR may be in the 70-80 watt range.

RF Tuning assembly

This is the unit inline with the BAND switch.  The coils noted below correspond with the frequency range and should be adjust for best response across that noted below.

NOTE: 

As the receive and transmit filter inductors are not normally accessible, it is necessary to remove the band switch module to perform these adjustments - a laborious task which requires unsoldering a lot of different cables and removal of the front panel.  It should be done ONLY if problems are suspected.  These adjustments should only be done with a spectrum analyzer and tracking generator OR a VNA/SNA.

If the sensitivity of the receiver is adequate and the transmit drive is within specifications, there is probably little need to even touch these adjustments.  As my radio was "up to spec" in terms of sensitivity and TX drive, I did not pull the module and make any adjustments.

Use only a plastic adjustment tool to avoid breaking the cores.

Receive filters

  • 80 Meters:  L101, L102 - 3.5-4.5 MHz
  • 40 Meters:  L103, L104 - 7.0-7.5 MHz
  • 20 Meters:  L105, L106 - 14.0-14.5 MHz
  • 15 Meters:  L107, L108 - 21.0-21.5 MHz
  • 10 Meters:  L109, L110 - 28.0-30 MHz
  • WWV:  L111, peaked at 10.0 MHz.

Transmit mixer band-pass filters

  • 80 Meters:  L201, L202 - 3.5-4.5 MHz
  • 40 Meters:  L203, L204 - 7.0-7.5 MHz
  • 20 Meters:  L205, L206 - 14.0-14.5 MHz
  • 15 Meters:  L207, L208 - 21.0-21.5 MHz
  • 10 Meters:  L209, L210 - 28.0-30.0 MHz

Synthesizer adjustments

Unless the synthesizer has difficulty locking - particularly at the upper or lower edge of one or more bands - there's probably no need to make these adjustments.

Major Loop VCO

  • Adjustments should be made at low edge of the respective band.
  • Coil should be set for a voltage of 2.5 +/- 0.25 volts on R18
    • Exception:  For units that can tune to 27.0 MHz, the voltage should be 3.0 +/- 0.25 volts when tuned to 28.0 MHz.
    • Start with the highest band first.  For the progressively-lower bands, the following inductors are in series meaning that a higher-band coil's adjustment will affect all lower bands.
    • 10M:  L9
    • 15M:  L8
    • 20M:  L7
    • 40M:  L6
    • 80M:  L12
  • Notch filter:  Adjust R11 and R15 for minimum amplitude of 100 Hz signal on the output (pin 6) of IC21 (0.035Vpp or lower)

Minor Loop VCO

  • Adjustments should be made on low edge of the respective band.  (Manual isn't clear about this)
  • If adjustment is needed, it will be necessary to remove the brass shield by unsoldering its three corners.  Note that the presence of the shield may affect tuning, so it may be necessary to iteratively replace it during the process.
  • Coils should be set for a voltage of 1.6 +/- 0.2 volts as measured on R21.
    • Start with the highest band first.  For the progressively-lower bands, the following inductors are in series meaning that a higher-band coil's adjustment will affect all lower bands.
    • 10M:  L5
    • 15M:  L4
    • 20M:  L3
    • 40M:  L2
    • 80M:  L1
  • Notch filter:  Adjust R25 and R27 for minimum 165 Hz signal (0.025Vpp or lower) on the output (pin 6) of IC20.
* * * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]



tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-8688538186268145479
Extensions
Using a PIR to reduce wear and tear on a Nixie clock
Black'n'Woodclockhigh voltageHVimproving longevitylifetimemotion sensornixienixie tubepassive infraredPIR
Show full content

"Does a lit-up Nixie tube in a forest wear out even if there's no-one to see it?"

Figure 1:
The "Black'n'wood" Nixie Clock (blue back-light turned on)
with the PIR (Passive InfraRed) sensor to the right.
With no detected movement in the room, the high voltage
supply turns off, reducing wear on the tubes.
Click on the image for a larger version.
This millenia-old riddle has a simple answer:  Yes.  Yes, it does.

This article has not so much to do with this specific model of Nixie clock, but rather adding a PIR (Passive InfraRed) sensor to turn off the display when there is no-one in the room to look at it.

They wear out!

Nixie clocks and other neon-glow displays (e.g. Panaplex), along with VFD (Vacuum Florescent), Numitron and CRTs have a "wear out" mechanism when they are operating:  In other words, when they are on, they are slowly degrading.

By limiting the "on" time of such displays only to when someone is likely able to see it one can prolong its overall useful life in many cases.  As many of these devices are no longer made, the supply of "new, old stock" tubes is very limited and what there is still available is becoming more expensive year upon year.

* * *

A few years ago - at a swapmeet - I picked up a "Nixie" 1 clock - the "Black'n'wood" by Nocrotec.  It was in a plastic bag with loose parts, but for only $20 I couldn't resist!

Getting it home I found the problem:  One of the elements of the "10s of hours" tube was shorted internally and very visual close inspection revealed that two internal wires were touching each other.  A bit of "percussive repair" (banging it on the table) moved the two wires away from each other and the tube was once again usable.  I suspect that the problem was originally caused by the tube experiencing mechanical shock.

The current limiting resistor associated with this same element was burned, so replacing it returned the clock to full operation.

"Could I use one of those microwave motion sensor boards instead of a PIR module?"
 
Motion sensor boards that use low-level microwave energy are cheap and available.  These work in a manner similar to the old "Proximity Fuse" - an electronic sensor used to detonate bombs a certain height above ground.  By detecting interference to its own oscillator by the disturbance of standing waves in a room caused by movement, they can also be used to turn on lights, open doors, etc.
While the use of radio waves instead of (infrared) light means that they can sense movement through walls or behind many non-conductive materials like plastic or wood - albeit with some diminution in sensitivity - this property may make them less desirable in this application:  If you want to turn off the clock when no-one is there to see it, you likely don't want it to turn on when it detects movement at a farther distant - even in the next room.
One advantage of a PIR sensor is that it may be placed to limit its range of sensitivity to reduce false triggering - including from pets:  If you can't see it, it probably can't see you!

Over the next year or two the clock has continued to work fine - although the display got "glitchy" and began to dim - but the biggest clue was that the flashing colon neon lights were flickering but this was quickly traced to the failure of the main high voltage filter capacitor on the 180 volt supply:  These problems went away with the replacement of that capacitor - but I digress.

* * *

All of this brings me to the main topic of this article:  Reducing the wear and tear of the neon tubes.  

Sitting unused, in a box, many "vacuum" devices (I'll include neon indicators and other cold-cathode tubes in this category even though they are not strictly "vacuum" devices) have the property that laying on the shelf, they (usually) have little/no degradation over time.  There are many (now) century-old devices that have been sitting around that work just as well as they did when they were made - the caveat that they haven't been compromised in some manner (e.g. broken, corrosion, failure of a seal, etc.)

Like most "vacuum bulb" devices - which include thermionic tubes/valves (with a filament) and those without a filament - like neon indicators - there is a definite lifetime related to acceptable performance when they are operating.  For normal tubes/valves, the emission from the filament/cathode will inevitably drop over time - often due to gradual degradation of emissivity and the "work function" of the cathode.  "Cold cathode" devices (e.g. those without a filament) like neon indicators also suffer degradation - and the causes are broadly similar:  Degradation of the materials and subsequent contamination.

In the case of the neon indicators, one major cause of degradation is the inevitable "blasting" of atoms from the electrodes' surfaces (called "sputtering") where the metal gets liberated - only to redeposit elsewhere.  The most obvious result of this is that the inside of the of the glass envelope darkens, reducing the brightness of the display - but even if the glass were to remain clear, this and other effects conspire to reduce the brightness overall.

Running neon indicators such as these "Nixies" at lower than maximum current will reduce these effects - but what about not running them at all?

Nixies are meant to be seen!

The entire point of a "Nixie" clock is that it is cool to look at - but what if no-one is there to see it?  As the conceit at the top of the page states, if we operate a Nixie tube in a forest and no-one is there to see it, it still wears out!

The goal, therefore, is to turn off the display when no-one is in the room.

Turning off the display

First, we need to figure out how to turn off the display, presuming that the clock or other device has no obvious means of doing so (e.g. there is no "turn of the display" switch or pin).  Two options came to mind:

Approach #1:  Removing the power

Figure 2:
Interface with HV converter.  PNP transistor "Qa", when
its base is pulled low, injects current into Pin 5 of the
HV converter chip, effectively turning it off.
Click on the image for a larger version.
As the "Black'n'Wood" clock has a battery back-up, I first tried the most obvious thing:  Interrupt the power to the clock if no motion was detected.  This worked - in theory - but I soon noted that the clock was losing almost a minute every day.

After I'd first repaired the clock, I applied correction factors via its menu and got it to stay within a fraction of a second per day - but I had assumed that this was done in the clock module itself (as some Dallas/Maxim devices are equipped) but this was not so:  While the timekeeping module continued to run on the battery, the firmware on the clock itself - being powered down - was obviously not and the calibration that I'd applied was missing, explaining why it was keeping time so badly.

To be sure, I could have likely done something to "fix" this (e.g. trim the oscillator with a tuning capacitor, added a GPS module to auto-set the clock, etc.) but since the clock - while it was running normally - was very stable, I decided to try another approach.

Approach #2:  Turning off the high voltage

Figure 3:
A top-down view of the components added to the high
voltage switching converter IC to produce the circuit depicted
in Figure 2, above.
Click on the image for a larger version.
The clock itself runs on 12 volts DC and to get the 150-180 volts needed to drive the neon displays, there is an onboard voltage converter.  While no schematic seems to be publicly available for this particular clock, the various sections of its circuitry are easily identified by visual inspection:  A large-ish inductor adjacent to a high voltage capacitor flagged the location of the voltage converter and the chip next to those components.  

This clock uses two switching supplies - the first one converts the nominal 12 volts down to 5 volts for the logic, but the second one - near the high-voltage capacitors - is the one that produces the (approximately) 180 volts for the Nixies.  Both of these use a common type of switching supply controller chip - the MC34063 - and since the implementation of these chips is spelled out in the data sheets, we have some insight as to how they work and a schematic isn't necessary to complete our task.

Fooling the voltage converter into shutting down

Like most any voltage regulator or converter, it monitors its own output voltage - typically through a pair of resistors ("Rdiv" is one of them, depicted in Figure 2 - the other, not shown, would go between the chip and ground) that are chosen to divide the desired output voltage down something close to the chip's on-board reference voltage - in the case of the MC34063, 1.25 volts, which is applied to its pin #5:  If the voltage on this pin is lower than 1.25 volts, the switching converter adjusts the voltage higher but if the voltage is higher, it reduces the voltage.

Figure 4:
A side view of the high voltage switching converter IC
showing the components added to it to allow the
180 volt supply feeding the Nixie tubes to be turned off.
Click on the image for a larger version.

As can be seen from the diagram in Figure 2, I tacked a PNP transistor ("Qa") - and three resistors - across several of the pins of the MC34063 high voltage converter.  "Pre-forming" the shape of the components to match the locations of the needed IC pins along with using a hot soldering iron to pre-tin the leads of these components and the IC itself it's possible to attach this simple circuit directly to pins 5 and 6 of the high voltage switching converter IC without risk of damage to the chip or other, nearby components.

If the base of Qa, the PNP transistor (I used a 2N3906) is pulled to ground (via the 10k resistor, Rc), it will turn on - and with its emitter connected to Pin 6 of the MC34063 - its power supply pin - it will apply current, via the 3.3k resistor (Ra), to Pin 5 of the MC34063, dragging the voltage on this pin up.  When this happens, the MC34063 will "think" that the voltage is too high and effectively turn off.  If the base of Qa is allowed to float (nothing connected to it), this transistor is biased off by the 100k resistor (Rb) between the emitter and base and the high voltage converter will run normally (e.g. the display will be on).

Any converter will do

While this article shows the example using the MC34063, this sort of technique could be applied to about any switching-type of voltage converter.  Determining a bit about the circuit itself could be done simply by referring to the data sheet of the chip that was used - as was done here - but it could also be done with a bit of reverse-engineering.

It would have also been possible to find the power supply lead feeding the voltage converter - in this case, about 12 volts from the external power supply - and interrupt it, perhaps with a relay, a PNP transistor or a P-channel FET.

If you are using an "old-school" power supply that does NOT have some sort of switching converter, perhaps consisting of a high-voltage winding, rectifier and capacitor to develop the high voltage for the tubes, your best option may be to use a relay to open the supply - preferably interrupting the pre-rectified AC side, directly.   At such voltages switching DC is best avoided due to the possibility of contact-damaging arcs:  Switching on the AC side (or between the rectifier and the first filter capacitor) is better in that the voltage falls to zero twice per cycle of the AC waveform and any arcing that does occur will extinguish at that time.

Getting the connection outside the clock

In perusing the manual for this clock I noticed that the 6 pin mini-DIN connector - intended for connection to an external GPS or DCF77 radio receiver - not only had ground (Pin 1) and power (Pin 2 for 5 volts), but also an unused pin (#4) that I verified to be floating - and to this I connected the end of the 10k resistor (Rc) to this pin with a flying lead inside the clock.  With the three needed signals (power, ground and the "disable" line) on the mini-DIN connector, I was ready to connect it to a sensor.

A PIR sensor to turn it off and on

A PIR (Passive InfraRed) sensor fits the bill for this task quite well - and they are inexpensive.  These devices use pyroelectric detectors to detect heat from warm, moving objects - which includes us humans - by focusing deep infrared energy onto a pair of sensing surfaces from an array of Fresnel lenses.  A moving object in the field of view will cause a difference in the pair that can reliably indicate that an object in view is in motion.

Figure 5:
This circuit was added to the output of the PIR to present
an open-collector to allow transistor Qa in Figure 2
to properly turn off when the HV was to be turned on.
Click on the image for a larger version.
The PIR sensor that I chose was found on Amazon - three of them for under US$10 - and it has exactly three connections:
  • Power.  This particular PIR sensor was happy to operate from between 5 and 12 volts, having an onboard 3.3 volt regulator.
  • Ground.  This is the negative supply and the reference to the output signal.
  • Output.  This output pin goes "high" (to 3.3 volts) when motion is detected.

This sensor also has two potentiometer adjustments:

  • Delay - Which is the amount of time the output will go "high" when motion is detected.
  • Sensitivity - As the name implies, this sets the degree to which the device reacts to movement.

There's also a jumper:  The piece of paper that came with the PIR sensor implies that this determines if the output is "re-triggerable" (the default setting) or not.  Being re-triggerable means that motion will reset the delay timer whenever it's detected:  If it were not re-triggerable, the delay time would be reset only after the delay had expired and the output had turned off.  Clearly, we want to use the "re-triggerable" setting so that any movement simply extends the timer.

It turns out that moving the jumper on this board from its factory position stopped the unit from working at all and a quick bit of reverse engineering revealed that whoever designed this board simply connected it to the wrong place - probably due to poor reverse-engineering on the part of the "designer" of this (likely cloned) circuit board.  Fortunately, the wiring of the circuit is such that it is already wired as being re-triggerable, so we can leave it alone.

Figure 6:
Perhaps a bit messy, but this is the two-transistor circuit
depicted in Figure 5, tacked to the pins of the PIR module's
circuit board.  The three-conductor cable that connects to the
clock via the mini-DIN connector can just be seen.
Click on the image for a larger version.

One problem with the 3.3 volt output is that it is a logic output that is limited to 3.3 volts because it has both pull-down and pull-up transistors, internally.  As we discussed in the previous section, we need to ground the base of transistor "Qa" through the resistor to disable the high voltage and let it float to an unknown voltage to allow it to turn on.  

Because the output is not an open collector or open drain, it cannot be pulled higher than approximately one diode drop above the 3.3 volt supply on the PIR chip:  This voltage is lower than the emitter voltage of the transistor that we added ("Qa") which means that Qa will always be turned on, always disabling the high voltage converter!

To fix this we need to provide an open-collector output - but preserving the polarity of the output - which is to say that we want it to be an open collector to allow the base of "Qa" to float high when movement is detected, but go to ground and turn on "Qa" when it is not.  To accomplish this, transistor "Qb" takes the "high-active" pulse from the PIR and inverts it - and then transistor "Qc" will invert it yet again, but this time with the needed open collector.  "Qb" and "Qc" can be practically any NPN transistor - I used 2N3904 types in this cicruit.

In experimenting with this PIR sensor module, I noted that when set to "maximum" the "on" time from the output was about 150 seconds - about 2.5 minutes.  I was able to iteratively adjust the "sensitivity" control incrementally upwards until I found a setting that reliably detected even slight motion in the room - but seemed not to randomly "false" trigger, the result being that even when I was in the room and not moving much - say watching TV - it would stay on most of the time, but be easily (re)triggered by even slight movements.

Figure 1 shows the clock with the PIR sensor next to it, sitting on the shelf below my TV.  I purposely set the PIR sensor back from the edge of the shelf - not just to line up with the front of the clock, but to obscure part of the view of the floor to reduce the probability that a cat would trigger it:  Since cats sleep most of the time, anyway, their occasionally triggering the PIR sensor isn't a big deal and the display remains off most of the tim.

Reducing "wear-out"

For a "cold cathode" tube like a Nixie, turning the high voltage on and off is not a stress on the tube:  After all, simply changing the segments to show the time is also turning on/off parts of the tube.  With no voltage present, there is no electron bombardment on the elements within the tube and thus, it will not experience wear.

Powering down other devices in the absence of "viewers"

There are other types of "antique" displays that may benefit from having some sort of "human presence detector".  For example, a VFD (Vacuum Fluorescent Display) has a wear-out mechanism similar to a Nixie in that electron bombardment will gradually degrade the phosphors - and the cathode (filament) may also lose emission.

Similarly, if one has a "Scope Clock" - a vector-graphics clock that uses an oscilloscope tube to show the time - it, too, will wear out over time, the emission of the from the cathode will drop over time - not to mention possible burning of the phosphor.

Figure 7:
An example of a "Scope Clock" - a vector-graphic clock
display shown on an oscilloscope using a cathode-ray tube
(CRT).  In this photo, the CRT in a Cushman CE-50A
communications monitor is being used to demonstrate, but
an old, analog oscilloscope would work as a "permanent"
fixture and blanking it when no-one is looking would
extend the life of increasingly-rare CRTs.
Click on the image for a larger version

For these two examples, a bit of care should be taken in that while removing the high voltage source may partially remove the wear-out mechanism (e.g. degradation of phosphors) other steps would be required to mitigate the diminution of filament emission over time.  This could include turning off the filament - or at the very least, reducing its voltage, perhaps in steps, in the absence of the anode voltage.  If grid voltages happen to be present, those, too, should be carefully considered to see if they should be removed when the high voltage is turned off - but since these often share the same power supply, this problem may take care of itself.

In so-doing - and depending on the nature of the display tube - other precautions may also be required (e.g. removing all other voltage prior to powering down the filament) to avoid damage - and frequent power-cycling of the filament itself may be an issue:  These are potential issues that should be considered - but are beyond the purview of this article.

Footnote:

  1. The name "Nixie" is a trademark of Burroughs Corp. to describe certain types of neon-glow indicators.  Like many trademarks, it's become "genericized".  As done in this article, nowadays it's commonly used to denote all types of similar cold-cathode glow devices in which each digit is indicated by a separate element within the tube in the shape of the desired numeral or symbol - whether they were made by the original trademark holder or not.

 * * * * * * *

This article stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com


[END]

 

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-1236055557393434550
Extensions
Repairing a NanoVNA "V2" with nonsensical readings ("Blown up" input)
50 ohms8641bad readingsdamageH2high return losshigh SWRhigh VSWRincorrect readingsMXD8641NanoVNAnonsensicalRF switchSAA-2NSAA2Nsmith chartTVSV2
Show full content

Figure 1:
The SAA-2N, a variant of the Version 2.  As noted in the text
I chose this version as it had N connectors and was suited
for my specific needs and has served well for several years.
Click on the image for a larger version.
The NanoVNA has become a ubiquitous device for the RF toolbox:  For less than US$200 you can get a device that is reasonably capable, accurate and covers a usefully-wide frequency range - from a few 10s of kHz into the GHz range, depending on the model.

The original NanoVNA - sometimes found for less than US$50 - works reasonably well up to about 250-ish MHz - the limit of the frequency range of its RF synthesizer (typically an Si5131).  Using harmonics for the higher ranges allows the unit to "work" higher than this, but with the dropping gain of the mixers and lower power of the higher-order harmonics diminish its usefulness and it pretty much "runs out of steam" by the time one gets to around 1 GHz.

The "Version 2" of the NanoVNA (which includes many variants, such as the "H2") improved on this using a different detector (often the Analog Devices AD8342 which is rated to work above 3 GHz) and two RF synthesizers - the original Si5351 and another device (usually the Analog Devices ADF4350 or similar) that takes over from the '5351 at the higher frequencies (usually above around 140 MHz) up through 3+ GHz.  The different architecture of the Version 2 necessitates greater complexity - which also implies increased vulnerability as we'll see.

Note:  This article will generically refer to the units thus-constructed as "V2" NanoVNAs - regardless of who actually makes/sells them.

Background

When I looked for an "upgrade" to the original NanoVNA I was looking for a device that would have durable connectors that would withstand hundreds of connect/disconnect cycles and be able to hang the unit from the interconnect cables themselves to measure gear "in situ".  This "need" was due to its expected use:  Being dragged around in the equipment box to repeater and radio sites, the houses of other amateurs, and being used on the workbench - and almost never above about 1.5 GHz - a frequency range for which I have other gear, anyway.  Having friends with other NanoVNA V2 variants, I've heard how physically fragile these devices are - mostly related to the supplied cables and the SMA connectors themselves, and how they may be physically attached to the circuit board.  All of this ruled out anything with SMA connectors.

For this reason I got the SAA-2N (metal case with "N" connectors) and have used it enough that the nickle plating is starting to wear off the threads of the N connectors, indicative of a number of connect/disconnect cycles (now in the hundreds) that would have trashed even the best-quality SMA connectors:  Had anyone else made a device as physically rugged as this, I'd have considered it - but as of the time of this writing, no-one else has done so!  (Why not?)

The problem

One issue that can befall users of all NanoVNA "V2" variants is that of static sensitivity - particularly on the S11 port (e.g. "Port 1" or "CH0").  While some users on the forums suggest that this is due to "inferior" components of some of the clones, this is simply false:  It's a result of the way that the unit is designed - and the components necessary to execute it which are intrinsically more vulnerable to ESD (ElectroStatic Discharge) than simpler versions.  

Additionally - and speaking for myself -  I'm much more likely to use this unit - with its "N" connectors - "out in the field" where it may be exposed to hazards (ESD) than someone who gently rests their NanoVNA on their workbench for its entire life.  At least for me, this increases the probability that a unit that is more likely to be used out in the field - away from the "safe" workbench - will be damaged in some way, electrically or mechanically.

Specifically, the problem is the Maxscend MXD8641 RF switch found in several places on the "Version 2" NanoVNA variants (e.g. those that work past 3 GHz).  This is a SP4T (4-way) RF switch used to route the signals that, among other things, is used to switch between the Si5351 oscillator and the ADF4350 (or similar) - but one of these devices may also be found right on the S11 port - and that's where the problem lies.  (This device is not on the original NanoVNA, which seems to be more rugged in this respect.)  As the list price of the MXD8641 is well under US$0.07 in any sort of production quantity, it's unlikely that so-called "cheap counterfeits" are being used.

While the data sheet for this device indicates that it has good ESD protection, it's clear from the NanoVNA forums - and my personal experience and that of friends who also have a V2 NanoVNA - that this protection is NOT necessarily adequate for in-the-field, casual use.  If your NanoVNA V2 never leaves your static-free workbench, you may never have this sort of problem - but if you drag it out in the field like I do, you may well have run across situations where the NanoVNA becomes damaged.

Figure 2:
If the RF switch chip is has a "dead" short to ground,
you may end up with chaos of lines like this after you do a
"short-open-load" recalibration.
Click on the image for a larger version.

As it happens, a good-quality coaxial cable is capable of storing quite a bit of energy, stored as voltage.  With a typical 50 ohm coax having around 30pF per foot (100pF/meter) this, coupled with triboelectric effects - not to mention static on your person or on the antenna to which you might connect it - pose a hazard to sensitive electronics, and this is device is no exception.

Considering that the specifications for this part note that it should withstand 1kV from the "human body model" (100pF discharged through a 1.5k resistor) it's easy to see that discharging even a hundred or so volts from 3000pF of capacitance - represented by about 100 feet (28 meters) of coaxial cable - and not having any series resistance - could easily damage this part.  One can trivially develop hundreds of volts across a piece of coaxial cable just from handling - not to mention that which might be developed across an antenna from wind static!

When a NanoVNA V2 goes bad

On the NanoVNA forums I've seen people commenting on how they are suddenly getting nonsensical readings on their V2 (see Figure 2) or the apparent inability of the unit to maintain calibration - and this is indicative of possible damage to the MXD8641 found on the S11 port, likely caused by voltage discharge:  With a 0.047uF series coupling capacitor, it would not take much accidentally inject enough energy to damage that part!

My own NanoVNA V2 was, itself, damaged through discharge after having used it for several years without incident, apparently when connected to a fairly long length of coaxial cable - despite reasonable effort and care.  I have also encountered others with V2 NanoVNA variants that have also experienced similar issues and in all of the cases where I have been able to get the unit into my hands, it's been due to damage of the MXD8641.  One thing in common with these other failures is that these folks often - but not always - use their NanoVNA V2 places other than just on the workbench - to test antennas, cables, etc. out in the field:  I don't know about you, but I can detect a common thread here!

Comment:  

As can be seen in Figure 3, there is a 0.047uF monolithic ceramic coupling capacitor.  Ideally, a capacitor tester would be used to verify its integrity, as would an ohmmeter to assure that it's not shorted - even intermittently.

It is possible - particularly if the NanoVNA V2 has board-mounted SMA connectors - that if the things are flexed repeatedly (tightening of the connectors or other mechanical stress) that this capacitor and/or the solder joints in the signal path have broken or become intermittent.  It would be a good idea to use an ohmmeter to "buzz" out continuity from the end of the cable to the "connector" side of the coupling capacitor, and also between the other (circuit-side) lead of the capacitor and the trace.

Sometimes, reflowing both ends (allowing time in between for the two solder connections to cool) will restore connectivity if the solder joint has cracked - but note that the capacitor itself may be mechanically intermittent and thus require replacement, anyway.

Diagnosis:

Having corresponded with several others who have had the misfortune of damaging their V2 NanoVNAs, there are several ways that the damage will manifest itself that may appear to be totally different, but are actually the caused by the same problem.

  • Sudden high return loss everywhere.  Sometimes the discharge will cause the '8641 to simply fail dead-shorted and the user will see a very high VSWR on everything and if one configures the unit for an S21 (e.g. "through") reading, the apparent insertion loss is extremely high - indicated by a very high noise floor (after attempted recalibration) as compared to what it was when working.  If one attempts to recalibrate (Open/Short/Load) a completely nonsensical display like that in Figure 2 is likely to result after doing so.
  • Unit will not seem to "hold" calibration well.  This seems to be the more common failure:  The user will suddenly find that the unit is out of calibration for no obvious reason - and this is often worse at higher (VHF/UHF) frequencies than at HF (30 MHz or lower).  Using the Open/Short/Load, the unit will seem to calibrate, but the noise floor in "S21" measurements will likely be higher - and the calibration will seem to drift all over the place over time and with temperature.

This second failure mode is a bit more sinister in that the user may, at first, presume that the loss of calibration was a result of user error.  What has actually happened was that rather than fail shorted, the '8641 will be damaged, often putting between 30 and 80 ohms of resistance between the input port and ground  - a value that will vary significantly with temperature and over time.  This is insidious in that the unit may "seem" to be working - but it will likely give incorrect readings, even if it seems to calibrate properly.  This causes two problems:

  • Calibration drift.  The NanoVNA's source impedance is nominally 50 ohms - but placing a varying resistance across this - possibly in the 30-80 ohm range - will lower this, causing calibration to seem to vary despite frequent recalibrations.  As noted above, if an "S21" measurement is done (e.g. a "through insertion loss"), the shunting of the source signal (on CH0/Port 1) will reduce its amplitude - possibly significantly - and you may notice that the noise floor is higher than expected as the signal levels have been reduced.
  • Misleading results.  What's worse is that even though the unit will seem to calibrate correctly using the Open/Short/Load, the fact that it is no longer sourcing or loading 50 ohms on the Ch0 port can cause misleading readings if you are trying to sweep a filter, antenna, cable or other device that is expecting a source impedance in the area of 50 ohms.  This may be proven by using a known-good 50 ohm cable of significant length (10s of feet/meters long) and terminating it with a known good 50 ohm load:  Ideally, it should remain "flat"(low VSWR/return loss) but if the unit itself no longer sources/loads 50 ohms, this test will reveal something other than a flat response.
    Figure 3:
    The screwdriver tip is touching the "circuit" side of the
    0.047 uF coupling cap.  It is between this point and ground
    that one would test with a digital Ohmmeter to determine if
    the RF switch chip has been damaged.
    Click on the image for a larger version.

A quick check with an Ohmmeter will reveal the problem and figure 3 shows where a measurement may be made, on the "circuit" side of the blocking capacitor on the CH0/Port1 terminal. This photo shows the SAA-2N, but your model may have a slightly different layout, but it should be pretty easy to locate this capacitor and do a similar test on other variants.

If all is well, a typical digital Ohmmeter will likely read around 10k or higher with the unit powered down - but if you get anything lower - specially if it is in the hundreds of Ohms or lower (it is likely to be in the 10s of ohms if you have noticed a problem) - the MXD8641 is likely blown.  (Do NOT use the "diode test" function of your Ohmmeter.  Be sure to check your Ohmmeter in both directions to rule out a reading a protection diode on the chip.)

As mentioned earlier, the MXD8641 is a very inexpensive part - but it's difficult to find from U.S. suppliers - and for this reason I sourced a strip of the MXD8641 on EvilBay with each part costing well under US$1.00, including shipping.  Replacing this part, however, is another matter as we'll see shortly.

A promising equivalent part would seem to be the Skyworks 13414-485LF (available from DigiKey) which is also a SP4T switch - in the same package and with the same pin-out - but despite what look like identical specifications, parameters and truth tables in the data sheet, the units that I got from DigiKey did not work in the 'V2 for reasons still unknown.

Figure 4:
Highlighted section shows the installed TVS - the 30 volt
0603-package part mentioned in the text.  It is laying on its
side, which was the easiest orientation for mounting.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Input protection

If one makes it standard practice to always place a resistive attenuator (say, 6-10 dB) on CH0/Port1 of their VNA - and does calibrations with it in place - this may reduce the probability of damage, but doing such may complicate certain types of measurements due to the added loss and reduction of signal levels.

Unfortunately, none of the V2 variants that I've seen have included overt protection in addition to that intrinsic to the MXD8641 - and this would likely be in the form of a low-capacitance TVS diode.  As it happens, there are a number of TVS diodes that have very low capacitance (0.5pF or less) that are specifically intended for protection of GHz-range devices (HDMI, USB3 and RF/antenna) which make the suitable candidates for use with a NanoVNA.

The device that I chose was the Inpaq EGA10603V12B0DG - a 12/30 volt, 0.2pF part in a 0603 SMD package (DigiKey P/N:  3526-EGA10603V12B0DGCT-ND).  There are other devices with low capacitance with even lower voltages (which would have been preferred) but these were available only in 0402 (or smaller!) packages, making their handling very difficult:  As it is, a 0603 package is about 1/4th of the size of a grain of rice!

With a fine tip and small-diameter solder, it's possible to add the TVS diode.  Figure 4 shows how this might be done on the SAA-2N:  Adjacent to the blocking capacitor, the green coating is scraped off the board to bare the ground plane and the TVS diode is installed.  I find it a bit easier to set the TVS on its side, but your mileage may vary.

You will note that the TVS is placed on the "circuit" side of the blocking capacitor rather than on the antenna terminals.  The reason for this is that if there is a voltage across the input (and thus across the capacitor) that is then shorted, the energy of the 0.047uF capacitor (plus any "ringing" from inductance/resonance) will be dumped into the circuitry.  By placing the TVS on the "circuit" side, it will be able to dissipate at least some of the energy dumped by the capacitor, placing an absolute limit on the voltage peak applied to the '8641.

How much effect does this TVS have on the readings?  I've added one to a perfectly-functioning Version 2 NanoVNA and then re-checked the calibration:  Below several hundred MHz, there was no detectable effect of the device's small amount of capacitance - and even well into the 2+ GHz range, the effect was very minor.

As I rarely use my NanoVNA above about 1.5 GHz, this effect was acceptable - and the added protection against damage (that is, finding your NanoVNA non-functional at a radio site - possibly disrupting the planned activities - perhaps resulting in a wasted trip unless you have a spare VNA or equivalent!) is worth it. The 0.2pF capacitance of this device is probably less than stray capacitances in the circuit/layout, anyway.

Figure 5:
Location of the failed chip (U551) - the first active component
in the signal path on CH0/Port 1 of the VNA - and the one
most likely to be damaged.  The SAA-2N is shown above.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Note:  I haven't put similar protection on CH1/Port 2 as it's less-commonly used - and it's typically used in conjunction with a device under test that is less likely to produce ESD.  If you are measuring the loss of coaxial cable, however, it would be a good idea to dissipate any stored charge on it (shorting the center to the shield - or even touching across the two with your fingers) prior to connecting it to either terminal of the NanoVNA.

Replacing the MXD8641

If your 'VNA has already been damaged, it may be too late unless you have the equipment to do small surface-mount work.  For such work, it's not so much skill that is needed - but the right gear (hot-air rework, ceramic tweezers, etc.) and good magnification is required:  None of this is particularly expensive as a suitable hot-air rework station can be had new for well under US$100.

Using the hot air rework wand with a small-diameter blower tip (Figure 6) the chip is carefully heated and using ceramic tweezers (which are fairly heat-insulative and non-conductive) the old, blown-up chip is lifted off - noting the orientation of the small dot on the original chip - which, on this board, corresponds with the "arrow" symbol seen at about the 7 o'clock position on U551 in Figure 5.  This image shows the location of this chip on the SAA-2N, but it will be located near the connector itself on other models - you may need to trace the signal path for other models.

Figure 6:
Heating the failed chip with a hot-air rework tool.
Be sure to note the orientation of the tiny dot on the chip
before you remove it!
Click on the image for a larger version.
Flooding the area with a drop of "no clean" solder flux from a pen, the replacement chip is dropped onto the spot where the original was - taking care to orient its dot properly - and the area is re-heated with the rework tool.  Gently nudging it back and forth, when the solder melts it will "stick" in place as surface tension does its work - but it may be necessary to make sure that it's centered on the pad - or even push down on it slightly.  If it seems to not be centering itself, let it cool a bit and apply a bit more flux and re-heat it:  The trick here is to let the flux and surface tension do the work!  It is unlikely that more solder will need to be added as the new chip was pre-tinned at the factory and there will likely be plenty still on the pads.

Letting the unit cool - and verifying that its dot is oriented in the same manner as the original part - the unit may be reassembled and tested:  I've had extremely good luck with this method and have never had a failure - and having replaced '8641's in several Version 2 NanoVNAs, I've been 100% successful - but then, I've been doing surface-mount work for quite some time.

Figure 7:
The repaired NanoVNA, recalibrated.  The flatness and level
of the noise floor (<=-70dBm) indicate that it's well matched
and that the losses are low between 100kHz and 1.5 GHz.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Conclusion

Without careful examination of your Version 2 NanoVNA it may not be possible to determine if it has the added protection of the TVS diode - although this may be noted in its documentation.  If it does not - and you regularly take it out in the field rather than having it sit comfortably on your workbench - it's worth considering adding it.

Note:  As much as I would like to help, I'm not going to get into the business of repairing/modifying NanoVNAs in the manner described, so please don't ask - sorry.  If you have a "blowed up" NanoVNA and don't have the gear/skill to do SMD rework, find someone who can.  At the very least, you now know why this issue might happen and this may prevent you from damaging other devices in the future.

 * * * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com 

[END]

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-4960685365796878632
Extensions
Ali Express "SDR TX/RX Switch" - A design NOT well thought out...
audio mutingaudio switchrelayRF senseRF switchsdrSDR mutingSDR protectionSDR TX/RX SWITCHT/R switchtransmit receive switchWebSDRWebSDR muting
Show full content

Figure 1: 
Front panel of the SDR TX/RX antenna switch showing the
the 3.5mm audio connectors and the red/green RX/TX LED -
which have been swapped to be in their proper location.
Click on the image for a larger version.

        IMPORTANT:        

If you have one of these devices, DO NOT connect it to your transceiver and second receiver (SDR) UNTIL you have read and understood the issues described here. 

Failure to understand how this device works may result in you blowing up your SDR when you transmit! 

If you wish to use it ONLY as an audio muting switch when you transmit (e.g. when using a remote receiver) see the section labeled "Audio Muting" near the bottom of the page.

I've you've been following this blog you'll note that I've used SDRs (Software Defined Radios) quite a bit - particularly for reception.  Transmitting in the vicinity of any receiver - or trying to use an outboard receiver in conjunction with a transmitter on the same antenna - is a bit problematic for several reasons:

  • If the transmitter and receiver are in close proximity and on very nearby frequencies (e.g. on the same band) then it is (nearly) inevitable that the receiver WILL be overloaded when the transmitter is active.
  • Unless the frequencies (transmit and receive) are very well separated AND both the receiver and transmitter have adequate filtering, the receiver will be overloaded by the transmitter.
  • It is possible that even if you have a separate receive antenna, it may intercept enough energy from the transmitter to damage/destroy the receiver.  If the two are on the same band, this is more likely - but even if the receiver is being operated on a very different frequency range than the nearby transmitter and there is insufficient filtering at the receiver the receiver could sustain damage.
  • It is often the case that one might have a single antenna on which there are two receivers (e.g. the receiver built into the transceiver and an outboard SDR receiver).  In this case one clearly must protect (e.g. disconnect) the outboard receiver when transmitting.

It's worth noting that most SDR receivers do NOT have particularly strong filtering in them:  Unlike an amateur transceiver - which may have separate filtering for each amateur band (or groups of bands) - this is rarely the case for wide frequency-range software-defined radios:  RTL-SDRs, SDRPlay, Funcube and others have either no band-specific filtering or rather broad (e.g. covering about an octave or even wider) filtering in them.

What this unit does

Some modern radios actually have external receive ports on them to allow you to "share" the RF while protecting the external receiver.  If your radio doesn't have that, there are/were several devices to allow this that may be found on the market (e.g. the MFJ-1708) but my attention was brought to an inexpensive unit (pictured above) that has appeared on the various seller web sites (Amazon, EvilBay, Ali Express, etc.) so I obtained one via a U.S. seller.

The description of this device is typical of those found on at the stores of Chinese sellers, curiously being both under and over-descriptive at the same time:  "160MHz 100W Portable SDR Transceivers Aluminum Alloy Box Device Radio Switch Antenna Sharer Practical Signal Equipment Accessory"

By the description, with this device it should be possible to connect your transceiver and SDR (receiver) to the same antenna, perhaps receiving using both (e.g. the addition of a waterfall to an older radio) without fear of damaging the SDR or the transceiver.

This device also has another feature:  To re-route audio when transmitting - which is probably the most usable feature of this device as it comes out of the box as we'll see.

As we'll see, this device doesn't quite work as you might think that it should.

"Documentation?  What documentation?!" 

This unit arrived in a package with (surprise!) no documentation at all - which was somewhat disappointing:  Sometimes one gets a (badly!) translated half-sheet of paper that hurts one's brain to parse - or even a URL to a page with... something... but not the case here.

From a practical standpoint, it's somewhat "self documenting" in the sense that if you ordered this device in the first place, you already had an idea as to what it was supposed to do, so it's possible to figure things out.  Referring to Figures 1 and 2 (the front and back panels) we have:

Front panel (Figure 1):

  • LED on the left-hand side.  This LED is illuminated when the unit is in "Receive" mode - that is, the "SDR" rear-panel RF connector is connected to the "ANT" rear-panel connector.  (The PC board shows this as a green LED, but on mine the red and green were interchanged during assembly:  I swapped them back.)
  • 3.5mm jack labeled "SDR".  This is a stereo (2-channel) audio jack and, during receive, both channels are connected to the "Audio Out" connector.  It is disconnected during transmit.
  • 3.5mm jack labeled "AUDIO OUT".  This is a stereo (2-channel) audio jack that is intended to be connected to speakers.
  • 3.5mm jack labeled "TRX".  This is a stereo (2-channel) audio jack that is intended to be connected to the transceiver during transmit.  Is is disconnected during receive.
  • LED on the right-hand side.  This LED is illuminated when the unit is in "Transmit" mode - that is, the "TRX" RF rear-panel connector is connected to the "ANT" rear-panel connector.  (As noted, this should have been a red LED according to the marking on the PC board but mine was populated with a green LED, which I swapped.)

Figure 2:
Back panel of the SDR antenna switch.  SO-239 connectors
are for the radio (transceiver) and antenna with the SMA for
the SDR.  The 3.5mm PTT and power connectors are visible.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Rear panel (Figure 2):

  • RADIO connector.  This is an SO-239 (female) UHF connector to which the transmitter/transceiver is to be connected.
  • ANTENNA connector.  This is an SO-239 (female) UHF connector to which the antenna is to be connected.
  •  PTT ("Push To Talk") connector.  This is a 3.5mm connector in which the center pin (tip), when grounded, will switch the unit from"Receive" to "Transmit" mode.  It's likely that a 3 or 4 wire 3.5mm cable was provided in which case only the tip (PTT) and sleeve (outer-most ring - ground) are needed.
  • SDR connector.  This is an SMA connector to which the SDR (or other auxiliary receiver) is to be connected.
  • 13.8 VDC connector.  This is a 2.1x5.5mm coaxial power connector (center positive) through which DC power is supplied.  This voltage is not critical and could be anywhere from 11.5 through 15 volts.

Also in the box my unit came with an SMA-SMA jumper, SMA-BNC adapter to adapt the SDR connector to BNC, three "audio" cables with 3-conductor 3.5mm connectors on each end, and a 12 volt switching supply (with a European "pin" plug) and a universal plug adapter:  The 12 volt switching supply seems to be the cheapest, meanest possible unit with no brand name and should NOT be trusted or used - but at least its DC cord is useful!  (In other words, do not use this power supply - particularly as it is unfiltered from an RF standpoint and it would be a really bad idea to use it on an RF receive device of any type.) 

How it actually works

As you would expect, the antenna is to be connected to the "ANTENNA" port.  When in receive mode, the "SDR" connector is also connected to the "ANTENNA" port - but the "RADIO" port is not!

What this means is that as shipped from the factory, if you connect your transceiver, antenna and SDR to the unit, when it's in receive mode, you will get no receive signals on your transceiver.  This is by design, apparently.

It is expected that the PTT connection on the back should be grounded when the transceiver is in transmit mode - and when this happens, the RADIO and ANTENNA ports will be connected to each other.  There is also an RF sensing circuit that is supposed to detect when the transmitter is producing RF, but this has its own issues as will be discussed later.

There is a jumper...

If you take the unit apart (via the four screws on the back panel) you'll see a jumper (J5 - see the schematic of Figure 3 and the photo of the board in Figure 4) and some awkwardly-worded text indicating that if you remove the jumper that you'll have "dual receive" - which means that the Radio's receiver and the SDR will be connected to the antenna at the same time.

This is technically true - but there are a number of "gotchas" here

First, let's take a look at a reverse-engineered schematic of the unit, below:

Figure 3:
Reverse-engineered schematic diagram of the unit.
The parts designators are those shown on the silkscreen of the circuit board.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Circuit description:

DC power

The DC input power via J4 is protected with F1, a 500mA self-resetting fuse and D10, a diode for reverse polarity protection while L2, a 220uH inductor, isolates the connection at RF.  Capacitors C6 bypasses RF while C7, a 220uF electrolytic, provides smoothing/filtering - likely enough to even allow an AC power source (from a 12-ish volt transformer) to be used. 

It's worth noting that there are two "grounds" on this device:  The "antenna ground" of the rear panel and RF connectors and the "shack ground" of the DC power and audio which are isolated by L1, a 220uH inductor.  On paper, this isn't a bad idea - but on this unit there's a flaw:

The back panel being used to mount the connectors and it - and the entire case - is at "RF" ground - which would be fine as that would be the same "ground" as your radio.  The problem is that the circuit board's ground planes are not set back from the edges of the board meaning that it's possible that the green insulating coating could scrape off the board and contact the case it the mounting slot, connecting the two "grounds" together - perhaps intermittently.  (Practically speaking, most people would not be likely to ever have a problem.)

Oops.

Keying

J6 is the PTT input, activated by grounding the tip of the 3.5mm connection with the outermost sleeve being the "shack" (not antenna) ground.  Diode D6 blocks positive voltage and when the PTT is keyed, the gate of Q3, an N-channel MOSFET, goes low, de-energizing all of the relays.  When the PTT line is "un-grounded" capacitor C3 and R9 charge, preventing Q3 from re-activating the relays instantly, providing about 100msec or so of delay through the charging by R3.

Comments about the keying via the PTT port

This relay keying scheme assumes that there is either NO voltage, or that there is a POSITIVE voltage on the keying line from the radio when in receive that is greater than a few volts.  There are several caveats to this:

When powered up, the relays are energized whenever it's in "Receive" mode (PTT ungrounded or no transmit RF)  What this means is that if power is removed, it's as if it's in "transmit" mode.
  • This connects the ANT to the RADIO port and the SDR port is grounded when in TX mode or powered down.
  • Additionally, the front-panel AUDIO jack gets connected to the TRX jack. when in TX mode or powered down.

The keying line from the radio must go to GROUND when keyed.  If the keying line is shared with an amplifier, that amplifier CANNOT put a negative voltage on the keying line as that will hold the SDR switch in "Transmit" mode at best, damage the SDR switch in worst case - and in either case it would hold the amplifier in a "keyed" state.


If there IS a positive voltage on the keying line when "unkeyed" it must be at least 5 volts just to assure that Q3 will turn on reliably when the radio is un-keyed - and this lower voltage may affect the duration of the "un-key" delay.  If the voltage is less than 10 volts, the full delay caused by C3 and R3 may not occur.  The 100msec or so of "un-key"delay afforded by R3 and C3 is insufficient to prevent the relays from "chattering" during SSB and CW transmissions if RF sensing is used!

  • If you are a CW operator, the unit will not switch back to receive mode as quickly as your radio might.  If you are a CW operator that prefers QSK (full break-in) you probably don't want to have this unit inline.

There is also an RF-sensing keying circuit:  Transmit RF is tapped from the RADIO RF line (from the transmitter) by C1, a 47pF capacitor and rectified by D1 and D2 and used to turn on Q1 - grounding it in the same way that grounding the PTT line does - which in turn keys the transmitter.  There is a fatal flaw in the design of this device exacerbated by RF sensing which I will discuss shortly.

Audio switching

Figure 4:
The circuit board, showing J5 in the center.
The power supply filtering is in the upper-right with the audio
relay (K3) on the left.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Relay K3 may be used to switch audio based on keying.  Let's assume that you are using a separate SDR with a computer to receive audio:  By connecting the computer speakers to the "Audio Out" connector and the computer audio output to the front-panel 3.5mm "SDR" jack the SDR audio will be muted when transmitting at which any audio from the radio connected to the front-panel 3.5mm "TRX" jack will be passed through to the speakers.

Practically speaking, you would probably never use the "TRX" jack to mute your radio's audio, but a more likely scenario is that if you are using an online WebSDR (see the WebSDR.org web site for a list) to listen on the air, you could use this to mute your speakers when you transmit to prevent your own transmitted audio from coming back with a delay and causing an echo.

RF Switching

This is where it gets a bit scary.  First, consider the configuration - from the factory - with jumper "J5" in place.

Remembering that when powered up, the relays are energized, you can see that when in "Receive" mode, the ANT port is connected directly to the SDR port - but you'll also note that the RADIO port is not connected to anything (e.g. floating).  When you transmit, the relays de-energize, connecting the RADIO port to the antenna and grounding the SDR port.  This means two things:

  • There is no receive RF at the transceiver.  Most people that I know don't use their transceiver's receiver instead of the SDR, but use them at the same time - perhaps turning down the volume on the one not being used or, more likely, using their transceiver for audio and the SDR to display a waterfall.  Not having antenna RF to be able to receive anything on the transceiver is likely not what you really want to do.
  • When using the RF sensing, the transmitter is connected to an open circuit before the relay switches.  This has several implications:
    • If you don't have the PTT line wired to your radio, there will be a split second when RF first appears that the radio will see an infinite VSWR before the relays de-energize and the contacts close, connecting the radio to the antenna.  This repeated burst of infinite SWR can progressively damage a transmitter's finals, despite the SWR protection circuitry within the radio.
    • When relay K1 does de-energize and connect to the antenna, it will be "hot switching" the relay contacts, which is to say that they will be carrying RF power at the instant that the antenna is connected.  This tends to burn contacts and shorten the life of the relay.
    • The RF sensing circuit doesn't have adequate "hang time" to ride through word pauses and CW elements meaning that it will likely "chatter", repeatedly causing the hazards noted above.

As can be seen from the picture of the circuit board in Figure 4 there's a jumper, J5, on the board with the following somewhat confusing text:

J5 Usage
Open = Dual receive wheh [sic] RX ("wheh" was probably intended to be "when")
Short = Normal Operation

By removing J5, relay K1 is never energized meaning that it is always connected to the antenna:  This helps to mitigate the problem that - when RF sensing is used - that the transmitter is connected to "nothing" as it would be the case with J5 installed - but this also means that in receive mode, the transceiver and the SDR are connected in parallel

Simply paralleling two (nominally) 50 ohm devices (the transceiver operating in receive mode and the SDR) isn't a great idea - but it will generally work "OK", particularly if the SDR and the transceiver are tuned to the same frequency range.  When the transceiver is OFF - or on a band  other than that to which the SDR is tuned - it may cause its filters to "suck out" RF and a loss of signal/sensitivity on the SDR.   

(Note:  A "properly-designed" device that shared the antenna for receive would likely include a built-in 2-way splitter which can reduce such problems, and it will also contain circuitry to protect the second receiver should excessive RF manage to find its way into it.)

The bad part here is that if you transmit - and, for some reason relay K2 doesn't de-energize instantly, as would be the case with RF sensing only - you will transmit directly into your SDR, likely destroying its front end.

Oops, again.

What this means is:

  • If you remove J5, DO NOT operate the unit UNLESS you are using the PTT cable - which is to say DO NOT rely on RF sensing alone as transmit power will briefly enter the SDR's front end before the relay can switch.  The SDR is likely to be damaged due to the lack of RF power protection on that port.
  • If your PTT cable accidentally becomes disconnected - or external keying is turned off in your radio's menu - you will transmit into the SDR and destroy its front end due to the inability of the RF sensing to act instantly and due to the lack of protection to the SDR.

The reason for this as as mentioned above:  Not only are the transceiver and SDR connected together without any protection circuitry, but also the RF sense needs to detect transmit power before it will activate - and by the time that it does, a brief burst of full transmit power may have found its way into your SDR.

A hardware bug

There is also a more subtle bug that I uncovered.  While testing the unit on the bench, I disconnected J5 - but was confused when the ANT and RADIO ports were not connected.  What was happening was that when I removed J5 - while the unit was powered up and in receive mode - enough current was flowing through LED D8 and resistor R4 to hold relay K1 closed.

Simply removing the power temporarily caused K1 to release - and there wasn't enough current to close it again, but if you are messing with the configuration, this "bug" could bite you, too!  I suppose that it's also possible that jarring the unit could cause the armature of K1 to hold in place - but I didn't try this.

The "fix" for this - if you want to bother with it - is to change resistor R4 to a 10k resistor:  This also tones down the TX LED's brightness a bit, too.

Overall comments

I get the sense that whoever designed this thing may have been copying the general idea from other, similar devices - but not really understanding what was being done, and why.  For example, the separate "grounds" implies an understanding that having them separated would be a good idea - but whoever laid out the circuit board made the "rookie mistake" of making it possible for the two "grounds" to be connected, anyway if the green coating on the board and the black anodization of the case wear through.

The description of this unit implies that it's useful up to 160 MHz.  I suspect that this is probably "true-ish", but the VSWR starts to climb when one gets to and above 6 meters (50 MHz) meaning that it's likely most useful at low power at these higher frequencies.

The cardinal - and unforgivable - sin has to do with the fact that if you want to use both your transceiver's receiver and your SDR simultaneously, you WILL want to remove J5 - but if you do - and you don't absolutely have the PTT connection working properly, you WILL blow up your SDR!

Fixing this problem is possible with the addition of some simple protection circuitry to allow the SDR to survive brief bursts of transmit power - perhaps the topic of a later post. 

AS IT IS, I WOULD NOT USE IT FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE, AS AN SDR ANTENNA SWITCH - at least not without significant modification.

"Audio Muting"

What it IS useful for, out of the box

What it IS useful for is an audio switch to mute your computer audio when you transmit - as you might do when using a WebSDR or other remote receiver.  For this, I would:

  • Remove internal jumper J5
  • Connect the PTT to your radio's PTT
  • Connect your computer's speakers to the "AUDIO OUT" jack
  • Connect your computer audio output to the "SDR" jack

If you are hell-bent on not using the PTT cable, the RF sense may be useful, but you would also need to:

  • Be sure that you have removed internal jumper J5
  • Connect the transceiver to the "RADIO" port
  • Connect the antenna to the "ANTENNA" port 
  • DO NOT connect anything to the SDR port

As noted before, the "hang time" imposed by the time constant of C3 and R3 may not be enough and the relay may "chatter" - in which case R3 could be replaced with a higher-value resistor of, say, 330k - or with a 1 Meg potentiometer in series with a 47k resistor to allow "hang time" adjustment.  (Adjustment of R3 is preferable to increasing the value of C3 much as the latter could also slow the activation time when RF is detected.)

Final comments

Other than to switch audio as described above, I wouldn't use this device as it is shipped for any other purpose without appropriate modification.  This makes this device a possible  "starting point" for another project (e.g. there are already some relays and a metal box!) - one to provide proper RF protection for the SDR and make the RF sensing more useful when using modes that have variable power levels (e.g. CW, SSB) which can cause the current design to "chatter".

* * * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]


tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-5727159918784615345
Extensions
A short-term capacitor-based "UPS" for mini (NUC-type) PCs
12 volt19 voltinterruptionmini computerNUCPCrebootsupercapacitorUPS
Show full content

The problem

Figure 1:
A "Beelink" small form-factor PC.  This unit sports a Ryzen
processor and runs from an external 19 volt supply.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Very small computers (so-called "NUCs" - a term that we'll use generically throughout) of recent manufacture are energy efficient and are increasingly used in lieu of full-size desk top PCs.  Many of these use external power supplies - often referred to as "bricks" - of the sort also used to power and charge laptops.

Even if one has a UPS (Uninterruptable Power Supply) attached to their computer - or especially in the case of a "whole house UPS" (e.g. Tesla Power Wall or equivalent) there are instances during which the transition between power grid going down and the UPS picking up the load may not be fast enough to prevent the computer from rebooting or just crashing and hanging.

For this article, we are looking at the case when the power supply for a "NUC" (small form-factor power supply) is incapable of "riding" through the aforementioned UPS transition.  In this instance at least part of the problem has to do with that unlike the power supply in a desktop computer - which are physically bigger and have a comparatively large reservoir of energy storage in the form of big filter capacitors - the small power supplies used for these small computers have a comparatively small energy reserve - and unlike a laptop, there is no onboard battery to serve as a backup.

Returning to the "whole house UPS" and, to a lesser extent its much smaller "desktop" counterpart used to back up only critical gear, it may take more than 100 milliseconds for the power to resume after the grid is lost - depending on the nature of the outage:  Owning a Tesla Powerwall - and talking to others with this and similar (non-Tesla) systems - they all seem to share a common trait:  Sometimes they switch quickly enough that nothing reboots, but other times they take much longer to switch (sometimes more than 500 milliseconds) and many computers - even desktop PCs with more capacitive energy storage - fail to carry through the transition.

Details about the replacement power supply

The MeanWell power supply that works with this Beelink NUC  is P/N:  GST90A19-P1M  which may be found at Jameco Electronics and it is Jameco Part Number 2223486 (link) and from Digi-Key as Part Number 1866-2156-ND (link).  This unit is rated for 19 volts at 4.74 amps - much greater than the supply that is likely to have been supplied with the PC and it has the needed 5.5mm O.D./2.5mm I.D. coaxial power connector with center positive.  Other NUCs will have different power requirements and connector types and polarities so it is up to YOU to determine what might work for your computer.

As noted, it has good power factor correction (PF of 0.9 or better) and produces very little to no radio frequency interference - unlike some power supplies of "unknown" brands.  As a bonus, it so-happens that this supply works perfectly with my older Asus ROG laptop as well!

For this reason it might be reasonable to have a smaller (and, presumably a "fast") UPS to carry the computer through this transition although it seems a bit silly to have a UPS when one already has one for the entire house - but all it needs to do is to run for a few seconds, so even UPS batteries in poor condition will likely suffice.

In the case of a very small form-factor computer such as a NUC, we could contrive a means of providing power for just long enough for the UPS - whether desk-top or whole-house - to do its job.  It, too, needs only last long enough - perhaps a second or so.  If it's powered via a "brick" power supply this task is a bit easier and it is those devices with external power supplies that this article addresses.

Carrying through the interruption

In the specific case of the "NUC", these are often (but not always) powered via an external DC power supply.  In my case, I have a Beelink NUC using a Ryzen 5700 that is powered from a 19 volt supply.  In communicating with others who own this same mini PC it's clear that it's shipped with a wide variety of different power supplies from different manufacturers - some of them with ratings that seem a bit low for the expected power consumption of the computer - so I replaced it with a good-quality MeanWell unit (see sidebar) which not only has more robust ratings, but its input is power factor corrected - a very important consideration when powering it from a UPS! See comment #1 at the end of this article

In testing, neither the original or MeanWell power supply had enough reserve capacity to consistently carry it through a UPS transition - particularly if the computer was "busy" and consuming maximum power

The major reason why there is this concern is that this Beelink computer is located at the remote site of the Northern Utah WebSDR where power bumps and outages causing the load to switch to the UPS are very frequent - and occasionally, this causes the computer to "hang" (and not reboot!) requiring that the power outlet be remotely switched off - and back on.  As this is not a "public-facing" computer (it does WSPR monitoring) its outage may not be immediately noticed.  It's worth reiterating that the desktop-type computers usually have no issues with these transitions.

What to do?

Figure 2:
The Tecate SCAP PBLS-3.5/21.6 capacitor module.
This unit contains the necessary voltage equalization circuitry.
Click on the image for a larger version.
I did not want to put a separate mains-powered UPS on this computer and while I could have figured out a battery-based solution, this seemed overkill as I literally needed it to power the computer for less than one second - plus I didn't want to have batteries that would eventually "age out" and need to be replaced.  The obvious solution seemed to be the "supercapacitor" - devices with Farads of capacitance, capable of storing enough energy to power the computer for a very short period of time.

In perusing the DigiKey catalog I found at least two useful candidates:  One capacitor of 1.25 Farads with 540mΩ of internal resistance (Tecate P/N: SCAP,PBLS-1.25/21.6) and another of 3.5 Farads with 260mΩ of internal resistance (Tecate P/N: SCAP,PBLS-3.5/21.6), each rated for 21.6 volts - both suitable for use with a 19 volt supply.  These are actually capacitor modules, consisting of eight 2.7 volt capacitors of 10 and 20 Farads each, respectively, and containing simple circuitry to assure that the voltage across each of the internal capacitors was balanced.  It's worth noting that the voltage equalization circuitry itself will consume a small amount of current (perhaps as high as a few 10s of milliamps) - particularly as one approaches the maximum voltage rating and this must be considered in the design of the support circuitry.

It's important to note that these won't actually function as a UPS in the traditional sense:  These capacitors can store enough energy to power the computer for a short time - only for a few seconds at most - but this is more than enough to carry it through for the few hundred milliseconds of drop-out that might occur during a UPS transition. 

Using the supercapacitors

The problem with using a supercapacitor is that when they are discharged, they look like a dead short, meaning that you probably cannot simply tack them in parallel with a power supply:  To do so would stress the power supply - putting it into current limiting at best, possibly causing it to "trip out" and go offline, or in the worst case, damaging it - so provisions must be made to regulate the charging of the capacitor.  The diagram in Figure 3 shows the circuit surrounding the capacitor.

Figure 3:
Schematic of the supercapacitor NUC UPS.
A standard outboard power supply is used - typically the one supplied with the computer, but it could
be another unit - probably of better quality - as noted in the article.
Click on the image for a larger version.

How it works

For charging, we are using old and "newer old" tech here - R1 is a simple series resistor of 100 ohms with a power rating of 3-5 watts which will limit the current to around 200mA, tapering off gradually as the capacitor charges up.

In parallel with R1 is F2, a 100 milliamp self-resetting thermal fuse (e.g. "Polyfuse").  This device is really a thermistor and when "excess" current flows through it, it heats up and the resistance skyrockets, greatly reducing the current flow.  The way that it is used here means that when the power supply is first connected (and the capacitor is fully-discharged) there's a brief inrush of current until F2 "blows" (gets hot) at which point it takes only 15-20 milliamps to keep it in this state at which point R1 is handling most of the current.  As the capacitor charges and the voltage differential across R1 decreases, the current through the 100 ohm resistor will also drop - but F2 will also gradually cool down as the voltage across it decreases - but the current will also increase - but never more than approximately the 100 mA rating.

Figure 4:
Internals of the UPS.  The support circuit was constructed
on a small piece of prototype board (left) while the LEDs to
indicate the status are on the right.  The rear panel (far left)
has the power cable and coaxial power connector.
Click on the image for a larger version.
asfasdf

The use of F2, the 100mA fuse, results in much faster charging of the capacitor than with the 100 ohm resistor alone.  In testing with a 3.5 Farad capacitor, it took about an hour for the capacitor's terminal voltage to be within a hundred or so millivolts of the power supply voltage with just R1, the 100 ohm resistor - but it took about 9 minutes with the addition of F2.  As an added bonus, when the capacitor is nearly fully charged (within a volt) the thermal fuse would allow much more current than the 100 ohm resistor would be only about 10mA or so and the charging rate would slow to a crawl - plus the equalizing circuit within the capacitor module draws a few milliamps meaning that it will never get closer than 200-500 millivolts of the power supply voltage.

The reason for this is that with the addition of F2 - and the fact that at this low voltage drop it will have cooled off and have a resistance of between 3 and 10 ohms - the capacitor's resting voltage will be within a few 10s of millivolts of the power supply rather quickly.  This is important as even a few hundred millivolts of extra charge on the capacitor will measurably extend the "run" time.  Attaining this sort of "full charge" could be done with a solid state circuit using FETs and op amps,  but it would be fairly complex:  This approach - with a single, inexpensive component - is nice and simple.  The use of F2 also overcomes the small current consumption of the capacitor module's equalization circuitry:  A few milliamps of current from this circuitry would drop the full-charge voltage by as much as a few hundred millivolts without F2.

A maximum charge current of 200-300mA seems reasonable as that would not put a significant amount of burden on the power supply - which must be able to power the computer and charge the capacitor at the same time.  I also considered the use of a simple transistor-type current limiter which would maintain a constant current until the capacitor got to within a volt or so of the supply voltage, but decided that it probably wasn't worth the added complexity - and I would still have required something like F2 to bring the capacitor right up to the supply voltage.

The "Charge" LED works by detecting the voltage crop across R1:  If it exceeds approximately 0.6 volts, Q1, a PNP transistor, is turned on, pulling its collector high, turning on LED2.  When this LED goes out, the capacitor will be within 0.5-0.6 volts of full charge.  The "Ready" LED (LED2) is in series with D2, a 15 volt Zener diode and it will start illuminating when the voltage across the capacitor exceeds about 17 volts for an old-tech AlGaInP LED (with a 2.1 volt threshold) or about 18 volts for a more modern GaN LED.  In a "standby" state, the "Charge" LED will have extinguished and the "Ready" LED will be on indicating the unit's readiness.  Neither of these circuits are perfect, but they give a "good enough" indication of the state of the device and let the user know that things are working.  A little bit of extra circuitry could dispense with the Zener-LED circuit and simply turn on the "Ready" LED when the red "Charge" LED goes off - effectively indicating the same thing.

Figure 5:
The completed UPS with the two LED indicators on
on the front panel.
Click on the image for a larger version.

An "ideal" diode - in real life

Parallel with R1 is a diode (D1) that is reverse-biased when the capacitor's voltage is lower than the supply voltage, preventing current flow other than through the resistor.  While I originally considered using an "ordinary" diode - which would have a voltage drop of about 0.6 volts for a standard silicon or around 0.4 volts for a high-current Shottky type - I decided to do something different:  Use an "ideal diode".

A voltage drop of 0.3-0.6 volts from a typical diode would represent an immediate voltage drop from the capacitor - and since the voltage on the capacitor will drop as it's discharged, the "diode drop" would represent less time that the computer could be powered by it, alone.  A hypothetical "ideal" diode would have zero voltage drop in the forward direction and block current in the reverse - and fortunately, something pretty close to that actually exists these days!

As it turns out, such a thing actually exists - and it is pretty inexpensive.  This implementation of an "ideal" diode is really a module with several components:  The specific modules that I used (which I got from Amazon - five for US$10) use the Diodes Incorporated DZDH0401DW chip along with an AGM30P05A P-channel FET along with a 100k and 1 Megohm resistor.  These "diodes" are rated for a maximum stand-off voltage of 26 volts and a steady-state current of 10 amps, but could probably handle 15 or even 20 amps for brief periods.

The way that these work is that the DCDH0401DW has a comparator that is used to detect the minute voltage drop between the "input" of the "diode" (on the "+" side of the FET, actually) and the "output" (the "-" side):  If the voltage on the input is higher than the output, the P-channel FET is turned on, allowing it to conduct from the input to the output.  If the voltage on the input is NOT higher than the output, the FET is turned off, preventing current from flowing from the output to the input.  The use of a P-channel FET allows the switch to be placed in the positive lead which permits the negative side of the power sources - the power supply and the super capacitor - to be connected together.  Incidentally, the FET is wired such that even if it weren't "on" at the moment that it might need to conduct, it's intrinsic diode would conduct, anyway, albeit with a 0.6 volt drop, but since the DZDH0401DW chip responds within a few microseconds at most, the FET would be very quickly turned on.

Figure 6:
The back panel of the supercap UPS.
The original power supply plugs into the jack while the
short cable needs to be just long enough to get to the
back panel of the PC.
Click on the image for a larger version.

When the FET is on, its resistance is on the order of 5.5 milliOhms which means that if there's three amps flowing through it, less than 20 millivolts will be lost - about 1/30th of that of a standard silicon diode - and since there is so little voltage lost, there will be a similar fraction of heat being produced as well.

As you may have noticed in the schematic diagram of Figure 3, there are actually three connections to this "diode":  The anode, the cathode and ground - the ground being required because not only does the comparator/control chip need power, but the gate of the P-channel FET needs to be pulled negative with respect to its source.  The "overhead" current of the FET and comparator/control chip is only on the order of 175 microamps according to the data sheets so it's power consumption is practically negligible in our application.

The other components in the circuit include D2 - a 15 volt Zener diode along with LED1 and R2 for current limiting:  This LED will illuminate if the applied voltage exceeds about 17 volts and functions as a "Power" indicator.  Transistor Q1, a PNP, is connected across R1 via current-limiting resistor R4 and when the voltage drop across R1 exceeds about 0.6 volts, its collector will be pulled toward V+, causing LED2 to illuminate, indicating that the capacitor is charging.  When this LED goes out, this indicates that the capacitor is - at the very least - "mostly" charged.

The final component is F1 - a self-resetting thermal fuse (e.g. "polyfuse") which could have a rating of anything between 5 and 9 amps.  As the capacitor can deliver a large amount of current when shorted, this is provided as protection.  A "normal" fuse of 6-10 amps would suffice here, but I happened to have the polyfuse on hand.

Variations on a theme:  Backing up a 12 volt PC.

As noted, this unit was built using the 3.5 Farad capacitor - but it should be capable of doing its job with the lower-cost (and physically smaller) 1.25 Farad unit.

The described unit is also designed to be used with a NUC/PC that operates at 19 volts - a common voltage used by laptop computers.  Many of these small computers use 12 volts - and while one could possibly tack a small battery across the power supply, the use of a capacitor-based backup would mean that there would be no battery that would have to be checked/replaced on a routine basis.

The circuit depicted in Figure 3 - designed for 19 volts - would have to be modified slightly, as follows:

  • D2, a 15 volt Zener, would be changed to a 9 volt device for a 12 volt bus.  This would better-represent the charge state of the capacitor for a 12 volt supply, causing it to illuminate once it had charged to better than about 11 volts.  The "Ready" LED would illuminate at voltages above that of the 9 volt Zener plus the LED's forward voltage.
  • R1, a 100 ohm resistor for the 19 volt device would be changed to somewhere between 47 and 62 ohms but still a 5 watt device.
  • The capacitor described is rated for 21.5 volts - which is probably overkill for a 12 volt power supply.  A 16 volt capacitor would be a better choice.  Additionally, a lower-voltage capacitor module will have commensurately lower internal resistance which improves efficiency - and for a 12 volt power supply where voltage droop due to Ohmic losses is arguably more important, it would be best to keep it below 400mΩ.   Possible capacitors for 12 volt use include:
  • It's worth mentioning that while a "12 volt" computer may operate from a supply voltage that is nominally 12 volts, it's worth checking to make sure that it's within the safe operating range of the capacitors that you choose.  For example, the Tecate capacitors listed above (for the "12 volt" system) can operate safely only up to 13.5 volts, ruling out the use of a power supply that operates in that range - but the Cornell-Dublier capacitor with its 18 volt rating would work nicely over a slightly wider range.

Conclusion

Figure 7:
The supercap UPS, on the shelf next to the PC -
now in service at the Northern Utah WebSDR!
Click on the image for a larger version.

As can be seen from the photos, the capacitor and support circuitry was placed into a plastic enclosure:  The two LEDs were placed on the front panel and labeled while the back panel has a female coaxial power connector that matches that of the computer and power supply along with a short cord terminated with the same type of male power connector used by the PC - which happens to be the common "5.5mm x 2.5mm" type with the outside shell being negative.

To install the UPS, the PC was powered down and the device inserted into the power lead - the power supply plugging into the UPS and the short cable plugging into the PC.  After a bit less than 10 minutes, the "Ready" LED illuminated - followed soon after by the "Charge" light extinguishing - but since the charger is current-limited, the PC could be powered up immediately after installation - not needing to wait for it to fully charge.  Of course, any testing of the device to determine its ability to "ride through" an interruption should wait until the capacitor has fully-charged.

As can seen in Figure 7, the UPS was placed on the shelf next to the PC that it supports.  With the PC under a "moderate" load (about half of the maximum power consumption) the power supply was unplugged briefly to see if it would hold.  Interruptions of up to 1.5 seconds were tried with no disruptions of the PC with the capacitor being fully "recharged" to just a few 10's of millivolts of the maximum voltage in under two minutes due to the "shallow" discharge.  We chose not to try to see how long it really would hold the PC up, but with the UPS installed, we cycled the UPS several times and the PC happily rode through it - something that it would not do without.

In other words, success!

 * * * * * * *

Comment #1:

In this article, I mention that having a power factor corrected power supply is particularly important when running from a UPS.  If your UPS is running power supplies without power factor correction, it may well be that it will trip out due to overload at around half of its wattage rating:  The real clue is to closely look at your UPS's specifications and note that it has a "volt-amp" rating (which is more of a true indication of its capability) that is much lower than its "wattage".  What's worse is the "spiky" nature of the input current of a non power-factor corrected power supply which may put even more stress on a UPS - or even the circuit breaker/wiring - than the numbers would indicate. 

For example, using a "Kill-A-Watt" - a relatively inexpensive power analysis device - we measured the power factor of the originally-supplied power supply and found it to be 0.45.  What this means is that if computer were pulling 65 watts and the power supply were 85% efficient - which implies that it's needing about ( 65 / 0.85 = ) 76 "watts" - it would actually need to pull (76 / 0.45 = ) 170 volt-amps from the mains.  As the mains supply - which may be a UPS - must actually supply volt-amps, it must be capable of supplying that "170" value - which is more than 2.6 times the power that the computer is actually consuming.  The Mean Well power supply that we chose has a measured power factor of 0.94, so at an efficiency of 85%, it would be pulling only 80 volt-amps from the UPS - less than half of the load!

For more information about this, see the Wikipedia article about Power Factor (link) - and pay special attention to the section about "Non Linear Loads" which are what a typical, non power-factor corrected switching supply presents to the mains.  In these cases, the peak amperage can be several times higher than the average - and all power circuits must be able to supply these high peaks regardless of the average power, which is why a UPS, generator or even mains supply circuit must to be de-rated to accommodate devices with a poor power factor.

In other words:  If you don't use power-factor corrected power supplies on your UPS or generator, you won't be able to safely and reliably supply anywhere near its "wattage" rating - but if you do use only devices with good power factor, you will be able get much closer to its ratings without overloading it.

* * * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]

 


tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-7544636587876183270
Extensions
Charging LiFePO4 batteries from a vehicular electrical system - the problems and a solution.
alternatorauto cut-offcharge controlcharging LiFePO4 from vehiclehysteresisLiFePO4load dumpRenogyRF InterferenceRFIRFI filteringRNG-DCC1212TL431voltage threshold
Show full content

Figure 1:
The Renogy RNG-DCC1212-20 - an isolated
and current-limited battery charger, intended
for use with vehicle electrical systems.
Click on the image for a larger version.

There are times - usually on a camping or road trip - where I would like to charge my LiFePO4 batteries en-route, from the vehicle.  The "need" is largely the result of having one of those coolers with a built in compressor:  It runs about 10-30% of the time at normal room temperature and pulls up to about 3.5 amps when doing so - but it's also advantageous to be able to keep a battery topped off in the event that you didn't start the trip with a fully-charged battery in the first place.

To do this, one may be tempted to connect the battery directly to the vehicle's electrical system, as might have done in days past with a lead-acid battery.

DO NOT do this with any lithium battery - at least not directly.

In short, you cannot and should not parallel a LiFePO4 battery with an existing charging system intended for lead-acid batteries.  The biggest issue with doing so is that unlike a lead-acid battery, a LiFePO4 battery will attempt to charge with all available current, likely resulting in blown fuses, heated wires and burnt-out alternators. A secondary issue has to do with the BMS (Battery Management System) of the LiFePO4 simply disconnecting abruptly when the battery is fully-charge, potentially causing voltage spikes capable of damaging vehicle electronics and possibly, the BMS itself.

See the section "Why you need to treat LiFePO4 batteries differently" in the "tl;dr" section near the end of this article (link) for more details as to the problems that can occur.

A solution

The solution to the issues noted above lie largely in limiting the charging current.  One way to do this would be resistively - perhaps with the use of intentionally small-gauge wire and/or resistor or incandescent automobile headlamp in series.  This will, by its nature, generate heat as it's inefficient - and it can generate quite a bit of heat (potential fire risk here!) - but this is the way one might have accomplished this in years past.

This sort of limiting may occur unintentionally if one charges via, say, a cigarette lighter/accessory plug connected with light-gauge wire, but this is sort of a "kludge".  One issue with this is that it can cause frequent blown fuses as the current isn't regulated and if the user attempts to circumvent this by using a higher-current fuse, damage to the electrical system (or even fire) can result.  If the connection is made to a power source that is switched on/off with the ignition, a connected battery can "back feed" the electrical system which can result in the battery being discharged when the vehicle is off or, worst case, damage to both the vehicle and battery.

These days one would use a current-limited and regulated voltage DC-to-DC converter with its power source connected as close to the vehicle battery as possible.

One of the many devices out there that will fit the bill is the Renogy RNG-DCC1212-20 (pictured above), available at the time of the original posting of this article for around US$100:  Using DIP switches, the type of battery (lead-acid, Lithium-Ion or LiFePO4 - I configured for the latter) may be selected along with the charging profile/voltage - and the device will limit the maximum charge current to just 20 amps, selectable to 10 amps with the addition of a jumper wire to the "LC" terminal.  What this means is that no matter the charge state of the LiFePO4 battery, the current being pulled from the vehicle's electrical system will be limited - very useful if one expects to avoid blowing fuses, destroying alternators, or burning up wiring.  (Note:  I have no vested interest in Renogy, they just happen to make one of the readily-available devices that is appropriate for this task.)

Additionally, it's rated to operate from between 8 and 16 volts while maintaining a constant output voltage (once the output current has dropped below limiting) that is independent of the voltage from the vehicle's electrical system. The Renogy is also an isolated DC-DC converter in that there is no electrical connection between the input and output terminals:  By being isolated, circulating currents (through the chassis or other "sneak paths") can be completely avoided which may be helpful for some sensitive equipment and/or to minimize/eliminate alternator "whine".

This particular unit is rated for up to 20 amps output current.  Rated at about 90% efficiency, it will take more power on its input connections than it will output, producing a bit of heat (which is why it has internal fans).  Also note that the current pulled by the unit will vary depending on the voltage input despite the fact that the output voltage and current - and overall power consumption - may remain constant.

For example, let's say that the unit is outputting 20 amps at 14.5 volts, representing a LiFePO4 battery that is nearly fully-charged representing an output power of 290 watts:  Assuming 90% efficiency, the unit will actually consume 322 watts with the difference (32 watts) as heat.   At an input voltage of 12.0 volts,  322 watts is 26.8 amps, but at 14.0 volts, 322 watts is just 23.0 amps.  The fact that it can pull more current from the source supply than it is outputting - particularly when the input voltage goes down - must be taken into account when sizing the wire and selecting the fuse rating.

You can't just connect it and walk away!

The Renogy has a "D+" terminal that, when connected to a voltage source, will activate it.  The intent is that this wire is connected to some part of the vehicle's electrical system that is likely to be on when the engine is running to charge the battery - such as the "accessory" circuit.  The reason for this is that the Renogy itself has no useful low-voltage disconnect:  If you connected it to the vehicle's electrical system with the engine off, it will happily attempt to charge the battery to which it's connected - and if the battery being charged is a large, discharged LiFePO4 battery, it will likely run the vehicle's battery down completely in doing so.

For a permanent installation in a truck, van or RV, finding a wire that is only active when the engine is running (or, perhaps, the ignition is just "on") makes sense - but in my case I have no need for a permanent installation of the unit - plus, I don't have room to mount the unit and am unwilling to connect/disconnect an "ignition on" wire from the electrical system every time I install/remove it.

One way around this would be to monitor the battery voltage:  If it's above about 13.2-13.5 volts, one can be assured that the engine is running, but it will drop fairly quickly when the engine is off as the lead-acid starting battery's voltage drops.  Unfortunately, the Renogy's only means of low-voltage cut-off is set to 8 volts (a very "dead" 12 volt battery!) which requires that I come up with another way of enabling/disabling the device. 

Another issue is that whenever  the unit is on (the D+ line is active) but unloaded (e.g. no battery connected to the output) it consumes about 250 mA at 14 volts - increasing to over 500mA at 10 volts - and more than this if its cooling fans are running:  This sort of load may run a battery dead in a few days at best, so there had to be a way of completely disabling it and eliminating current draw.

A voltage-controlled switch

In poking around, I noted that without the "D+" line connected to a voltage source, the Renogy drew no detectable current meaning that I could leave the high-current input leads connected full-time:  By switching just the D+ lead I could enable/disable the device as needed without the need of a heavy-duty relay.  (Judging by the "clunk" that one hears when applying power to the D+ line, the Renogy probably has such a relay built into it.)

As the D+ line itself drew very little current (only about 3 milliamps) and anything above about 4 volts seemed to reliably trigger it, it would take almost nothing to drive it so the circuit could be very simple as the diagram below shows:

Figure 2:
Schematic diagram of the low-voltage cut-off circuit with hysteresis.
This circuit provides an "on/off" control of the converter to the "D+" line based on the
voltage at the "V+" and "V-" connections.
Click on the image for a slightly larger version.

How it works:

The "V+" and "V-" lines are connected across the unit's input terminals to monitor the voltage applied to it.  Resistor R1 scales the input voltage to a lower value to apply to the top of R2, a 10-turn trimmer potentiometer, that is used to divide the voltage down to the 2.5 volt threshold of U1, a TL431 "programmable Zener" via its "reference" terminal.  Capacitor C1 connected across the top of R2 provides a degree of filtering to reduce the probability of the circuit from responding to noise on the electrical system.

Figure 3:
The prototype, built on a scrap of proto board.  This uses
uses through-hole components, but could have been built to be
much smaller using surface-mount devices.  The capacitor has
been lifted up to allow a better view of the components.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Resistor R3 limits the current into U1 and R4 limits the current into Q1 while R5 keeps the emitter-base voltage of Q1 high when U1 isn't conducting, turning it off, resulting in no voltage on the "Out" lead and in this state, with the Out lead connected to the Renogy's "D+" connection, the unit would be powered down and draw no current.  Resistor R6 offers protection to the circuit in case the "Out" terminal is momentarily shorted to ground.

If the voltage on the reference terminal on U1 exceeds 2.5 volts, it turns on, pulling the bottom of resistor R3 toward ground, turning on Q1 and causing the "Out" lead to go high, enabling the Renogy via the "D+" line. When this voltage goes high, resistor R7 feeds back a slight amount of current into the junction of R1/R2, very slightly increasing its voltage, lowering the circuit's turn-off voltage slightly but leaving the turn-on voltage unchanged:  The value of 270k shown causes this voltage difference between "on" and "off"  to be about 0.9 volts while a value of 680k results in a threshold difference of about 0.3 volts.

This threshold difference between turn-off and turn-on (a.k.a. hysteresis) is very important to the stable operation of this circuit.  If the voltage applied to the circuit were just above the threshold (by a fraction of a volt) the "Out" lead would turn on and activate the Renogy.  When this happened, the Renogy would start drawing current, causing the voltage to drop slightly through wire losses and load on the electrical system - but if this voltage dropped below the threshold, the "Out" lead would turn off again and the current consumption would stop, causing the voltage to rise again and turn it back on, causing an endless "on-off" cycle.  

By adding such hysteresis - and making sure that the voltage drop under load was comfortably less than the hysteresis amount - the unit will reliably turn on at the high voltage threshold and will not turn off until/unless the voltage drops below the low voltage threshold.  It is also imperative that this unit be connected as close to the battery (with appropriate fusing!) with as short and heavy leads as practical:  Too-light wiring will cause the voltage to drop under load, possibly causing it to trip out due to low voltage - only to be re-enabled immediately (e.g. the "on/off" cycling mentioned above.)  The need to minimize voltage drop is one reason why the power source should be connected as near the battery/alternator as practical.

Figure 4:
The completed unit in heat-shrink tube.  There are no
exposed electrical connections - just the adjustment at the end.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Enabling the Renogy by voltage detection alone isn't quite as reliable as having a connection to the ignition circuit of the vehicle, but it will work "well enough" and prevent the vehicle's battery from being flattened by the unit staying on all of the time, when the engine is off.

Figure 3, above shows the prototype unit, built on a small piece of prototype board.  R2, the 10 turn potentiometer is the blue device on the far right with U1 being the black object to the left of it with Q1 being on the far left.  In this photo, capacitor C1 is bent up, out of the way to allow a view of the components underneath where it will be laid over.

Figure 4 shows the same circuit covered with some yellow heat-shrink tubing to hold the components together and to protect it from external short circuits.  The end of the adjustment resistor, R2, protrudes from the end of the tubing so that it is accessible.

Installing within the unit

Figure 5:
The circuit within the converter.  The DC output
terminals (to the battery being charged) are in
the lower part of the image.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Not wanting to have any more of a maze of wires outside the device than necessary I installed the circuit inside the Renogy unit itself as seen in Figure 5.  Using some "Shoe Goo", a strong rubber adhesive (do not use "hot melt" glue!) the encapsulated board of Figure 4 was mounted in the upper-right corner of the "output" side of the unit, set back by about 3/8" of an inch (10mm).  The location is such that the voltage threshold adjustment is accessible via one of the ventilation holes:  Setting it back prevents it from obstructing air flow and makes the precise alignment between the screw of the potentiometer and the hole less critical.

The "V+" and "V-" wires from the circuit are soldered directly to the bottom of the board on the DC input terminals and the "out" terminal of the circuit (the blue wire in Figure 5) is routed through another hole near the green "D+" and "LC" terminals.

Figure 6 shows how these wires are routed.  In addition to the connection to the "D+" terminal from the circuit, another wire and a switch was added that optionally connects the "LC" terminal to the "D+" to set the Renogy to the "Low Current" mode by pulling it high when the switch is closed - in this case, limiting the maximum charge current to 10 amps, which may be useful if you are connecting the unit to a current-limited power source (e.g. "cigarette lighter" plug) that cannot supply the 25-ish amps current input that the unit may draw when charging at 20 amps output.

Figure 6:
Looking on the "output" side of the Renogy, this shows how
the "out" wire from the circuit routes out of one of the air
to the "D+" terminal.  Also shown is a switch that optionally
connects the "D+" to "LC" terminal for just 10 amp max.
Click on the image for a larger version.

This "modification" - since it does not involve drilling any holes - is "reversible" if desired as the circuit and wiring could be easily removed.

In-vehicle testing and use

High/low voltage turn-on/turn-off

Prior to testing the modified unit in my vehicle I set the "cut-in" voltage to about 13.65 volts which resulted in a disconnect voltage of around 12.7 volts - a voltage below which a 12 volt lead-acid battery will quickly drop when charging is stopped.  As expected, the unit did not get turned on until a few seconds after the engine was started, the voltage rising due to charging by the alternator:  If the battery had been heavily discharged and a lot of accessories were running (headlights, blower, wipers) it may take longer than this for the voltage to rise above the threshold.

The voltage dropped below the 12.5-12.7 volt shut-off threshold within a few 10s of seconds of turning off the engine with the entire unit drawing only about 0.5mA (all of that being from the added circuit) in that state - far lower than the vehicle's own quiescent current, and probably lower than the vehicle battery's self-discharge rate.  So far, I have found no tendency for the unit to cycle on and off while the engine is running - even if the headlights, heater blower and windshield wipers are on.  (As noted in a sidebar below, cycling did start to occur, but this was traced to the adjustment potentiometer setting having drifted upwards by about 0.4 volts, likely due to vibration.)

Of course, the voltage thresholds mentioned above are only valid for a healthy (and properly functioning) conventional charging with lead-acid batteries as part of the chassis electrical system:  If your vehicle somehow has a different type of electrical system than the conventional "alternator + lead acid" configuration it'll be up to you to determine how and even if a solely voltage-referenced on/off system like this can be done.

RF Noise generation

Being an amateur radio operator, I was concerned that this unit might produce an excess of radio frequency interference as it contains a high-power oscillator in its power converter.  While visual inspection of the Renogy (with its end covers removed) showed that it does have some filtering of its own in the form of series inductors and capacitors across the input/out leads and to the metal case (to suppress common-mode and differential RF energy) it would be unusual for even a well-designed commercial device to go to extremes in reducing radio frequency energy to the point of extinction. 

Using a "Tiny SA" Spectrum analyzer I connected directly to the input and output leads - using a 0.002uF capacitor to block DC and protect the analyzer - I measured the amount of RF energy being differentially emitted from the unit.

This measurement is important in that if the instantaneous RF voltage on the output leads is different than on the input leads, the in/out cables will necessarily conduct RF energy to the outside world, into whatever is connected at both ends, including the wiring itself, which may radiate like a dipole antenna and/or conduct radio-frequency current through the unit and into other wiring and/or equipment.  A plot from the spectrum analyzer showing the produced RF energy up to 10 MHz is shown below:

Figure 7:
The spectrum of RF energy as measured directly between the voltage in and out terminals across the range of 0-10 MHz with no filtering.  If a receiver's input terminals were connected directly to the DC terminals, the signal level at 40 meters (7 MHz) would be bit more than "10 over S-9.

Without any added filtering, I tested it in my vehicle - powering the 100 watt HF transceiver directly from the Renogy (with no battery) - something that I probably would not ever do in normal use:  If the converter does have the tendency to produce RF interference, connecting the radio directly to it and putting conducted RF energy on its power leads - and its chassis - would represent a "worst-case" scenario.  On 40 meters (7 MHz) and 12 meters (24 MHz) I could just hear the switching frequency's harmonics near the noise floor which indicated that it was pretty quiet - but not completely so.

Since the spectral switching components were just audible I decided to add a modicum of filtering on both the DC input and output leads - four bifilar turns of #12 AWG (e.g. the input/output power cables) each on their respective T140-43 ferrite cores as seen in Figure 9.  In most situations I would prefer to include bypass capacitors in the mix (see figure 4 in the article "Reducing QRM (interference) from a Renogy 200 watt (or any other!) portable solar panel system" - link) to (significantly!) improve performance, but I decided that even a modest reduction in conducted emissions would likely reduce them to the point of inaudibility.

A spectrum analyzer plot of the noise generated by the unit with the added filtering using just the bifilar-wound T140-43 cores is below:

Figure 8:
The spectrum of RF energy as measured between the in/out terminals with the bifilar inductors between the measurement point and the converter - also over the range of 0-10 MHz.  If a receiver's input terminals were connected directly to the DC terminals the signal level at 40 meters (7 MHz) would be a bit less than "S-9" - for a reduction of about 15dB, or nearly  3 "S" units.

As can be seen Figure 8, the bifilar chokes alone reduced conducted RF by a significant amount above a few MHz, but from as noted in the linked article mentioned above, the addition of the capacitors would have improved the attenuation of the conducted RF energy by another 20 dB or so, but including capacitors is a bit awkward as it involves baring wires and adding additional jumpers.  One issue related to lacking capacitors is the response peak around 2 MHz - likely due to a broad resonance of the bifilar inductors themselves - but this effect diminishes quickly as frequency increases on amateur bands likely to be used in a vehicle.  While not shown in any of the included plots, between 10 and 30 MHz the attenuation afforded by the bifilar chokes, alone, remains at 20dB or better for much of that range.

Note:  At HF, a simple "snap on" choke with a single wire running through its center will not offer enough impedance to provide good attenuation - particularly below 20 MHz.  As the choking inductance is proportional to the square of the number of turns through the ferrite device (e.g. 16-fold with four turns) it is only by being able to put multiple turns through it that we can effectively attenuate frequencies in the HF spectrum.

Figure 9:
The Renogy charger with 5-turn bifilar-wound 12 AWG
chokes wound on the DC input and output leads.  For best
results, always place the inductors as close to the noise-
generating device as practical.  Not visible is a fuse on the
input lead to provide protection to the device and wiring.
Click on the image for a larger version.

If interference from this device were to persist after adding the bifilar inductors, I will go through the trouble of adding the aforementioned capacitors.

Can it be scaled up?

The Renogy RNG-DCC1212-20 is "only" a 20 amp converter/charger, but higher current devices are made by Renogy and others.  While I don't own a higher-current Renogy device, those units seem to operate in exactly the same way:  The "D+" terminal may be used to power it on/off and the "LC" terminal, when pulled high, sets the output current to half of the unit's rating.

If RF interference is considered to be an issue, the higher-current units would require proportionally larger wires and likely larger ferrite cores (say, FT240-43) to accommodate a reasonable number of turns of that larger wire.

I cannot speak to how other brands or dissimilar models from Renogy might be powered down via their equivalent of the "D+" terminal to minimize quiescent current consumption:  That must be left as an exercise by the reader.

Real-world useage

Shortly after originally posting this article I went on a rather long road trip.  I had along with me three 100 aH LiFePO4 batteries and I was using them to power not only my refrigerator/cooler, but also my 100 watt HF transceiver.

The reason for powering the transceiver from the batteries was due to not wanting to pull more than about 30 amps from the connection to the battery, which itself is fused for 40 amps:  At full charge current, the Renogy could pull about 26 amps from the vehicle to deliver 20 amps to the battery, but the addition of the transceiver would have added another 20 amps, peak to this, the the desire to "average" out the current.  To monitor, I put a voltage and current meter on the "vehicle" side of the Renogy.

For the most part, things work perfectly:  I heard no QRM (interference) from the Renogy across the HF spectrum and the 20 amp charge current was more than enough to keep up with the loads, recharging the batteries within an hour or so even after running the refrigerator for a couple of days, in the car.

The one issue that I had was that at night, with the headlights and with the heater running was that when the vehicle's engine cooling fan would kick on, the electrical system voltage would drop just enough that my circuit for the Renogy would drop off - then the voltage would increase and would kick back on, repeatedly cycling.  At the time I simply flipped the switch (see Figure 6) to the "10 amp" position to reduce current and the related I*R drop:  This lower current was still more than enough to maintain the batteries - even with the refrigerator and the HF transceiver running/being used.  This issue was later found to be due to the voltage threshold having drifted upwards by about 0.4 volts - likely due to mechanical vibration of the potentiometer.

Conclusion

This unit - and the modification - have worked as expected:  The unit gets turned on and off with the running of the engine automatically with no connection required other than that of power.  When traveling, 20 amps is enough to provide a reasonably fast charging rate to a modest bank (say, 200aH) of LiFePO4 batteries while even the "Low Current" 10 amp limit is more than enough to keep the batteries topped off with a moderate load such as a refrigerator-type cooler or a 100 watt HF amateur transceiver occasionally used for transmitting.

With the added filtering using the ferrite cores on which multiple turns are wound, no interference from the Renogy is audible on the HF transceiver in the vehicle.

 * * * * *

The TL;DR part

Why you need to treat LiFePO4 batteries differently

In the "old days" of lead-acid batteries, you could probably get away with putting it in parallel with the vehicle's electrical system - possibly with the use of an "isolator" (e.g. diode, FET pack, a relay or contactor that connected it in parallel with the starting battery when the engine is running) to prevent the drain on the auxiliary battery from depleting the vehicle's starting battery when the engine was off - but this CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be done with LiFePO4 batteries.

A LiFePO4 battery will attempt to pull "infinity" current when charging

The reason for this has to do with a fundamental difference between the two chemistries.  A healthy lead-acid battery is somewhat self-limiting in the amount of charging current it will take - at least when it's nearly fully-charged:  The charge current will gradually taper off as it asymptotically approaches full-charge.  Additionally, on a typical lead-acid battery the internal resistance of the battery and evolution of gasses at the plates often leads to intrinsic current limiting.

A healthy LiFePO4 battery is closer to that of an "ideal" battery in that unlike a lead-acid battery, where the current will gradually taper off as it approaches "full-charge" voltage (which isn't well defined in that chemistry), a LiFePO4 battery will attempt to consume as much current as it can until it is fully charged.  Practically-speaking, the current is actually limited by internal resistance of the battery - which can be in the milli-Ohm range - and the resistance of the wiring between the voltage source (the alternator) and the battery - and since heavy-gauge wire is typically used, this current can be very high.

In the case of a large (100aH or bigger) LiFePO4 battery, it's likely capable of consuming as much current as the alternator will put out - and this could easily exceed its actual ratings.  Short-term overcurrent conditions on an alternator - such as those that might occur immediately after starting the engine, particularly if accessories (lights, wipers, heater) is on - are tolerated, but they cannot withstand a continuous overload - such as that which might occur with a discharged LiFePO4 battery - without overheating - particularly in hot weather and/or if the vehicle is moving down the road quickly and providing air movement.

Another potential issue with a LiFePO4 battery has to do with its BMS (Battery Management System).  If the charge current exceeds the rating of the BMS, it will disconnect to prevent overcurrent that could damage the cells by charging them too vigorously.  At best, this would cause the BMS to disconnect/reconnect the battery (called "load dump", which is a problem as noted below) and at worst it could cause overheating and damage to the BMS - not to mention the alternator and other vehicle systems as well.

The dangers of alternator "load dump"

Another issue with LiFePO4 batteries that does not exist with Lead Acid is that they can abruptly "dump" their load (e.g. disconnect).  While a lead-acid battery's charge current will gradually taper off, if a LiFePO4 battery attains full charge, its BMS (Battery Management System) will abruptly disconnect the battery once any of its individual cells get to full voltage - something that can happen if the cells are all fully-charged and the current is minimal (the preferred situation) or if high current is still flowing, perhaps due to too-high charging voltage - a much worse case.  The result of an abrupt drop of a large current flow is that the voltage from the alternator will briefly skyrocket, its voltage regulator unable to compensate quickly enough.

While this can happen in a vehicle using a lead-acid battery when a load is suddenly removed (e.g. fan cycling, headlights being turned off) a healthy lead-acid battery is quite good at suppressing such voltage spikes and protecting the attached electronics as it functions much like a large capacitor - but voltage transients high enough in voltage to cause damage can still occur, perhaps cumulatively, particularly if the lead acid battery's condition is poor:  If there is no lead acid battery at all to buffer such transients (e.g. only a LiFePO4 battery) such a voltage spike can damage other devices connected to that power source as described in the example below.

(Note:  As the BMS "disconnect" voltage of a four cell LiFePO4 battery is typically around 14.6 volts, a "load dump" may not regularly occur in many automotive applications as the voltage may never get that high - at least under typical conditions.)

Lead Acid and LiFePO4 batteries don't use the same voltages

A third issue is that the full-charge voltage of a typical "12 volt" LiFePO4 battery is 14.6 volts, precisely, whereas a lead-acid battery is quite forgiving, allowing anything between 13.5 and "14.something" volts as a full charge.  The implication of this is that a vehicle's electrical system is not precise enough to either avoid under-charging (e.g. too low voltage, preventing full charge) or over-charging (e.g. causing the BMS to connect/disconnect/reconnect).

Maintaining a precise voltage near the maximum voltage of a "12 volt" LiFePO4 battery (14.4-14.6 volts) for extended periods (a few hours) - at least occasionally - is also necessary for the BMS (Battery Management System) equalize the individual cells within the battery.  Failure to do this every so often will allow individual cells to drift apart in their charge states as inevitably, one or more cells will discharge more quickly - and if never fully recharged, those cells will seem "weaker" and the battery will appear to lose capacity.

"Equalization" as done by the BMS of a LiFePO4 battery is typically done by "leaking" current across fully-charged cells to top off those that are not - but this will only happen effectively at/near the battery's maximum voltage.  Depending on the degree of this "inequality", it may take hours of holding the battery at this high voltage to fully equalize the battery's cells.

Note that the equalization mechanism for LiFePO4 cells is NOT compatible with that which might be done for Lead-Acid - see the battery's manual or other references for the technical details.

Real-world case

I've seen the above issues play out on a friend's RV:  The original "chassis" battery to run the engine and charge the engine starting battery was augmented by a second and completely separate "coach" alternator which was dedicated to charging the LiFePO4 battery bank and running the devices in the living quarters (lights, TV, pumps, microwave oven, inverter, etc.)  In this case, the secondary alternator was adjusted to produce higher voltage than would be necessary for lead-acid batteries to allow full charging of the LiFePO4 system.

Built by Thor onto a Mercedes chassis,  several alternators were destroyed (one of them lasting only minutes!) by overheating due to the the lack of current-limiting in the battery-charging regimen:  One of them lasted longer than the rest only due to several of the rectifier diodes going open-circuit almost immediately, crippling the ability of the alternator to produce output, limiting current - but putting very high ripple voltage/current onto the coach battery's electrical system.  Additionally, equipment connected to that circuit (namely a $1200 amateur radio transceiver) was destroyed by the high-voltage spike when a "load dump" occurred at the instant that the LiFePO4 battery disconnected  upon full charge do to the intrinsic inability of the alternator's voltage regulator to act quickly enough.  

It is fortunate that this vehicle had two separate alternators so the integrity of the "chassis" electrical system responsible for powering the vehicle itself was spared any problems - and no damage to its components (engine and transmission computers, etc.) was possible.  Without a functioning "coach" alternator to recharge the LiFePO4 battery he was still able to make his trip, but had to stop every couple of days and camp somewhere where he could plug into a mains outlet and use the onboard charger to top it off.

Ultimately this friend ended up taking his rig to a company that specialized in RV power systems and the system was upgraded and reconfigured - at significant expense - to avoid the issues noted above.  A quick perusal of online RV forums will reveal many similar stories - some being a result of the manufacturers apparently being unfamiliar with the requirements of LiFePO4 batteries, and others from individual owners' botched retrofits.

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-1726574513128483930
Extensions
Frequency response of the RX-888 SDR at the high and low ends (Above 30 MHz, below 1.5 MHz)
aliasingFM broadcastfrequency responsehigh endlflongwavelow endlow-passNyquistroll-offRX-888VHFvlf
Show full content

Figure 1:
The RX-888 Mk2.

For information about improving reception below 1.5 MHz, scroll down to the text surrounding Figure 2.

The RX-888 Mk 2 (hereafter referred to as the  RX-888 or '888) is a versatile device, essentially providing a means by which "all of HF" (0-30 MHz - or even 0-60 MHz) may be sampled and presented to a computer for processing via a multi-gigabit USB3 interface.  As it has no onboard signal processing, this device is practically "future proof" in that as all computations are performed on the host computer and there are no frequency or bandwidth limitations regarding the sort of signals - or how many - may be processed, presuming adequate processing capacity.

Comment:

I've seen at least three different "sub-versions" of the RX-888 Mk2 - each one looking slightly different (different circuit board color and other minor differences) - since this device was released.  It's also very likely that components also vary a bit with different manufacturers so the actual frequency response of units of different "builds" may also change.  Unfortunately, I only "have what I have" and haven't been able to compare possible variations in frequency response with these different "builds" - if any.

The highs and the lows

Like any receiver, it has limits of its frequency response - both at the upper end where the high-pass filter dominates and at the bottom end where the component selection as well as the design itself will limit low-frequency response.

Let's look at the low end first.

The lows

The low end limit to the frequency response (somewhere below 1 MHz) of the '888 has not previously been well defined.  This low frequency response is set by component limitations within the HF signal path, including:

  • Coupling capacitors.  DC blocking capacitors in series with the signal path will act as high-pass filters, rolling off the low frequencies.
  • The Bias-Tee inductor.  The RX-888 has the ability to supply power via the antenna port to an amplifier.  This inductor has a finite inductance and it, too, will force a high-pass response as well.  This inductor's value was measured as being 10uH (nominal) which presents a reactance of 50 ohms at about 800 kHz.  This is the major contributor to low-frequency roll-off as discussed below.
  • The coupling transformer.  The RX-888 has a transformer that couples the input of the variable gain amplifier (VGA) from the attenuator.  As with any transformer, this, too, has defined low-frequency response.  This transformer was measured and found to have an inductance of 125uH of its primary (a reactance of 50 ohms at 64 kHz) with the secondary (the side facing the VGA) being about 760 uH.

This low-frequency roll-of is not uncommon in broadband receivers:  Most amateur transceivers suffer severe performance degradation at LF and VLF frequencies for the simple reason that the designers presume (correctly!) that very few of the users of that gear would ever be interested in that range - and making this assumption simplifies the design somewhat and reduces cost. 

Using a signal generator with a constant output, the response of the RX-888 (Mk2) was measured, using the signal strength at 1500 kHz as a reference, with and without the Bias-Tee inductor removed:

Frequency (kHz)Attenuation (db)
Unmodified unit
Attenuation (db)
Bias-Tee inductor removed1500 (Reference)
0012500.3010000.4-0.17501.0-0.25002.6-0.3475 (630 meters)
2.9-0.34004.5-0.23007.4-0.225010.9-0.220019.9-0.215017.90137 (2200 meters)
14.70100 (Loran C)
9.70.375  (DCF77 approx.)
7.50.760  (WWVB, JJY)
6.81.1506.71.940 (JJY)
7.45.330 (Submarine comms)
11.37.425 (Submarine comms)
12.810.520 (Submarine comms)
17.515.01522.522.71030.732.87.536.440.0545.549.52.5616018087

Table 1:  Attenuation measurements at 1.5 MHz and below using both an unmodified RX-888 and the same one after the bias-Tee inductor was removed.

Comments about the frequency response of the unmodified unit:

As can be seen from the table above, the "stock" RX-888 is flat within about 2 dB or so across the AM broadcast band (520-1700 kHz) but it falls off precipitously between 100 and 300 kHz with a bit of "rebound" in the 40-150 kHz area, likely due a very low "Q" resonance of inductance and capacitance of the aforementioned components (inductors, transformers) in the signal path.

In the "VLF" range (30 kHz and below) the unmodified receiver may be somewhat usable when using an active antenna to overcome losses, but at 20 kHz and below the response drops off like a rock and, as the chart shows, it's pretty much unusable below 5-10 kHz.

The factors above conspire to prevent a flat frequency response at lower frequencies - say, those below 1.5 MHz.  For the table below, my reference amplitude and frequency is 1.5 MHz as it seemed to be more or less representative of the amplitude response above this, in the HF range - and it seemed to be comfortably above that at which the aforementioned high-pass effects of the components were having a significant effect.


Can anything be done to improve LF/VLF response?

Figure 2:
The red arrow points to the location of the
10uH bias-Tee inductor.  As seen in
Table 1, its removal can significantly improve
MF and LF performance.  The yellow
arrow points to the 0.47uF bypass capacitor
that needs to be removed even if the Bias-Tee
jumper (if equipped)
were to be removed
.
Click on the image for a larger version.YES, it is possible to modify the RX-888 to improve the low and frequency response by removing the Bias-Tee inductor (see Figure 2) from the HF port and as can be seen from the above data there is a dramatic difference in usable sensitivity at frequencies below 1 MHz - particularly below 400 kHz.

This is the easiest modification as it entails the removal of a single component and the red arrow in Figure 2 shows the location of this inductor.  It may most easily be removed with a hot-air rework tool, but it should be possible to carefully use a solder-wetted iron to heat it and remove with a pair of tweezers (temporarily remove any thermal pad below that portion of the board if it's present) or a very sharp pair of diagonal flush-cut pliers to remove it (perhaps destructively) as well.

If your RX-888 has a "Bias-Tee" Jumper:

Some versions of the RX-888 have a jumper near the location of the red arrow in Figure 2.  While removal of this jumper will prevent DC from being applied to the "HF" antenna port, it does not remove the 0.47uF bypass capacitor.  In other words, removing this jumper does nothing to help low-frequency performance.  If you remove the bias-Tee jumper and don't wish to remove the inductor, you may also remove the 0.47uF bypass capacitor, indicated by the yellow arrow in Figure 2.  (Note that even though Figure 2 shows the version without the jumper, the bypass capacitor is still in the same location.)  If you remove the inductor, you need not remove the capacitor.

There are other ways by which the low frequency response may be improved, including:

  • Replacing the coupling transformer.  The transformer used in the RX-888 is likely specified for a low-end frequency response of 1 MHz or so, so it's not surprising that this may be the worst offender (once the bias-tee inductor has been removed) in low-frequency roll-off.  Replacing it with a different unit with larger inductance (a commercial or hand-made unit) would certainly help.  It may also be possible to simply replace the transformer with coupling capacitors (say, 0.1uF) - but this would be at the expense of sensitivity and performance across the entire frequency range, something that might be acceptable if one's primary interest was in the MF/LF/VLF spectrum.  As the inductance of the transformer's primary is known to be about 125uH, we can see that this is likely the main cause of attenuation below 60 kHz.
  • Increasing value of coupling capacitors.  The coupling capacitors in series with the signal path are likely not ideal for coupling VLF frequencies.  A value such as 0.1 uF or larger would be suggested.

For VLF use (30 kHz and below) if you have interest in this frequency range you may be better off not trying to use the RX-888 - at least directly.  Some possibilities include:

  • Use a VLF up-converter.  Converting the frequencies 0-30 kHz to a higher frequency range will put this spectrum within the useful range of the RX-888 and practically any other modern receiver.  There have been a number of VLF up-converter units for sale in the past, but I don't have a specific recommendation.  If this up-converter is clocked from the same source as the RX-888's clock (e.g. using its onboard 27 MHz oscillator, or both from a common, external clock) then frequency drift could be minimized.
  • Use a sound card.  A modest computer sound card with a 192 kHz sample rate and a 16 to 24 bit A/D converter is perfectly capable of ingesting frequencies up through at least 80 kHz and down (nearly) to DC.

Having a receiver capable of VLF (3-30 kHz) or ELF (300-3000 Hz) is one thing, but having an antenna system capable of this is a different matter altogether.  There are many available E-field active whips that will work well down into the 10-20 kHz region, but below that frequency you are into the realm of specialized gear - and listening at "audio" radio frequencies in all but the most rural areas devoid of power lines and other forms of civilization can be fraught with frustration and disappointment due to the likely pick-up of mains-related energy and its harmonics.

Here are a few links related to equipment for LF/VLF reception.  Note that I have not necessarily built, bought or used the equipment described below, so your mileage may vary.

The effective reception of signals in the LF, VLF and ELF frequency range is highly contingent on having a "quiet" receive site, largely free of local noise sources and also on scrupulous attention to detail when it comes to decoupling the feedline (going to the "noisy" chassis of the receiver) from the antenna to prevent unwanted signals from being conveyed - but that's a topic of its own!

See the article A (semi)-typical suburban E-field whip receive system for the 630 and 2200 meter amateur bands - link. for a few details on how this might be done.

Real-world observations

At the Northern Utah WebSDR - where there are, at the time of writing, full-time WSPR receivers - it so-happens that there are currently some KiwiSDR and RX-888 based receivers sharing the exact, same signal path.  The KiwiSDR - which is capacitively coupled (e.g. you can hear "tinny" audio from the receiver tuned to 0 Hz and you apply the source to the antenna connector) has quite good response well into the VLF range.

Compared to the RX-888, the KiwiSDR performs noticeably better on the 2200 meter amateur band (137 kHz) in decoding WSPR and FST4W signals in which the '888 is about 15dB down.  As the '888 based system can't hear the 2200 meter signals as well, this indicates that signal levels feeding the '888 are a bit too low for it to "hear" the noise floor of the antenna system - but it also indicates that, perhaps, a few dB of boost in the signal path may remedy this:  This RX-888 has NOT had its bias-Tee inductor removed - but that's on the "to do" list:  After the bias-Tee inductor is removed I expect that it will perform comparably to the KiwiSDR at 2200 meters and I'll update this web page after having done so.

As the "LF/VLF" antenna system at the Northern Utah WebSDR is separate from that of the HF signal path - being combined in a special filter/amplifier module - boosting only the LF/VLF path would be the most beneficial as it wouldn't compromise HF reception by potentially overloading the A/D converter as would boosting everything.

The Highs

The RX-888's specifications state that it contains a "60 MHz" low-pass filter - but the precise nature of its response is not noted.

Comment about sample rates and aliasing - and the need for additional low-pass filtering

The use of the 60 MHz low-pass filter implies that the designers intended an A/D converter sample rate of more than twice that frequency - and since the RX-888 will happily sample at more than 130 MHz, this fits the need.  Many users do not operate their RX-888 at 130 MHz, however, as their interest does not extend beyond HF and operate it, instead, at around 65 MHz to reduce CPU and power loading.

A bit of warning here:  With a 65 MHz sample rate, the '888 will happily respond to signals above the Nyquist frequency (half of the sample rate, or 32.5 MHz) and these signals - spectrally "inverted" - will naturally appear at lower and lower frequencies as the original source signal's frequency increases.  Since the '888s low-pass filter is set at around 60 MHz, it will do nothing to prevent this:  The far right column of Table 2, below, shows the aliases of the test frequencies.

What this means is that users of the RX-888 using it at a sample rate lower than 130 MHz should be using an outboard low-pass filter.  With a sample rate of 65 MHz, a good-quality 30 MHz Low-Pass filter is strongly recommended and will suppress aliased signals that would otherwise appear above Nyquist.  Such filters may be found online via the usual retailers, but do not overlook an old 30 MHz transmit-type low-pass filter of the sort used to prevent interference to analog TV by an HF transmitter - often found at amateur radio swap meets or on EvilBay for cheap.

Even if you do run the RX-888 at 130 MHz sample rate, the low-pass filter is rather mediocre (only 30-40dB across most of the band) and you will likely need to add an FM broadcast-band filter to your receive system if there's even a modestly-strong transmitter near you.

 The amplitude response, relative to 30 MHz, is shown below:

Frequency (MHz)Attenuation (dB)Alias frequency (MHz)
@130 MHz sample rateAlias frequency (MHz)
@65 MHz sample rate30 (Reference)0--400.8-25503.8-15545.5-11608.5-56410.5-17014.1605  (double alias)7517.75510  (double alias)8021.75015  (double alias)8527.14520  (double alias)9032.54025  (double alias)9537.83530  (double alias)10042.83030  (triple alias)10548.02525  (triple alias)11052.92020  (triple alias)

 Table 2:  Sensitivity response of the RX-888 relative to 30 MHz

Table 2 shows the amplitude response of the RX-888 (Mk2) relative to 30 MHz.  The third and fourth column show the resulting aliased frequencies at sample rates of 130 and 65 MHz, respectively.

"Could I intentionally use aliases to receive higher frequencies than my sample rate would allow?"
 After reading this, you might ask yourself "If I operate at a sample rate of 65 MHz, could I intentionally do this to receive spectrally-inverted 6 meter signals between 15 and 11 MHz?" The answer is yes, you could - and as the chart above shows, they would be only 3.8-5.5dB down from the "real" signals across that same 15-11 MHz range.  Intentionally allowing aliases to occur is often done to allow the detection of signals well above the sample rate.  The caveat here is that one would want to sharply filter the source of the "above Nyquist" frequencies to limit them to the band of interest as well as prevent noise on the aliased frequency (15-11 MHz in this example) by filtering those frequencies as well.
 Doing this works just fine as long as proper filtering is done to keep out the "unwanted" signals (at the higher and lower frequencies) along with appropriate amplification make up for losses.
 In the example above, the lower part of 6 meters would appear just above the 20 meter band - but if one adjust the sample rate, the alias could be moved farther away from 20 meters and, with proper filtering, one could receive both 6 and 20 meters on the same receiver hardware.

What the above table above also shows is that the 60 MHz low-pass filter isn't very good:  By the time you get to the bottom of the FM broadcast band (88 MHz) we know that the attenuation is only around 32 dB.  Here in North America it's common for an FM broadcast station to have many 10s of kilowatts of ERP which means that if you live anywhere near such a station - even if you are using an antenna that wasn't designed to receive FM broadcast frequencies - you may experience some interference around the alias frequencies noted in Table 2.

No matter the sample rate at which you operate your RX-888, it's recommended that you carefully check for aliased responses of FM transmitters.  If you find them - and even if you don't - I'd recommend a separate FM broadcast band blocking filter be installed to quash ingress from strong signals:  Without it you'll probably get some leakage of moderate-to-strong signals in the 22-42 MHz range (frequency-inverted) if you are running at a 130 MHz sample rate or in the 23-32 MHz range if you are running at a sample rate of 65 MHz.

Figure 2 also demonstrates why - if you operate the '888 with a sample rate of 65 MHz - you should really be using a good 30 MHz low-pass filter with it:  Any signals above 30 MHz - including noise - will be attenuated only to the extent shown in the table and will interfere with the desired 0-30 MHz signals.

* * * * *

Other RX-888 related posts at this site:

  • Measuring signal dynamics of the RX-888 -  This page discusses the gain distribution of the RX-888, its apparent sensitivity and steps that one should take to maximize performance when used for simultaneous "all of HF" reception.
  • Improving the thermal management of the RX-888 (Mk2) - The internal power dissipation of the RX-888 exceeds its ability to get rid of the heat that it produces, reducing reliability - particularly in environments with elevated temperature.  This page discusses what to do to remedy this.
  • Using and external clock with the RX-888 (Mk2) - Although the RX-888's TCXO is pretty good, you may wish to use an external reference to provide very high frequency accuracy and stability - and this page gives advice and warnings about doing so.
  • Repairing a dead RX-888 (no A/D converter clocking) - While external clocking of the RX-888 (Mk 2) is desirable, it must be done with a bit of care to protect the circuitry involved.  If you do manage to damage your '888, this page may be helpful in its repair.

 

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]



tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-4686248664554646483
Extensions
The "Universal TCXO" - better stability for the Kenwood TS-590, TS-570 (and other radios) using the QRP Labs ProgRock 2
1ppsgpsKenwoodProgRockProgRock 2QRP LabsQRP-labssubstituteTCXOTS-570TS-590
Show full content

Figure 1:
The TS-590G into which the ProgRock was installed.
A useful accessory for many amateur transceivers is a TCXO - a device, often offered as an option, that improves the absolute frequency stability and accuracy of the radio.  When in current production, the TCXO is available from the manufacturer - and possibly from third parties - but long after the radio has been made, a TCXO may be difficult to find.

One option for addressing this issue is the use of the QRP Labs ProgRock 2 - LINK.  This unit is relatively inexpensive (US$18 at the time of writing) and has a stability of 0.25ppm - which is likely better than the original TCXO offered by the manufacturer - and likely less expensive as well.

This page describes not only the installation of the ProgRock 2 in a Kenwood TS-590, but also in the TS-570:  These two radios use very different frequencies, but the ProgRock 2 is easily programmed to whatever is needed!

Any weird frequency

While it would be convenient if radios had a nice, easy frequency like 10 MHz as their main oscillator, that is rarely the case - and this was true for a friend's TS-590G which wanted 15.6 MHz.  This radio, which he purchased second-hand, did not come with a TCXO and based on his experience during June Field Day and winter Field Day (in January) it drifted excessively - more than a few 10s of Hz on 10 meters - enough that he would occasionally get complaints about him being "off frequency" - even if it was he that was calling CQ!

Although an aftermarket unit was available, he was intrigued by the idea of using the ProgRock 2 as this same device could be programmed for any frequency between about 3.5 kHz and somewhere near 300 MHz with a resolution of 1 Hz.  Additionally, the ProgRock 2 allows the use of a 1 PPS (1 pulse-per-second) output from a GPS module to "discipline" the oscillator with even greater stability - but more on this later.

Prepping the ProgRock 2

Using the ProgRock 2 is pretty easy:  It has a micro-USB connector onboard and when plugged into a computer, it can appear as a serial port - refer to the manual for the appropriate driver.  Using a serial terminal program - like PUTTY - one simply enters the frequency, to the nearest 1 Hz, hit the "S" key to save it to memory and you are pretty much done.  The ProgRock will allow the output of more than one frequency if needed (the manual has more detail) but we will be using output #1, which is also the one into which we'd program the needed frequency, setting the others to zero (e.g. "off").

Figure 2:
ProgRock 2 with the 3.9 and 10k resistors mounted to allow
the external application of a 1pps signal from a GPS module
to stabilize the frequency further.  The bottom side of the
ProgRock 2 is shown.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Having said that, there's a bit more to it in that it needs power, ground, and the signal output needs to get into the radio - but more on that in a moment.  

As my friend wished to experiment with using a 1 PPS source to nail it down to frequency, a 3.9k series resistor was added to the "1pps" pin along with a 10k resistor to ground to keep the pin from "floating" around in voltage when nothing was connected to it.  Figure 2 shows these resistors mounted on the "bottom" side of the board:  The upper resistor is the 3.9k connected to the 1pps pad with the lower, 10k resistor connected to a ground pad.  The junction of the two (with the yellow piece of insulating tubing) is where the 1pps input would be connected.

The use of the 3.9k resistor is described in the ProgRock 2's documentation which notes that the onboard microcontroller operates from 3.3 volts - but placing this resistor in series (the value of which isn't particularly critical) limits the current into the logic pin, allowing it to be safely driven by a 5 volt - or even 12 volt - 1pps pulse. 

Figure 3:
The Progrock 2 mounted to the original TS-590 TCXO board
using short, insulated jumper wires.  The top side of the
ProgRock 2 is shown.
Click on the image for a larger version.
As noted in the ProgRock 2's documentation, as long as the 1pps pin is held low, it's ignored and the unit will operate based on the frequency set by its onboard oscillator, but when it sees the 1pps pulses, it measures the time between their rising edges to determine how far off the internal clock is from ideal, making slow, incremental changes.  If the 1pps signal were to later disappear, it would simply "hold" that frequency until the ProgRock 2 was power-cycled at which point it would revert to the internal clock unless/until it was again presented with a 1pps signal.

There's a place for it!

While the "stock" TS-590 did not come with a TCXO, there was a small "daughter" board adjacent to the portion of the circuit board with the stock oscillator on which the user is expected to solder a TCXO in the form of a "crystal can" oscillator module - or, in the case of some after-market units - replace that board entirely.  As the ProgRock 2 is roughly the size of a postage stamp (it will fit within an HC-6 crystal can!) it could be wedged on this same board - which is convenient as this board also carries 5 volt power for the original TCXO, so a bit of pretty easy "micro" surgery was undertaken.

Figure 4:
A hand-drawn diagram showing the connections
on the top side of the TS-590's TCXO board and
the ProgRock 2 board.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Figure 3 shows how the ProgRock 2 board was mounted on the original TCXO board.  Fortunately, all of the needed connections are there:  +5 volts to run the original TCXO, ground, and the signal output.  Figure 4 shows a hand-drawn diagram showing the original TCXO board (top) with its pin locations while a representation of the ProgRock board (with the USB connector oriented on top) is in the lower drawing along with its connections.

Using small gauge, insulated wire liberated from a scrap of CAT5 Ethernet cable, short-as-possible jumpers were run between the TCXO board and the ProgRock.  In Figure 3, the "ground" connections were made using green wire - one of them utilizing the body of the USB connector - while the output signal used blue and the power used orange:  In the upper-right corner of the ProgRock 2 board - just above the USB connector - you can just see the yellow insulating tubing of the 1pps connection.

There is JUST enough room - if one scrunches the edge of the ProgRock 2 board against the TCXO board's white connector (and by routing wires such that they are not between the ProgRock 2 board and the connector) so that it will fit in the original location within the TS-590 as can be seen in Figure 5, below.

Comment:

It was noted - during testing of the TS-590 - that  the combination of 10 meters at 100 watts while using the built-in tuner - seemed to "glitch" the ProgRock for reasons unknown, although it's suspected that magnetic fields from the PA/Tuner board are finding their way through the aluminum chassis from the opposite side.  Simply tipping the ProgRock 2 board from being flat against the original TCXO board to more of an angle and adding another ground wire jumper to the TCXO board seemed to fix this.

One important consideration is that you MUST be sure that there's a blocking capacitor somewhere between the output of the ProgRock 2 and the input of the circuit that it's driving.  As it turns out, the stock TS-590 TCXO board has such a blocking capacitor - but if your application does not, or you are not sure if it does, simply use a 0.001 to 0.1uF capacitor in series with the output - and this capacitor may also serve in lieu of a jumper wire in connecting it to the radio.

Finally, don't forget to disable the original oscillator of the radio into which you are installing the ProgRock 2.  In the case of the TS-590, there are two jumpers that must be removed - one to cut power to the original oscillator and the other to disconnect its output - these black jumpers are just visible to the right of the orange connector on the jumper cable to the TCXO board on Figure 5.  In some radios the TXCO replaces the original oscillator entirely so there's no need to "disable" it.

Figure 5:
The TCXO + Progrock 2 boards, installed in the TS-590.
There is enough wire length to connect the USB to program
the ProgRock in-situ if the mounting screw is removed.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Checking the calibration

You might notice that the TS-590's TCXO board is connected with a short, 4-wire jumper (the red, black and green wires in Figure 5) and this is long enough to allow connection of the ProgRock 2 board to a USB cable and a computer to allow the frequency to be adjusted "live", while the radio is in operation - this requires removing the single mounting screw to permit the board to "hang loose".

Simply setting the ProgRock 2 to 15.6 MHz exactly in the configuration menu resulted in the TS-590 being within 2 Hz of the correct frequency when checked against the 10 MHz WWV/H signal - this difference likely because the ProgRock 2's onboard 25 MHz oscillator was very slightly off, but well within the 0.25ppm tolerance.

But what if you wanted it to be closer?  Keep in mind that the frequency tolerance of the ProgRock 2's own TCXO is 0.25ppm which amounts to as much as 2.5 Hz at 10 MHz (or 7.5 Hz at 30 MHz) so absolute accuracy over a wide temperature range is unrealistic - but "dialing it in" at the typical room temperature (or that of the radio's interior after it has been on for a while) is quite reasonable - although there's a caveat to this if you plan to use the 1pps input as we'll soon discuss.

Dialing it in

If you have an ultra-precise frequency reference such as a GPS-disciplined oscillator or a Rubidium reference, by all means use it - but if you don't, you can use an off-air frequency reference like WWV, WWVH, CHU, BPM, or whatever else is near you that is KNOWN to be very precise - but the higher the frequency, the better.

Using 15 MHz WWV as an example, tune the radio USING THE KEYPAD so that it is exactly on frequency:  Note that the TS-590 can tune smaller than the 10 Hz steps shown on the display, so turning the dial doesn't guarantee that you are on the "zero Hz" frequency step.  Without bumping the main tuning knob and knocking it off by less than a 10 Hz step listen for the WWV transmission to hear the portion when they are transmitting the 500 or 600 Hz tone (this step won't work if they are not transmitting this tone) and switch between USB and LSB:  If you hear any difference in tone, you may wish to tweak the ProgRock's frequency up or down as appropriate.  If the tone on USB is slightly lower than that on LSB, the ProgRock's frequency needs to be set slightly lower.

An alternative method to setting the frequency is to use a spectrum analysis program - "Spectran" by I2PHD (LINK) is probably the easiest to use.  In this case, one would tune Spectran for a 1 kHz tone and configure it to pick up the audio via the computer's microphone or a web cam - or using a direct audio connection such as a rig interface or audio cable from the radio.  If you are using WWV/H for this, it's suggested that you first listen using AM and verify that your sound card's sample rate is accurate, with Spectran showing precisely 500 or 600 Hz during the periods when WWV/H is transmitting those tones.  If you find that it's not showing exactly 500 or 600 Hz (to within a Hz or so) you may wish to try a different sound card/computer combination or just do a bit of math to compensate for the slight difference in the audio card's sample rate.

Using USB on the TS-590, tune exactly 1 kHz below WWV/H (e.g. 14.999 kHz) using the keypad and measure the frequency of the carrier:  If the tone frequency measures slightly high when using USB, the ProgRock's 15.6 MHz frequency can be increased slightly - but remember that it may be done only in 1 Hz steps.  Remember that 1 Hz at 15.6 MHz will cause a frequency shift of about 0.6 Hz at 10 MHz and almost 2 Hz at 30 MHz as the effect will be proportional to the radio of the reference frequency (15.6 MHz in this case) and the frequency to which the receiver is tuned.

Note:  If you have a known-accurate reference oscillator of your own (such as a GPS Disciplined oscillator, Rubidium oscillator or similar) by all means, use it!

Comment about tuning step size.

Many modern transceivers tune in 10 Hz steps or finer - but note that these steps are often not exactly what they may seem.  For example, some radios' 10 Hz steps aren't exactly 10 Hz each - some being a bit more, some being a bit less - but that they will average 10 Hz steps.  The same goes for the smaller step sizes as well.

Keep this in mind when you are attempting to set/measure a given radio exactly to frequency as this slight difference in step size may result in some frequencies being slightly different from what is expected and this difference may vary by seemingly random amounts.

Using the (optional) 1pps input on the ProgRock 2

As noted earlier, the ProgRock 2 can take a 1pps input from a GPS receiver module, using this to make gradual corrections of the frequency.  Doing this if the GPS signal is reliable will result in the frequency being very stable over a wide temperature range, but there are two caveats to this:

  • The ProgRock 2 doesn't (yet?) have in its firmware a means by which one can input an offset of its 25 MHz TCXO frequency.  As the onboard 25 MHz TCXO is not likely to be exactly correct, this means that if you set set the frequency at room temperature - and the oscillator is slightly off - when you apply a 1pps input the frequency will then be shifted assuming a 25 MHz clock frequency.  The reason for this is that the 1pps will set the frequency as if the onboard 25 MHz TCXO were 25 MHz, exactly - but since it probably isn't (remember - it's rated to be within 0.25ppm) a frequency shift will result.
    • In other words, if you want your radio to be precisely on frequency with a 1pps input, you will have to "dial it in" with 1pps applied and expect it to be slightly off when no 1pps signal is present.
    • If you ever do apply a 1pps signal - even briefly - the Progrock 2 will "remember" that offset even when the 1pps is removed until the unit is power-cycled.  If the 1pps is removed, the oscillator will now be free to drift with temperature. 
  • The frequency step corrections as a result of the 1pps input are not infinitesimally small.  What this means is that with 1pps applied, every second the frequency will shift slightly, typically hovering above and below the target - but the magnitude of these corrections may be set in the configuration of the ProgRock 2.
    • For most modes on HF - including FT8, FT4, PSK31, CW, Sideband or even many digital modes - these small "sub-Hz" shifts would likely be inconsequential. 
    • If you are using a digital mode where fractional-Hertz frequency shifts are important, you may want to carefully consider using 1pps at all, weighing the pros and cons of having seemingly random small frequency shifts.  Modes where this may be important would be WSPR, FST4W (particularly the modes longer than 2 minutes), coherent CW, during an FMT (Frequency Measurement Test) or any other instance where small frequency steps may be disruptive.
    • If you are in a situation where the continual frequency correction is an issue but you want the frequency to be closer than what the TCXO onboard the ProgRock will allow you might consider manually applying the 1pps signal intermittently to occasionally recalibrate the frequency.  This would allow the frequency to drift slightly with temperature between calibration intervals.
    • While one may configure the adjustment size in the ProgRock 2 and likely minimize the size of the frequency adjustment steps, remember that it must be capable of correcting for the normal and expected frequency changes related to temperature.  This need sets a minimum correction size that will be practical and the varying environments with differing temperature and its stability will affect this.
    • If you are using a 1pps input on a radio that operates in the VHF/UHF and/or microwave frequencies, these small frequency shifts will be proportionally larger and may even be noticeable on SSB and/or as slight "clicks"in received audio - possibly making the radio unusable for digital modes altogether.  It may be possible to configure the ProgRock 2 to mitigate this somewhat by reducing the magnitude of the corrections, but they will always be there.

* * *

A ProgRock 2 in the Kenwood TS-570

The (older) Kenwood TS-570 (all variants) can also be retrofitted with a ProgRock 2 in lieu of the Kenwood "SO-2" TCXO - and it's also pretty easy.  Using the same steps as above, program the ProgRock 2's "Clock 0" for 20000000 Hz (20 MHz exactly).  I modified my own TS-570 for the same reason that my friend modified his TS-590:  The original oscillator would audibly drift in frequency with temperature and it was over 100 Hz high on 10 meters  (approx. 25 Hz on 40 meters) once it warmed up, causing the occasional complaint that I was off-frequency.  I do not use this radio for digital modes like FT-8, but if I had, I'm sure that I would have made this modification some time ago!

Figure 6:
The ProgRock 2 installed in place of the original Kenwood
SO-2 TCXO in the TS-570.  The wires through the
board were bent and soldered to the V+ and three
ground pins.  The output of the ProgRock 2 is
connected to the "out" pin on the board via a 47 ohm
and 1000pF capacitor in series.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Via online search, you can find the instructions for installing the SO-2 TCXO module and these show how the PLL board (the one in the bottom of the radio) may be removed:  Be careful with the flat ribbon cables!

Rather than solder in the TCXO, cut five short pieces of tinned wire (20-24AWG, 0.6-0.8mm dia) to be about 3/4" (20mm) long and solder them in the five holes into which the original TCXO was soldered and re-install the board.

On the board itself you'll notice that two of the holes are marked - one for power and one for the "out" pin of the TCXO into which we will feed our 20 MHz clock from the ProgRock 2:  The other three pins are ground.  First, the ProgRock 2 is "dry fit":  It is placed on the circuit board (with a piece of foam or cardboard underneath to space it slightly away - perhaps 1/8" to 3/16" or 3-5mm) and the wires that we soldered bent around to the contact pads and trimmed, taking care that they not touch the pads on the back side of the board or anywhere else that they shouldn't.

As can be seen in Figure 6, the "V+" pin was wrapped around and soldered to the "V+ pin (which carries 5 volts) on the ProgRock 2 (the one in the lower-right corner of the ProgRock board in Figure 6) while two of the the three wires for the ground connect to top-side "GND" pads on the ProgRock while the third is soldered to the top of the USB connector.  As the ProgRock 2 is very light, these wires are more than adequate to hold it into place - just be sure to keep the board height low enough to avoid interfering with the shield when it is replaced.

The top-right corner pad on the ProgRock 2 in Figure 6 is the "CLK 0" that we programmed - but like the TS-590, it must be capacitively coupled to the clock input on the TS-570 and this is done with a series capacitor:  I used a 1000pF capacitor for this, but anything between 470pF and 0.01uF would be fine.  On the schematic I noted that there is a 10pF capacitor to ground in the TS-570 on the "out" pin so I also included a 47 ohm resistor in series with the capacitor just in case the output of the synthesizer would be "unhappy" with capacitive loading - and also to reduce the amount of RF drive into the '570's clock input.  This resistor may not have been necessary, but hey, it's just a resistor so why not play it safe?  The final steps are to cut the two resistors, R503 and R504, seen to the right of the ProgRock 2 board:  This necessary step disconnects the power and the output of the original oscillator circuit.

Upon reassembling the TS-570, I tuned in WWV on 5 MHz and switched between LSB and USB (with the RIT set to zero) and heard no discernible change in pitch during a part of the transmission with the tone indicating that the radio was "dead on" frequency.  As the ProgRock 2 is rated for 0.25ppm stability, it should stay within 5-8 Hz on 10 meters, worst-case - about 1/20th as much drift as with the original oscillator!

While I could have done so, I chose not to add the resistors to permit the external application of a GPS-based "1pps" input to "lock" the ProgRock 2, as was described above for the TS-590.

From start to finish, it took me about an hour to program and install the ProgRock 2 in my TS-570 - but your mileage may vary.

* * *

Using the ProgRock2 in other radios

As the ProgRock2 can be programmed for about any frequency you like, it can be used in radios other than the Kenwood TS-590 or TX-570.   The ProgRock 2 draws a modest amount of current (40-60mA) so its addition will likely not be consequential in power consumption on "desktop" and "mobile" radios - but it may be significant on a QRP or portable radio.  It's likely that most radios do NOT have a handy board onto which the ProgRock 2 may be easily mounted like the TS-590, but the unit is small enough that it will likely fit in/near the location intended for the oscillator/TCXO.

Be sure to use as short as leads as practical and it will likely be necessary to use some sort of adhesive (foam pad or glue) or some sort of "zip tie" to hold the ProgRock 2 board into place.  If possible, be sure to install it such that the ProgRock 2 may be moved so that its USB port may be connected to a  computer to allow final tweaking of frequency once it is installed - at least before it is secured into place:  Once the frequency has been "dialed in" it's unlikely that you'll need to readjust it any time soon.

The ProgRock 2 is also rather flexible in its power supply, but even though it is rated to 12.0 volts, I would NOT recommend allowing more than 10 volts ever be applied to it - and the input voltage can be as low as around 4 volts meaning that it's likely that if the radio itself has an already-existing supply rail (5 volts like the TS-590 - many radios have an 8, 9 or 10 volt supply as well) that will work nicely or one could use an appropriately-chosen series resistor (likely in the 47-82 ohm range for a 12 volt supply - but please do your own measurements) to drop its supply by a few volts.

As noted above, you must be sure to keep the DC on the output terminal of the ProgRock from being shorted to ground (via a transformer or inductor to ground) or to another voltage source (such as a bias network of an amplifier/buffer) as it has no blocking capacitor of its own.  In the TS-590 the original TCXO board had its own blocking capacitor - but if your intended circuit doesn't have such - or if you don't know if it has one - simply add a 0.001 to 0.1uf (value not critical) series blocking capacitor of your own.

Most "recent" radios (e.g. those made since the early-mid 90s) have a single frequency reference for their synthesizer - but ones prior to this (and a few after) may have more than one master oscillator that determines the precise frequency.  It's worth noting that the ProgRock 2 can output more than one frequency at a time (three if you are not using the 1pps input - just two if you are) and it may be possible to program one of the ProgRock's other outputs to another useful frequency.  One possibility is for very old analog radios that sport a 100 kHz crystal calibrator or similar:  The ProgRock 2 would be excellent for this purpose.

In some cases, these "other" frequencies may include the radio's BFO (Beat Frequency Oscillator) or HFO (Heterodyne Frequency Oscillator) in which case you may need to be more creative - but it's worth noting that the ProgRock has up three "digital" inputs that may optionally be used allowing up to eight separate frequency combinations to be produced - possibly allowing one to replace impossible-to-find crystals in vintage radios - but this is a possible topic of another article.

* * * * *

This post stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]



tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-3297898346865918315
Extensions
Hiking and POTA (Parks On the Air) operation from Arches National Park (US-0004)
Arches National ParkauroraCWHFJPC-12JPC-7Parks On the AirPOTA
Show full content

Figure 1:
Double-O Arch
Click on the image for a larger version.
Earlier this month I had the opportunity to spend nearly a week in Arches National Park in south eastern Utah.  As the name implies, there are a lot of natural arches scattered throughout the area, the result of erosion occurring over millenia, the semi-porous sandstone eventually yielding the the inexorable forces of wind and water.

These trips to red rock country are not new to me:  I've been visiting this part of the state for more than 30 years now, having spent more well over six months cumulative camping, hiking and backpacking in this austere land.  On most of these trips, I have been in the company of other amateur radio operators - and that was the case here, as well.

Compared to other national parks in Utah, Arches is fairly small - on a few 10s of miles long and narrower than this in width.  Compared to some places I go, it's a bit of a "tourist" park meaning that it's fairly crowded with comparatively few developed trails concentrated in a few areas.

Figure 2:
Fins and more fins, backgrounded by the La Sal mountains
as seen along the "primative" trail.
Click on the image for a larger version.
When going to such places, I tend to do about as much hiking as I can - but Arches is comparatively limited, but one of the longer trail systems is that associated with Landscape Arch and Double-O arch.  On this hike I took the "primative" trail, separating me from the madding crowds - a much longer route over occasionally rugged terrain, occasionally requiring a bit of scrambling up or down slick rock:  Just the way I like it!

Over the course of a few hours I made my way from the campground to Double-O Arch where I met the rest of my group who'd taken the other trail where we stayed for a while before splitting again and heading back.  Altogether, I managed about 10 miles (16km) or so by the time I got back to camp.

With temperatures in the mid 80s (about 30C) I set up my radio in the shade of my tent and shade and started operating.

* * *

Equipment:

Antennas:

The evening before, I had a bit of extra time around dinner and I took that opportunity to set up my portable antennas in the cooling evening air.  For this POTA operation, I eventually set up two antennas - the first one being my JPC-7 loaded dipole.

Figure 3:
Operating CW in the shade, on a portable table, using
a cast iron frying pan to keep the paddle in place.
Click on the image for a larger version.
I've discussed the JPC-7 antenna on this blog before (LINK) - and have used it for several POTA operations already with good results.  Since the last POTA operation I'd rewound the loading coils, replacing the original stainless steel wire with silver-plated copper to reduce the losses - I discuss the details about this HERE.  It's difficult to estimate how much improvement this change made, but it's likely in the general area of 3dB or so - only 1/2 "S" unit or so, but it's certainly worth a bit of hassle to improve efficiency on an already-small antenna.

A day after setting up the JPC-7, I also set up the JPC-12 vertical antenna (described here).  This antenna, too, has been refitted with a silver-plated loading coil as well:  With a few extra mast sections, a top-hat and resonant, elevated radials it also makes for an excellent portable antenna - albeit a bit more complicated to set up than the loaded vertical, particularly when changing bands.

Radio and power:

The radio - an older Yaesu FT-100 (with the CW filter from an FT-100D) which was powered by a 100 amp-hour Lithium-Iron Phosphate battery using a paddle from cwmorse.us - (link).  I've used this particular paddle ("Outdoor pocket double paddle with magnets") for several POTA activations and as before, I've used the same cast-iron fry pan for all of them to keep the paddle from sliding around - often ending up with a bit of soot on the side of my hand and wrist!

Figure 4:
The antennas - and solar panel.
There was no audible interference from the
now-modified solar controller.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Operating (mostly) on 20 meters I managed to make about 285 contacts - all but four of them CW with 277 of them counting as POTA contacts.  The operating position was almost as POTA as one gets:  Sitting in a chair, under a shade, surrounded by sand and red rock.

Mixing antennas with solar - with no QRM!:

 Figure 4 shows the "antenna farm".  In the foreground - just left of center - is the JPC-7 loaded dipole, using a studio tripod for support while in the background - to the right of center - can be seen the JPC-12 vertical with tophat.

Also in the foreground is a 200 watt solar panel - but you may be wondering if this would cause QRM (interference) from its controller:  The answer is NO - but this is only true because I've done previous work to add extra filtering to it.  Even with the antenna (particularly the JPC-7) right next to the solar panel with its controller, I could not hear any interference at all - but this is by design as I have taken steps to make it quiet, and you can read about the details to accomplish this HERE in a previous blog entry.

At this camp site there were two other PV systems in operation located some distance away from the antenna, but I could hear those.  For the one closest, I happened to have an FT240-43 toroid on hand and I was able to cram five turns (with connectors) of the cables from the two panels feeding it:  Predictably, this reduced the QRM somewhat (1-2 S-units) - but as noted in the blog entry noted above, ferrite alone will not likely solve such a QRM issue!

Figure 5:
Red and green auroras backgrounding the big dipper.
Click on the image for a larger version.
The "other" PV system - which was even further away - caused minimal interference so nothing was done about it - but since I'd used my only FT240-43 toroid, I wouldn't have been able do anything about it, anyway.

Red Rock + Aurora = More red!

As it happened, the sun did a bit of burping in the days leading up to and during this trip, the result being the repeated appearance of a visible aurora, the first appearing on October 7 when very visible red pillars appeared in the northern sky:  Scrambling to the top of a nearby bluff, we could see a bit of red and green in the sky along with the Big Dipper.

For the next few days we noticed something else:  On the first night, the sky was spectacularly dark - the Andromeda Galaxy being visible - but on the night of the first aurora and for a few nights thereafter it seemed as though we lost a lot of the "deepness" of the sky.  We also noticed that despite the lack of moonlight, we could see the surrounding landscape and make out large objects on the ground without needing additional light.

Figure 6:
Sky glow, lighting up the camp and environs.
Click on the image for a larger version.
We eventually realized that what we were seeing was sky glow.  In other words, the entire sky was glowing dimly:  Not bright enough to be perceived as color, but the cumulative glow of the entire sky was enough to illuminate the landscape in that odd way.

A few days later the aurora was clearly visible again - and that's when the photo in Figure 6 was taken, showing a bit of red behind the clouds to the north and some green glow on the northern horizon.


* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]


tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-1623158110686876112
Extensions
Neon bar-graph VSWR/Power meter using the ИН-13 (a.k.a "IN-13") "Nixie" - Part 2 (of 3)
AD8307bar-graphbridgeIN-13neonnixiepeakpowerpower meterRF power meterrussianSWRtandem bridgeVSWRИН-13
Show full content
Figure 1:
Power/VSWR meter using ИН-13 neon bar-graph
indicators.
Click on the image for a larger version
In Part 1 (link) I laid out the requirements of the ИН-13-based neon bar-graph VSWR/power meter.  Admittedly, this is a "buy cool, old tech and figure out what project might use it" scenario - but having one tube always showing the forward power and the other tube showing either reverse power of calculated VSWR was the goal.

In the previous installment we talked about how to generate the high voltage (130 volts or so) for the bar-graph neons, the means to drive precise amounts of current through the tubes using precision current sink circuits, and the "Tandem" coupler to detect forward and reflected power. Mounting the tubes 
Figure 2:
ИН-13 tubes in the raw.
It is up to the constructor to determine how best to mount
these tubes - and how to connect them to the circuit.
Figure 3 shows how flexible wires were attached as the
wires on the tubes themselves are very easily broken!
Click on the image for a larger version.
In looking at Figure 1 you can see that the ИН-13 tubes are mounted to pieces of clear acrylic, but a quick look at Figure 2 shows that they don't really have a means of mounting, leaving the method to the imagination of the user.
In preparing the tubes for mounting I trimmed the wire leads and soldered flexible wires to them, covering them with "hot melt" (thermoset) adhesive to passivate the connection, making them relatively durable:  The original wires will NOT tolerate much flexing at all and are likely to break off right at the glass "pinch" - which would make the tube useless.   Figure 3 shows how the leads were encapsulated - the thermoset adhesive being tinted with a permanent marker - mainly to add a bit of color.
Laser-cut sheets and markings
Figure 3:
Close-up of the "hot-glue" covered wire
attachments for the ИН-13 tubes.  Also visible
are the black wire loops holding them in place
and the laser-edged markings on the acrylic.
Click on the image for a larger version.

In looking at Figure 1 and 3 you will also notice that there are scales indicating the function and showing scale graduations and the associated numerical values.  I'm fortunate to have a friend (also an amateur radio operator) who has a high-power laser cutter and it was easy to lay out the precise dimensions of the acrylic sheets and also have it cut the holes for the mounting screws in the corners as well.

While it takes a bit of laser power to cut the sheets, a far lower power setting will ablate the surface, yielding a result not unlike surface engraving and when lit from the edges, these ablations will light up with the rest of the sheet remaining pretty dark:  A total of four sheets were cut and "engraved" in this way:  The front sheet for "VSWR" and its markings, the middle sheet for "Reverse Power" and the rear acrylic sheet for "Forward Power".  It was possible to arrange the lettering so that only "VSWR" and "Reverse Power" were atop each other but in subdued light - and with a bit of darkened plastic in front of the display - the markings on the un-lit sheet are practically invisible.  The fourth sheet mentioned was left blank, being the protective cover. 

Edge lighting

Edge-lit displays go back decades - and the idea likely goes back centuries where it was observed that imperfections in glass (later, plastic) would be visible if the substrate was illuminated from the edge.  Since the early-mid 20th century, one could find a number of edge-lit indicators - usually in some sort of test equipment of industrial displays - but they occasionally showed up in the consumer market - usually acrylic or similar with the markings engraved with a rotary tool or - as may be done nowadays, a laser.

While incandescent lamps would have been used in the past, LEDs are the obvious choice these days and for this I selected some "high brightness" LEDs to light the edges of the engraved acrylic sheets.  For the "Forward Power" sheet - which would be that which was always illuminated in use - I chose white while using Green for VSWR and Blue for Reverse Power.  I'd considered Yellow and Red, but discarded the former as it might appear too much light the white under some conditions and past experience has reminded me that - particularly in a dark room - the human eye can't see or focus on fine detail on red objects very easily.

Figure 4:
Six LEDs are epoxied to the edge to evenly light the laser-
etched markings in the acrylic sheet.  The faces of the LEDs
were filed flat to facilitate bonding and improve efficiency.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Figure 4 shows some details as to how the edge lighting is accomplished.  Six equally-spaced LEDs were epoxied to the bottom edge of the display, arranged to be nearly the width of the engraved text.  In writing this entry I observed that photographing edge-lit displays such as this is nearly impossible owing to the variations in illumination (e.g. it's difficult to take pictures of very bright objects in the dark!) but the effect is very even as viewed by the human eye.

The six LEDs were connected as two series strings of three LEDs:  As each LED requires about three volts - and I have only a 12 volt power source - doing so requires only a bit more than nine volts to power the LED arrays.  As the green and white LEDs are also silicon nitride based as well, they take similar voltages.

Not readily apparent from Figure 4 is the fact that the LEDs were modified slightly.  As we are trying to interface a standard T1-3/4 LED to the flat edge of a plastic sheet, it's apparent that the rounded, focused lens makes this physically difficult.  To mitigate this, the top of the LED was flattened with a file and the clear epoxy was removed to just above the light emitting die.  The result of this is that a flat surface is mated to another flat surface for a physically stronger bond and a more efficient coupling of light and a bit of the LED's original directivity in the form of the "lens" is removed from the equation. 

Just prior to mounting the acrylic sheets in the "stack up" some black electrical tape was applied.  This tape was put on both sides of the sheet, extending just above the bottom edge, to reduce the glare from the LEDs and to minimize the possibility of this light coupling into the adjacent sheet.

Mounting the tubes and sheets

As can be seen from Figure 3, the tubes are held in place with loop of solid-core insulated wire - the holes mounting them also "drilled" with the laser.  The "stack-up" of acrylic sheets and the tubes - both of which were mounted on "VSWR" acrylic layer - is held together using 6-32 brass machine screws and spacers with a piece of 1/4" (5.2mm) plywood covered with black felt for the back to provide contrast.

The box and base

As can be seen from figure 1, the entire unit is in a wooden base:  The same friend with the laser cutter also had some scraps of red oak and a simple base was made, decorated with an ogee cut around the perimeter with the router while atop it a simple box with mitered corners - facing at a slight upward angle - in which the display and electronics reside.  On the base itself are two buttons:  One switches between VSWR and Reverse Power and the other between peak and average readings.  These switches have other functions as well, which will be discussed in the third installment when the final circuit and internal workings of the software is discussed.

* * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]







tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-3689729940487837807
Extensions
Neon bar-graph VSWR/Power meter using the ИН-13 (a.k.a "IN-13") "Nixie" - Part 1 (of 3)
bar graphbar-graphIN-13IN-9indicatorsneonPICpowerreflected powerSWR bridgetandem bridgeVSWRwattwattmeterИН-13
Show full content

Figure 1:
Power/VSWR meter using
ИН-13 (a.k.a. "IN-13") neon bar-graph indicators.
Click on the image for a larger version.
(Be sure to read Part 2 of this article - LINK).
 Several years ago I bought some Soviet-era neon bar-graph displays - mainly because I thought that they looked cool, but I didn't have any ideas for a specific project.   After mulling over possible uses for these things for a year or so - trying to think of something other than the usual audio VU meter or thermometer - I decided to construct a visual watt/VSWR indicator for amateur radio HF use. * * * 
I actually bought two different types of these bar-graph tubes:
  • The ИН-9 (a.k.a. "IN-9").  This tube is 5.5" (140mm) long and 0.39" (10mm) diameter.  It has two leads and the segments light up sequentially - starting from the end with the wires - as the current increases.
  • The ИН-13 (a.k.a "IN-13").  This neon bar-graph tube is about 6.3" (160mm) long and 0.39" (10mm) diameter.  Like the ИН-9 its segments light up sequentially with increasing current but it has a third lead - the "auxiliary cathode" - that is tied to the negative supply lead via a 220k resistor that provides a "sustain" current to make it work more reliably at lower currents.
Note:  It would be improper to refer to these as "Nixies" as that term refers to a specific type of numeric display - which these are not.  Despite this, the term is often applied - likely for "marketing" purposes to get more hits on search engines.

Figure 2:
A pair of ИН-13 neon indicator tubes.  These tubes are
slightly longer than than the ИН-9 tubes and have three leads
Click on the image for a larger version.
For a device that is intended to indicate specific measurements, it's important that it is consistent, and for these neon indicators, that means that we want the bar graph to "deflect" the same amount anytime the same amount of current is applied to it.  In perusing the specifications of both the  ИН-9 and  ИН-13 it appeared that the  ИН-13 would be more suitable for our purposes.
This project would require two tubes:
  • Forward power indicator.  This would always indicate the forward RF power as that was that's something that is useful to know at any time during transmitting.
  • Reverse power/VSWR.  This second tube would switchable between reverse power, using the same scale as the forward power display, and VSWR - a measurement of the ratio between forward and reverse power and a useful indicator of the state of the match to the antenna/feedline.
Driving the tubes  "Because physics", gas discharge tubes require quite a bit of voltage to "strike" (e.g. light up) and these particular tubes need for their operation about 140 volts - a "modestly high" voltage at low current - only a few milliamps (less than 5) per tube, peak.
Figure 3:
Test circuit to determine the suitability of various inductors and transistors
and to determine reasonable drive frequencies.  Diode "D" is a high-speed,
high-voltage diode, "R" can be two 10k 1 watt resistors in parallel and
"Q" is a power FET with suitably high voltage ratings (>=200 Volts)
and a gate turn-on threshold in the 2-3 volt range so that it is suitable
to be driven by 5 volt logic.  V+ is from a DC power supply that is
variable from at least 5 volts to 10 volts.  The square wave drive, from a
function generator, was set to output a 0-5 volt waveform to
make certain that the chosen FET could be properly driven by a 5 volt
logic-level signal from the PIC as evidenced by it not getting perceptibly
warm during operation. Generating high voltage from a low is one of the aspects that I tackled in a previous project on this blog when I built a high voltage power supply for the Zenith Transoceanic:  You can read about that here - A microcontroller-based A/B Battery replacement for the Zenith TransOceanic H-500 radio, with filament regulation - link.
 
The method used for this project and the aforementioned Zenith radio is  boost-type converter as depicted in Figure 3.  The switching frequency must be pretty high -  typically in the 5-30 kHz range if one wishes to keep the inductance and physical size of that inductor reasonably small.

As in the case of the Zenith Transoceanic project, I used the PWM output of the microcontroller - a PIC - to drive the voltage converter with a frequency in the range of 20-50 kHz.  For our needs - generating about 140 volts at, say, 15 milliamps maximum, I knew (from experience) that a 220uH choke would be appropriate.  Figure 4, below, shows the as-built boost circuit.
Figure 4:
The voltage boost converter section showing the transistor/inductor, rectification/filtering and
voltage divider circuitry.

Description:
 Q301 is a high-voltage (>=200 volt) N-channel MOSFET - this one being pulled from a junked PC power supply (the particular device isn't critical) which is driven by a square wave on the "HV_PWM" line from the microcontroller:  R301, the 10k resistor, keeps the transistor in the "off" state when the controller isn't actively driving it (e.g. start-up).  L301, a 220uH inductor, provides the conversion:  When Q301 is on, the bottom end is shorted to ground causing a magnetic field to build up and when Q301 is turned off, this field collapses, dumping the resulting voltage through D301, which is a "fast" high voltage diode designed for switching supplies - a 1N4000 series diode would not be a good choice in this application as it's quite "slow". R304, a 33k resistor, is used to provide a minimum load of the power supply, pulling about 4.25 mA at 140 volts:  This "ballast" improves the ability of the supply to be regulated as the difference between "no load" (the neon bar-graphs energized, but with no "deflection") and full load (all segments of the tubes illuminated) is less than 4:1.  The resistive divider of R302 and R303 is used to provide a sample of the output voltage to the microcontroller, yielding about 2.93 volts when the output is at 140 volts.  The reader will, by now, likely have realized that I could have used R304 as part of the voltage divider - but since the value of this resistor was determined during testing, I didn't bother removing R302/R303 when I was done:  Anyway, resistors are cheap!
 Setting the current:
 Having the 140 volt supply is only the first part of the challenge:  As these tubes use current to set the "deflection" (e.g. number of segments) we need to be able to precisely set this parameter - independent of the voltage - to indicate a value with any reasonable accuracy.  For this we'll use a "current sink".
 Figure 5:
The precision current sinks that drive the neon tubes precisely based on PWM-derived voltage.
Click on the image for a larger version.
 Figure 5, above, shows the driving circuits for the two tubes using the "precision current sink".  Taking the top diagram as our example, we see that the inverting input of the op-amp (U401c) is connected to the junction of the emitter of Q401 and resistor R406.  As is the wont of an op amp, the output will be driven high or low as needed to try to make the voltage (from the microcontroller) at pin 10 match that of pin 9 - in this case, based on feedback from the sense resistor, R406.

What this means is that as the transistor (Q401) is turned on, current will flow from the tube, through it and into R406 meaning that the voltage across R406 is proportional to the voltage on pin 10.  It should be noted that current through R406 will include the current into the base - but this can be ignored as it will be only a tiny fraction (a few percent at most) of the total current.  It's worth noting that this circuit is insensitive to the voltage - at least as long as such current can be sunk - making it ideal for driving a device like the ИН-13 (or ИН-9) in which its intended operation is dependent on the current rather than the operating voltage.

At this point it's worth noting that the driving voltages from the microcontroller ("FWD_PWM" and "REV_PWM") are not plain DC voltages, but rather from the 10 bit PWM outputs of the microcontroller.  The use of a 10k resistor and 100nF (0.1uF) capacitors (R405 and C406, respectively) "smooth" the square-ish wave PWM into DC. Q401 and Q402 were, again, random transistors that I found in scrapped power supplies, but since there's at least 70 volts drop across the tube, about any NPN transistor rated to withstand at least 80 volts should suffice.  It's also worth noting the presence of R407 and R409, which provides the "sustain" current on the "auxiliary" cathode.Figure 6:
An exterior view of the tandem coupler module.
Visible is the top shield and the three feedthrough
capacitors used to pass voltage and block RF.
Click on the image for a larger version.

RF sensing

For sensing forward and reflected power I decided to use an external "sensing head" that was connected inline with the radio, on the "tuner" side of the feedline.  

For sensing power in both directions I chose the so-called "Tandem" coupler which consists of a through-line sampler in which a short length of coaxial cable carrying the transmit power (T1 in the diagram of Figure 7) passes through a toroidal core - using some of the original cable's braid grounded at just one end as a Faraday shield.  An identical transformer (T2) is connected across the first (T1) for symmetry.

When carefully constructed this arrangement has quite good intrinsic directivity and a wide frequency range.  Figure 6 shows the diagram of this section.

Figure 7:
Schematic diagram of the "Tadem" coupler.  A bidirectional coupler sends power to
separate AD8307 logarithmic amplifiers - one for forward and the other for reverse.
The outputs, expressed in "volts/dB" are sent to the microcontroller.
Click on the image for a larger version.

The RF sensing outputs of the second tandem coupler (T2) then goes through resistive voltage dividers (R606/R607 for the reverse sample and R603/604 for the forward sample) to a pair of Analog Devices AD8307 logarithmic amplifiers - one for forward power and the other for reverse - to provide a DC voltage that is logarithmically proportional to the detected RF power.  This voltage is then coupled through series resistors (for both RF and DC protection) R605/R608 and to the outside world using feedthrough capacitors.

The use of a logarithmic amplifier precludes the need to have range switching on power meter as RF energy from well below a watt to well over 2000 watts can be represented with only a few volts swing.  Looking carefully at Figure 6 one can see a label that notes that the response of the AD8307 is about 25 millivolts per dB - and this applies across the entire power range of a few hundred milliwatts to 2000 watts.

All of this circuitry is mounted in a box constructed of circuit board material and connected to the display unit with an umbilical cable that conveys power and ground along with the voltages that indicates forward and reflected power.

Figure 8:
An inside view of the Tandem Match (sense unit) showing
the coupling lines, internal shielding and AD8307 boards.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Figure 8 shows the as-built "sense unit" and the two coaxial sense lines are clearly visible.  As can be seen, the "main line" coupler is physically separated and shielded from the secondary sense line, using PTFE ("Teflon") feedthrough lines to pass the signals.

The AD8307 detectors themselves can be seen at the left and right edges of the lower half of the unit, built on small pieces of perfboard.  All signals - including the 12 volt power and the DC voltages of the output pass through 4000pF feedthrough capacitors to prevent both ingress and egress of RF energy which could find its way into the '8307 detectors and skew readings.

* * * * *

In a future posting (Part 2) we'll talk about the final design and integration of this project.


This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

[END]


tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-3826574579249947836
Extensions
Rewinding the stainless steel coils with silver-plated copper wire on the JPC-7 and JPC-12 antennas
coil heatingcopper wire coilheatimpedance matchingJPC-12JPC-7loaded dipolelossqquality factorsilver plated coilstainless steel coilvertical antennawolf river
Show full content

Portable antennas (verticals, loaded dipoles) typically use coils on the lower HF bands to make them electrically "larger" to alow them to be resonated at frequencies well below their physical size - but what about losses in those coils?

While it's "traditional" to use copper wire wire for these coils, there are a number of modern offerings that use stainless steel - and both types have their cheerleaders and detractors, so what's the deal?

Figure 1:
The JPC-12 vertical in the field.

Note:  This post refers to previous entries on this blog about the JPC-7 and JPC-12 antennas that are relevant to this discussion, namely:

  • JPC-7 loaded dipole antenna - link.
  • JPC-12 portable vertical antenna - link.

While some details in this article are specific to these antennas, the general observations may be applied to any HF antenna using loading coils.  I have not (yet?) done A/B field tests with antennas using different (stainless vs silver plated/copper) coils and/or simulations - perhaps a topic for a future blog entry?

* * * * *

In the previous posts I have discussed the JPC-12 vertical and the JPC-7 dipole:  To make either antenna usable at frequencies lower than their natural resonance, inductance is required (the "loaded" part) to achieve resonance at the desired frequency - and for their lowest operating frequency - 40 meters - it takes a fair bit of "loading", indeed.

For this, the JPC-7 dipole, which has a "coil-less" resonance of around 22 MHz, has two coils with adjustable taps - one for each element - a slider being used to adjust the amount of inductance:  Higher inductance = lower frequency.

The JPC-12 vertical - made by the same folks - unsurprisingly uses the exact same coil as the JPC-7 - and for the same reason:  To add inductance to make the electrically-short element - a radiator of approximately 150" (381cm) total length (resonant around 18 MHz without any added inductance and using the originally-supplied components) offer a semblance of a match on lower bands.

Having the coil in common, they also share the same trait:  Loading coils wound with stainless steel - and since, when running on a lower band like 40 meters - all of these coils run quite warm at nominal transmitter power (100 watts or so) there are definitely power losses in the coil - but how bad is it?

Wanting to answer this question, I ordered an extra coil from the seller from which I'd bought my JPC-7 and JPC-12 antennas and with that - and the three that came with the two antennas originally - I now had four coils - enough to do direct A/B comparisons on both antennas when I rewound two of them with silver-plated wire.

Why stainless?

The coils originally supplied with the JPC-7 and JPC-12 are wound with 1mm diameter (18 AWG) stainless-steel wire.  Fortunately, an austenitic (non-magnetic, as checked with a neodymium magnet) type of stainless steel is used:  If this wire been magnetic at all things would be much worse in terms of loss.  While the 1mm diameter stainless steel wire is very rugged physically, the fact that it is stainless steel means that its resistance is quite high compared to copper - in this case the end-to-end DC resistance is about 4 ohms, but the RF resistance, taking the "skin effect" into account, is likely to be very much higher.

Using Owen Duffy's online skin effect calculator (link to archived page) and assuming 1mm diameter, 316 Stainless, the 4 ohms of DC resistance translate as follows to RF resistance including skin effect:

  • 3.5 MHz = 5.2 ohms
  • 7 MHz = 7.2 ohms
  • 14 MHz = 9.6 ohms
  • 28 MHz = 13.6 ohms
These values would be for the entire coil, but since one uses slightly less than the full number of turns of the coil to resonate at 40 meters, the losses should be lower - but the message is clear:  The less of the coil that you need to use, the lower the loss.   The total length of 1mm wire is estimated to be about 180 inches (457cm) and  by comparison, copper wire of this same diameter and length would have a DC resistance of about 0.1 ohm - or, according to Owen Duffy's calculator, a skin effective resistance of 2 ohms at 28 MHz.

Why stainless steel, then?  Obviously, stainless steel won't oxidize/corrode like many metals - and it may be that in quantity, stainless steel wire is less expensive than silver plated/copper, but in this case I believe that there's another reason.  Other manufacturers of portable antennas (Wolf River, for example) advertise the use of stainless steel for some their coils as well, extolling the virtues of the material in regards to its inability to corrode - but I'd be surprised if such corrosion is likely to be the main reason for a hypothetical copper coil's losses in an electrically-short antenna that would make it worse than stainless.

I suspect that the "advantage" of a stainless steel coil is, in fact, related to the fact that it is lossy.  As portable antennas - when used on the lower HF bands - are necessarily smaller than their full-sized counterparts, their radiation resistance will be commensurately lower and this means that the feedpoint resistance may be lower as well when fed with simple matching schemes such as a series coil.

What this means is that rather than somewhere "around" 50 ohms, the feedpoint impedance of an "electrically small" antenna (e.g. one that needs a coil) when using a very low-loss coil may be much lower, resulting in an "unacceptable" VSWR (e.g. >2:1) at resonance:  While this would actually imply greater efficiency due to lower loss, it's "inconvenient" to the user.  While a more versatile means of matching the antenna is possible (multiple coil/capacitors such as a simple antenna tuner or the use of an autotransformer) this complicates construction and operation and would surely increase cost.

As implied earlier, another method of dealing with low feedpoint impedances is to add series resistance to raise it to something closer to 50 ohms to make radios (and their operators) "happy" - but an ohmic resistance in the signal path (say, the use of stainless steel) means power loss, and power loss means heat!

How hot is it?

Figure 2:
The original loading coil (lower) wound with stainless wire as
seen with a thermal infrared camera.  After 60 seconds at 75
watts (on 40 meters) the coil temperature rose by 110F (61C)
from the ambient 53F (12C) to about 166F (74C)!
Click on the image for a larger version.

I've operated both the JPC-7 and JPC-12 antenna a number of times in the field on the "lower" bands of 40 and 30 meters at 100 watts, using both CW and SSB, and observed that in each case, the coil gets "hot".  As the coil forms are (apparently) molded nylon, this is nowhere near the likely softening point of more than 300F (150C) - and being open to the air to allow convective cooling, and using a mode where the duty cycle is intermittent certainly helps prevent a "meltdown".  (Compared this to PVC - which has a softening temperature in the area of 140-180F or 60-80C)

As a test, I put both the original stainless steel and the rewound silver-plated coils in series on the JPC-12 vertical, putting a jumper across the coil not under test.  I then transmitted 75 watts into the JPC-12 vertical for 60 seconds and measured the temperature of the coil with  both an infrared thermometer and thermal camera, noting a temperature rise of about  110F (61C) - still not hot enough to risk melting the coil form, but certainly enough to dissuade one from running a 100% continuous mode like SSTV, RTTY or other digital modes on a hot day!  (Note:  On a hot day a temperature rise of 110F/61C may well be enough to soften a PVC coil form.)

The picture in Figure 2 - taken with a thermal infrared camera - shows the heat produced when testing with the JPC-12 vertical.  (Note:  During this test I swapped positions of the two coils to see if there was much difference in the current/heat of the stainless coil owing to differences in current distribution, but as expected, there was not.)  Similar results were observed when operating SSB and CW on the JPC-7 loaded dipole.

At this point I should make something clear:  The reader should not presume that the use of a stainless steel coil is going to result in an antenna that doesn't work, but rather it implies a degree of loss of efficiency.  As I've made many contacts with both the JPC-7 and JPC-12 in their original form, I know that it's perfectly capable of usable performance - but how much better would it be if we were to address coil losses?

Also, once I had seen the loss in the coil, I couldn't "un-see" it and I had to do something about it.

Choice of wire

In order to minimize losses in an electrically-small antenna it is important to reduce resistive losses and the loading coil and reducing the generation of heat produced by it is a good place to start - and copper wire is an obvious choice.  Knowing that the wire used is 1mm diameter - about 18 AWG - there were a lot of choices:  I had some enameled 18 AWG wire already on-hand and I could easily have obtained some tinned 18 AWG "buss" wire as well.  Finding bare copper wire was a bit more difficult, but since we need only make contact on the ends and along the slider, there's no reason for the entire coil to be bare and thus be subject to oxidization:  If I needed to do so, I could have wound the coil with enameled wire and then selectively remove the insulation along the path of the inductor's slider with fine sandpaper.

On a hunch, I did a search and quickly found on Amazon some 1mm (18 AWG) "Silver plated" copper wire of the same diameter described as being used for jewelry - a small spool costing about US$15 with more than enough wire to re-do three of these coils. Footnote 1

Figure 3:
The coil - still with the stainless steel wire.  On the left end of
the slider (the "top") of the coil can be seen the insulator.
Prior to disassembly move the slider to the end opposite the
insulator (maximum inductance) as shown.  When removing
or installing the Allen screw, keep a firm grip on the end with
the insulator to prevent it from rotating and damaging the
insulator itself or the end of the rod that protrudes into it.
Click on the image for a larger version.The use of silver-plated wire is traditional in RF devices as it has the advantage over copper wire in that as it oxidizes, the result (e.g. silver tarnish) is still a conductive substance, much better than copper oxide - and compared to bare copper it is less (chemically) reactive overall - plus the coil looks very nice!

Rewinding the coil:

The coil form itself - with molded grooves - is quite rugged and lends itself very well to being rewound by hand.  Using a silver-colored "Sharpie" I noted where the original coil's windings started and ended.  I would also recommend using a ruler to take careful measurements of both the start and end points of the coil as well as taking a photo of it - particularly if you are rewinding the coil of a JPC-12 vertical and do not have a second coil as a comparison.

It is also important to note that one end of the slider is insulated to prevent the shorting the unused turns of the coil itself - something that would surely reduce "Q" and overall efficiency:  It is important to reinstall the slider assembly in the same orientation as before to put the insulated end of the slider rod on the "top" (e.g. the side closest to the top of the vertical or end of the dipole).

When rewinding, first move the slider to the end farthest away from the end with insulator on the rod (e.g. the "bottom" of the coil, with the stud protruding) and cover the spring contact with a bit of tape to keep it with the slider body:  This moves the slider - and the contact spring - well away from the end of the wire that we are going to remove first.  Using an Allen wrench, carefully remove the screw holding the end of the slider bar with the insulator (e.g. the part at the top of the coil, with the female threads):  The end of the wire is tucked under the supporting post and the screw itself goes into the brass slug at the center of the coil with the M10 threads used to assemble the rest of the antenna.  Keep tension on the hardware with a finger as you undo this to minimize the possibility of it being launched across the room.

Figure 4:
This shows the end of the new wire looped around the screw
and the post tightened down to hold it in place as it is wound.
A blade screwdriver is used to push the wire into the groove
below the slider boar to keep it from jumping out of the slot.
Be sure to start the wire in the same place as the original coil.
Click on the image for a larger version.
At some point, the coil of stainless steel wire will unwind itself rather forcefully when it slips out from under the screw (it may be a good idea to wear glasses) as it is under a fair bit of spring tension:  Even if you are prepared for this to happen, it can be startling!  At this point be sure that the contact spring is still on the slider block:  If it is not, look for and find it now!

With the tension released, remove the other end of the slider bar.  At this point, carefully remove the slider bar from the insulated end so that you have just the support post and set the rest of it aside.  At this point you'll have a loose coil of stainless wire to set aside.

Take the end of the new wire and using a pair of needle-nose pliers, bend a loop to go around the screw for the support post and using (just) the support post that was insulated for the slider, secure it in place, under the post.  Lay the wire in the groove and at the point where you marked the coil to begin then push the wire into the shallow slot above which the slider moves to hold it in place.

Figure 5:
As the wire is wound, keep pressure on the wire and coil form
with a thumb while rotating the form itself, forcing the wire to
drop into the molded slots.  Continue winding until you get
to where you had previously marked the end of the original
coil - but there's no harm if you add one extra turn.
Click on the image for a larger version.
Keeping the wire under tension - and using a thumb as necessary to hold that tension and push it onto the form - tightly wind the wire onto the form, making sure that it drops into the wire slots.  When you get to where you marked the end of the coil (you can go one extra turn if you like!) push the wire into the slot again (to help hold it in place) and - leaving enough extra to go around the screw on the bottom of the coil - trim it off.  Before putting a loop in the end of the wire to go around the screw, again use a blade screwdriver to push it into the groove to help hold it into place.

At this point I temporarily wrap a the loose end of the coil with a bit of electrical tape to keep it from unraveling while I loosen the post at the top of the coil and align it carefully so that I can plug the slider bar back in and re-mount it and the other post at the bottom of the coil, torquing the screws firmly and being careful to prevent the post with the insulator from twisting as this is done.

Figure 6:
The finishing end of the coil with the wire looped under the
slider rod support and tightened down.  In this picture you
can see how the wire has been pushed into the groove, under
the slider.  To the left of the end of the wire can be seen the
blob of adhesive used to lock the end of the coil into place.
Click on the image for a larger version.

Now, the coil has been successfully re-wound.  While it may not be strictly necessary, I put a dab of "Shoe Goo" - a thick rubber adhesive - on the top and bottom 2-3 turns of the coil near where the wire drops into the slot and connects to the post to "glue" it into place, making sure that it doesn't jump out of its slot.  If you don't have "Shoe Goo" or something similar, some RTV ("Silicone") can work as can epoxy - but cyanoacrylate and polyurethane glues (e.g. "Super" and "Gorilla" glue, respectively) may not work very well - and "hot melt glue" are definitely not recommended as either will likely break loose their bonds across a wide temperature range and changing mechanical stress. 

The trick here is to bridge several turns of wire with the adhesive to lock them into place together as much as adhere them to the coil form.

Results

Figure 7:
The coil rewound with silver-plated wire (upper), under the
marker.  As can be seen, the temperature rose by about 3F
(less than 2C) above the ambient temperature of 53F (12C)
after 60 seconds of key-down on 40 meters at 75 watts.
Click on the image for a larger version.
As expected, the use of lower-loss wire for the coil results in a dramatic reduction of generated heat which no doubt corresponds with an improvement in overall antenna efficiency - The "after" picture (Figure 7) of the coil using the thermal camera after 60 seconds of transmission on 40 meters with 75 watts shows the difference.  As in Figure 2, the original stainless steel coil is on the bottom, but it is the one that is jumpered, putting all of the RF energy into the upper (silver-plated) coil, instead.

Touching the coil immediately after the 60 second key-down, the loss-related heating of the coil wound with silver-plated wire was barely perceptible - a far cry from the original stainless-steel wound coil that was  "hot"!

Electrical comparison of the stainless and silver-plated coils

For capacitors and inductors, one measurement of their departure from the ideal is their "Q" (e.g. "Quality Factor") and for inductors, the majority of this is likely to be the radio of the inductive reactance of the coil (XL) to its ohmic resistance.  I decided to measure the unloaded "Q" (Qu) of the original stainless steel loading coil and the rewound silver-plated coil.

To do this I used a NanoVNA and the method described in W7ZOI's article "The Two Faces of Q" (link) under the section called "Measuring Resonator Q":  I used both methods (#1 using parallel L/C and #2 with L/C in series) to determine the "Q".

Using method #1, for the "Cc " capacitors I used two 1pF NP0 capacitors in series each (0.5pF) which resulted in a 35-45dB through loss at resonance.  I put a high-quality 27pF silver mica capacitor in parallel with the coil under test and measured the -3dB response of the resonance curve.  In this test I set the variable inductor to the mark indicating tuning for 40 meters (around 22 uH) which, with the 27pF capacitor, yielded a resonance in the area of 6.6 MHz for each of the two coils being tested

Assuming that the Q of the series silver mica capacitor (Co) is 1000 (a mediocre value - it's probably a bit higher) the results were:

  • Original stainless steel coil unloaded Qu:  47
  • Rewound coil (silver-plated wire) unloaded Qu: 199

I then used method #2 (with L/C in series) and got:

  • Original stainless steel coil unloaded Qu:  47
  • Rewound coil (silver-plated wire) unloaded Qu: 221

At the risk of being accused of "cherry picking" my results, I'll note that for high "Q" values and where the value of Co is quite small, method #1 is less forgiving in terms of variances and minor losses in the test fixture, so we'll use the value from method #2.  The reader should also note that with a higher Q, deficiencies in the test measurement and effects of the coil itself will result in lower than actual Qu (e.g. you will not get an erroneously higher value of Q) so it is likely that even the higher reading from method #2 on the silver-plated coil is, itself, a bit conservative.

Note:  During testing I observed that just laying the coil on my wooden workbench lowered the Q of the silver-plated coil significantly (15-20%) so all readings were taken with both coils held about 12" (25cm) above it.  I think that there is likely some effect of free-space capacitance that is reducing the reading so I suspect that the "actual" Qu of the silver-plated coil is higher, still.  This same effect was extremely small with the stainless steel coil, further indicative of its lower Qu.  

Comment:  It's worth mentioning that with higher "Q" coils, the physical aspects of the coil itself - namely the ratio of the length versus diameter, spacing between turns, material of the coil form, increasingly affect the Q - both for reasons of geometry (which can affect the amount of wire needed and degree of mutual coupling) and less obvious parameters such as distributed capacitance, etc.

Taking these Qu measurements at face value, we can calculate the approximate "R" (resistive) loss of the two coils using the general formula:
  • Q = XL  / R

Or the more general form, knowing the inductance:

  • Q =  2π f L / R

And rewriting this equation for R we get:

  • R =  2π f L /Q

So, for a frequency of 6.6 MHz (which should be representative of 40 meters) and an inductance of 22uH, XL is approximately 912 ohms, so for each of the two coils the apparent "R" value - which would be a combination of conductor loss and skin effect resistance we get:

  • Original stainless steel coil:  R= 19.4 ohms
  • Rewound coil (silver-plated wire):  R=4.1 ohms

The reader should be reminded that for ideal components, at resonance the reactance of the inductor is losslessly canceled out by the reactance of the capacitor so what we are left with - the value "R" mentioned above - will be the ohmic (conductor loss + skin effect) losses of the materials.  This also means that the "R" value will be added to the feedpoint resistance - and the effect of this "R" value is to lose power as heat as we will see below.  It is not lost on me that the loss values appear to be far higher than those obtained from Owen Duffy's calculator if one presumes skin effect to be the main source of loss - which we know is not going to be the case

The ohmic loss mentioned above is not going to be the only source of loss in a real antenna system:  In the case of a vertical, the "ground" losses (ohmic loss of radials, dirt, etc.) and with any antenna, the materials from which it is constructed (wire, telescoping rods which are themselves stainless steel, any balun being used, etc.) will come into play - and for an "electrically small" antenna such as either the JPC-7 or JPC-12 on 40 meters, will dominate and probably be the main points of loss besides the coil.

This goes to show how - in either case - doing anything to physically "embiggen" the size of the antenna - such as making the elements longer (adding drooping wires to the loaded dipole, adding a tophat to the vertical) will reduce the amount of inductance needed and increase the radiation resistance - both things that will contribute to improved efficiency.

With the stainless coil, it gets worse the lower you go!

Out of curiosity I re-did the Qu measurements using a 270pF silver mica capacitor - which lowered the resonant frequency to about 2.2 MHz - and got the following results using method #2: 

  • Original stainless steel coil unloaded Qu: 29
  • Rewound coil (silver-plated wire) unloaded Qu: 277

Given the lower frequency and lower skin-effect losses I fully expected the loaded Qu to be slightly higher - which is true for the silver-plated coil - but initially I did not expect the Qu to go down on the stainless steel coil so I re-did the measurement using method #1 and got about the same results (to within a few percent) - but in retrospect, I realized that this was to be expected.

As QL can be defined as being the ratio between inductive reactance ( XL ) and skin effect and ohmic resistance (R), if "R" remains pretty high and XL lowers with frequency, the "Q" will be lower:  Since the resistance of the stainless steel wire is so high to begin with, it figures significantly in the reduction of Q and thus the losses incurred.

In perusing the forums in the back-and-forth discussions about stainless steel versus silver-plated coils, people have observed a "hotter" coil at the lower frequencies.  At first glance, this makes sense since lower frequency = "more coil" = more lossy wire - but the fact that - at least at HF - the Q of the stainless coil goes down significantly with frequency makes it even worse! 

Update2 (12/24):

As an update to a previous update, I  recently did very careful measurements using both my HP-4191A RF Impedance Analyzer and my HP-4275A LCR Meter:  These are both the sorts of instruments used by manufacturers of electronic components - including inductors and capacitors - to measure the characteristics to put into data sheets.

Figure 8:
Coil under test on the 4191A
Click on the image for a larger version.

The '4275A only has discrete frequency measurements - 1, 2, 4 and 10 MHz being the relevant frequencies here - while the '4191 is more tunable and designed for for higher frequencies - up to 1000 MHz.  After using both instruments, it's my impression that while both are quite good, the '4275A is a bit better suited for measurements below 10 MHz and unlike the '4191, it can go well below 1 MHz - down to 10 kHz, in fact. For the measurements below I did check at the lower frequencies (1, 2, 4 and 10 MHz) with the '4191 and noted that the inductance values were very close (within a few percent) of those of the '4275A and that the "Q" values were typically within 10-15%.

I used both the HP-4191A and the HP-4275A at frequencies 10 MHz and below and the '4191A up to 30 MHz for both coils and here are the results with both coils set to the paint mark indicating the setting for 40 meters using the stock antenna hardware:

Frequency
(MHz)
Inductance (uH)
(Ag-plated)
Q
(Ag-plated)
Inductance (uH)
(Stainless)
Q
(Stainless)
1 16.77 128 21.4 41 2 16.70 185 18.9 28 4 17.0 272 18.8 28 10 19.0 *
199 * 21.4 *
41 *

As mentioned earlier, the '4275A only measures at "1, 2, 4, 10" intervals so for 7 MHz we must do a bit of interpolation of the "Q" value of the 4 and 10 MHz values which would put it at around 235 for the silver-plated coil and 35 for the stainless steel coil if we trust the values with the asterisks.  (In retrospect, I could have used the '4191A as well for the 6.6/7 MHz frequency, but did not.)

Resetting the coils for the 20 meter paint mark, we get these results:

Frequency
(MHz)
Inductance (uH)
(Silver-plated)
Q
(Ag-plated)
Inductance (uH)
(Stainless)
Q
(Stainless)
1 3.71 68 2.08 11 2 3.69 108 2.06 18 4 3.72 115 2.05 27 10 3.96 256 2.15 35 15 4.3 *
92 * 2.4 34 20 5.1 *
63 * 2.9 22 25 - - 4.1 *
25 * 30 - - 9.2 * 11 *

From the above measurements it appears that the paint marks may have been 1 turn different from each other - explaining the different inductance values - but the point here is to note the "Q" value, which would be generally representative at that frequency.  As can be seen, the "Q" of the stainless steel coil is still pretty bad - never exceeding about 35 - while the "Q" of the silver-plated coil likely 100 or  better at any frequency at which we might use that tap.  (It's possible that the Q of the silver-plated coil at 15 MHz is higher than indicated due to self-resonant effects - see the discussion below.)

These values generally agree with what was measured using the methods outlined above using W7ZOI's techniques.  Anyone who has attempted to measure the "Q" of an inductor likely noted that when the values exceed 100 or so, even the slightest amount of Ohmic resistance has a large effect on the reading, and - especially as the frequency increases above a few MHz - any object near the inductor under test that has dielectric or conductive properties (plastic, metal, fingers!) will skew the results

Measuring a physically-large coil at these frequencies is awkward:  The test equipment itself is metal, meaning that its proximity affects the measurements but we cannot use long wire leads to space it far enough away to avoid this effect as this would affect inductance and also the Q, so we can only do the best that we can

Figure 9:
Coil being tested on the HP-4275A
Click on the image for a larger version.

You may have noted that some values in the tables have an asterisk (*) next to them:  These indicate that self-resonance may be at play here, skewing the "Q" and inductance values - and for the silver-plated coil, the readings at 25 and 30 MHz were nonsensical and varied considerably when I move my hand anywhere near the set-up (further indicating the probability of self-resonance) which is why they were not included.

For this coil - and almost any coil that is adjusted using an adjustable tap (including switched-tap coils and roller inductors) - an issue can arise when only a small portion of that coil is used to attain a low inductance.  As an example, for this coil - when tapped at the 20 meter point - there is a large percentage of that coil that is "unused" and those turns beyond the tap that are "floating", but still inductively coupled to the part of the coil that is in use, acting as an auto-transformer, potentially increasing voltage at the far end.  Since these unused turns still have inductance and capacitance to free space, there will be a natural resonant frequency.  In some devices the designers choose to short the "unused" portion of the coil to reduce this effect, but this can have the affect of reducing Q and increasing losses as it represents an auto-transformer with a shorted output - but this may be an acceptable trade-off to avoid other issues, such as high-voltage arcing. Of course, one way to mitigate this would be to have another coil with fewer turns to minimize this effect when lower values of inductance were required.

In-circuit (e.g. in the antenna) I would expect that the self-resonance of this coil would be at least somewhat quashed, but the "in-situ" measurement of "Q" is a bit more difficult and beyond the scope of this article.

 * * *

Testing with the JPC-12 vertical and JPC-7 loaded dipole.

As noted earlier, the rewound coil was initially tested on the JPC-12 loaded vertical on 40 meters - mostly because it uses only a single coil and at that time I had rewound only one with silver-plated wire.  While I was at it I decided to see if I could detect any difference in the current flowing through the coil at a given RF power output related with the use of the original (and lossy) stainless steel coil and the silver plated coil.  Again, figure 7 shows this rewound coil with a thermal infrared camera just after a 60 second key-down at 75 watts, the temperature rise being just 3F (<2C).

Let us now consider the measured resistive losses of the coil (let's say 20 ohms for the stainless coil, 4 ohms for the silver-plated one) at 75 watts - the power at which we observed the temperature rise.  As we know the approximate current to be expected (about 600mA at 20 watts as measured with a known-accurate thermocouple-type RF ammeter) we can calculate the apparent losses at 100 watts which would equate to about 40 watts for the stainless coil and 5.7 watts for the silver-plated coil.  What this means is that about half of the power is lost in the stainless steel coil - but this still represents less than 1 "S" unit of loss. Footnote 2

Note:  Judging by the ratio of the temperature rise between the two coils (3 degrees F for the silver-plated coil and 110F for the stainless) we would expect far greater difference in power loss between the two coils (more than 30-fold difference, so I'm likely missing something here).

Once I had two silver-plated coils and two stainless steel coils, I could do a direct comparison on the JPC-7 loaded dipole. The JPC-7 is more or less a pair of JPC-12 vertical on their sides, fed with a balun - but rather than having the ground (radial) system to "push" against when radiating RF, it - being a dipole - used both elements against each other and the "ground" under - unlike the vertical where the ground/radial participates directly in current flow - is somewhat less affecting of the impedance, although the proximity of the ground does have the effect of lowering feedpoint resistance and resonant frequency.

With the original stainless steel coils, the feedpoint resistance at resonance is "close enough" to 50 ohms to keep a radio without a tuner happy (it's actually lower than 50 ohms as noted below) - but consider that this means that each half of the dipole is closer to 25 ohms, the two being in series with each other:  With two coils' losses now in the mix - and the fact that a given loss of a coil in a 50 ohm circuit as a percentage was about half that of the same amount of resistance in a 25 ohm circuit - the losses are arguably worse, but "split" between the two elements.

While I didn't have the opportunity to use the thermal infrared camera to measure the temperature rise of the stainless coils on the JPC-7, they both got rather hot to the touch after key-down at 75 watts, indicating a roughly comparable amount of loss as did the original stainless steel coil on the JPC-12 vertical:  As with the vertical there was little change in temperature of the silver-plated coils.

Using a NanoVNA and minimal coax length  Footnote 3 I set up the JPC-7 as per the the manufacturer's instructions on 40 meters with the antenna roughly 3 meters above ground - about the limit of stability for a portable tripod:  From the feed point there were two mast sections, the coil and then the telescoping rod on each side.  Carefully setting the coils and the element lengths to yield the lowest "R" value (e.g. at resonance), I then noted the "feedpoint" resistance at resonance (where reactance, or "J" = 0) using the stainless steel and then the silver plated coils:

  • Stainless steel coils:  38 Ohms (1.32:1 VSWR)
  • Silver plated coils:  15 ohms (3.4:1 VSWR)

It's worth noting that these "feedpoint" readings were taken with the supplied 1:1 balun inline along with a short length of coaxial cable so the above readings are NOT precisely those of the actual feedpoint resistance:  There is likely a bit of loss and transformation occurring in the aforementioned set-up (which includes the balun) so the absolute numbers above may not reflect the actual feedpoint resistance itself.  I also observed that on the JPC-7, the (normalized) 2:1 VSWR bandwidth was lower with the silver-plated coil - an expected effect with higher Q resonator coils.

Note:  On higher bands (e.g. 20 meters and up) the feedpoint impedance was much closer to 50 ohms with either coil and it's likely that nothing special will need to be done to keep a radio "happy".

One might be tempted at first to think that because of the higher VSWR, the silver plated coil constituted an antenna that was "worse" - but that would be wrong - this actually indicates the opposite.  What this measurement shows us is that the apparent total resistance of the two silver plated coils at 40 meters was 23 ohms less (about 11.5 ohms for each coil) than that of the silver plated coil - and this increased resistance is what accounts for the power being lost as heat.

This realization still leaves us with the problem that if we take away much of the loss of the coils we lower the feedpoint resistance which means that we can end up with a rather high VSWR - of over 3:1 - meaning that many radios won't be particularly happy with the situation without throwing a tuner into the mix - which, itself, could contribute the losses we just worked to rid.  This leaves us with several options:

  • Pretend we didn't see this and continue using the stainless steel coils.  This is an obvious choice and I can attest that both the JPC-7 and JPC-12 antennas do work pretty well despite the loss of the coil, but personally, I can't "un-see" the lossy nature of these coils, so that's not an option for me.  As a "portable" antenna is all about compromise of performance, I prefer to minimize the deleterious effects of as many aspects of this "compromise" as I reasonably can.
  • Use an antenna tuner.  Placing a tuner at the antenna is the preferred choice as it will minimize mismatch losses that will result if the tuner is placed at the far end of the cable feeding the antenna (e.g. in the radio.) Whether the magnitude of mismatched loss of the cable when the tuner is placed at the distal (radio) end of the feedline to match the lower-loss silver-plated coil is worse than using no tuner at all with the stainless steel coil cannot be easily answered without knowing the properties of the coax used and how a specific tuner works under the impedance conditions that it might see.  It's worth noting that as the "R" of a load on a tuner drops much below 50 ohms, a typical antenna tuner rapidly becomes less efficient - and can be quite lossy at 10-15 ohms.
  • Rework the balun.  The JPC-7 has a 1:1 balun (one that isn't very "balanced" - but that's another topic) but it is clear that you could  choose a balun that inherently provides a suitable transformation - but more than one such balun would be required to cover all bands.
  • Autotransformer.  A tapped autotransformer used to be a common "thing" many years ago for matching short verticals (e.g. mobile installations) to deal with the low feedpoint resistances at resonance - often well under 20 ohms for a low-loss coil.
These devices seem to be less common these days, but if you look carefully they may still be found on the surplus market - namely the Atlas MT-1 and Swan/Cubic/Siltronix MMBX, both of which offer selections of impedances that will easily yield 1.5:1 VSWR or better at any likely feedpoint resistance at and below 50 ohms. I have tested the Atlas MT-1 (by putting two units back-to-back) and found a single unit to have about 0.2dB of loss on 40 meters which theoretically represents about 5% power loss per-unit - likely a fraction of the loss that would occur even in a good-quality antenna tuner, particularly when it is matching low impedances.  (Useful articles about RF autotransformers may be found in the November 1976 issue of "Ham Radio" magazine - link and the December, 1982 QST - link.)

As mentioned previously, the losses of the stainless steel coil are "lower than about an S-unit" on the lower bands so the user would have to weigh the benefits of the potential losses incurred by matching a silver-plated coil and additional matching versus just using the stainless steel coil and getting a more convenient match and just "eating" the losses.

Conclusion:

The reader should not go away thinking that antennas using loading coils wound with stainless steel wire don't work:  They do - and can be quite effective - but... 

In my measurements, the losses added by the stainless steel coils amounted to roughly "an S-unit" (more or less - mostly less) in a worst-case situation for the vertical antenna and somewhat more loss for the loaded dipole.  I have very successfully used both antennas with their original stainless steel coils for portable, remote and POTA operations with good results.  The difference of "about an S-unit" may be an issue for marginal situations using SSB, but it's less likely to be a problem for CW or digital modes under the same band conditions and distances where the signal margins are lower.

As electrically-small HF antennas will often have lower feedpoint resistance than their full-sized counterparts this means that intentionally using low-loss coils can shift the impedance well below 50 ohms, complicating the matching of the radio to it - particularly in the case of the loaded dipole:  The use of a radio's built-in antenna tuner - particularly with a long length of coax - may well incur losses greater than those of the lossy stainless steel coil without a tuner.

I'm guessing that the use of stainless steel wire for the coils is at least partly a result of it "simplifying" the operation of a portable antenna by resistively (lossily!) providing a feedpoint resistance closer to 50 ohms.  From a standpoint of operational simplicity and cost (both avoiding more complicated matching arrangements) the use of stainless steel - and simply "eating" the power loss - may be a reasonable compromise for most users.

But, it's not as simple as that.  The above is certainly true for the loaded dipole where the feedpoint resistance ends up being quite low (15 ohms on 40 meters) but for the vertical - where more variables are at play (e.g. lengths of radials, length of vertical resonator) one can easily attain a good match (<2:1) to 50 ohms even with the lower loss of the silver plated inductor coming into play.

All of the above should also point to something else:  In my respective articles about the JPC-7 and JPC-12 antennas I noted that performance could be improved by making them electrically "larger" (e.g. the addition of a top hat to the JPC-12 and "droop" wires on the JPC-7) which both reduces the amount of loading inductance and likely increases the feedpoint resistance - both of which contribute to improved efficiency.

Should you toss or rewind your stainless steel loading coil in favor of something using lower-loss material?  If you are trying to eke out every last bit of efficiency from your portable antenna and are prepared to deal with the possibility of slightly more complicated matching requirements (at least on the lower HF bands like 40 and 30 meters) to deal with potentially low feedpoint resistance - then perhaps.  If you operate a lot of SSB, operate using high power (>= 100 watts) and/or high duty cycle, it may well be worth doing what you can to reduce at least one of the sources of loss of these types of portable antenna systems and a potential failure point due to heat.

* * * * *

Footnotes:

  1. This silver-plated jewelry wire that I used is varnished, so it's not actually bare - but this poses no problem with this project:  The protective coating is pierced when the new wire is clamped under the posts and the slider easily "bites" through it after having moved across it a few times, so there is absolutely no need to strip it.  The varnish on the rest of the coil offers protection from oxidation and while silver oxide is a reasonably good conductor, unoxidized silver is much better, so the coating is left intact.
  2. The term "S Unit" is occasionally used in this article, but always with a bit of "hand waving" indicative of its ambiguity.  An "official" international definition of an S Unit is a 6 dB difference in signal level according to IARU Region 1 Technical Recommendation R.1 (where "S9" = -73dBm into 50 ohms - link).  While U.S.-made radios and many SDR programs use this definition by default, Japanese radios are often calibrated with 3 dB S-units meaning that for these radios, smaller amounts of signal change are more strongly indicated.  The reader should always note that while modern SDR-based receivers often do have reasonably good relative signal indications (e.g. the S-meter moves as it should for given changes in signal level) this is likely not true for older, analog radios.
  3. For both transmitter and VNA testing, minimal coax length was used.  For the former, a very short (15cm) coax jumper was used, connected directly between the radio and the antenna feed, the radio being powered by battery.  For the VNA, the instrument was connected similarly - the 15cm coax for the JPC-12 and hanging directly from the JPC-7's balun - to minimize possible effects of common-mode RF currents on the antenna.  In real-world operation this would be emulated by using an effective common-mode choke as close to the antenna feed as possible. 
Related articles:
  • Observations, analysis and field use of the JPC-7 portable "dipole" antenna - link.
  • Observations, analysis and modifications of the JPC-12 vertical antenna - link.
  • "The Two Faces of Q" by Wes, W7ZOI - link.
  • About Q-factor of RF inductance coil - link.
  • High-Q RF Coil Construction Techniques by Serge Stroobandt, ON4AA - link.

   * * * * *

This page stolen from ka7oei.blogspot.com

 

[END]

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4774014561040227748.post-7858518962251870379
Extensions