![]() |
|
Multiplier chains
Hello all,
I am trying to muliply a 72MHz crystal oscillator to 1296 MHz. My first approach was to just make a series of X2 or X3 transistor mulipliers to get the require X18 multiplication fact. However, I have found two pieces of equipment in the junk box which just use diode multipliers. One is an old Electrophone UHF CB radio which multiplies the crystal oscillator by 17 (I think, from memory)then uses helical resonators to filter the desired harmonic. The same approach is used in an old King aircraft transponder where the 138 MHz crystal is multiplied to 960 MHz with just a diode and uses the first two stages of an interdigital mixer to get rid of unwanted harmonics. So, the question is, which is the better approach? I just want a reasonably clean signal source to test a 1296 MHz down-converter. The diode approach seems simpler but is it likely to contain more spurious signals than a transistor multiplier chain? Alan VK2ADB |
Multiplier chains
On Wed, 21 May 2008, Alan Peake wrote:
Hello all, I am trying to muliply a 72MHz crystal oscillator to 1296 MHz. My first approach was to just make a series of X2 or X3 transistor mulipliers to get the require X18 multiplication fact. However, I have found two pieces of equipment in the junk box which just use diode multipliers. One is an old Electrophone UHF CB radio which multiplies the crystal oscillator by 17 (I think, from memory)then uses helical resonators to filter the desired harmonic. The same approach is used in an old King aircraft transponder where the 138 MHz crystal is multiplied to 960 MHz with just a diode and uses the first two stages of an interdigital mixer to get rid of unwanted harmonics. So, the question is, which is the better approach? I just want a reasonably clean signal source to test a 1296 MHz down-converter. The diode approach seems simpler but is it likely to contain more spurious signals than a transistor multiplier chain? Alan VK2ADB I don't know, and one thing to remember is that what was done years ago may no longer be the solution because other things have come along. A single stage of multiplication is of course simplest. But, if you do it in one step, the signal may be so weak that you need stages of amplification at the ultimate frequency. Once upon a time, frequency limits may have made that unfeasible. Also, if you have one stage that basically generates harmonics, and then you expect to pick off the desired frequency, that filtering may need to be much better than multiple stages. If you start with a low enough crystal frequency, the next harmonic may be too close and some of it will get through the filter on the ultimate frequency. If you have a string of multipliers, each does filtering so the next stage only has to deal with filtering out a relatively high frequency. Note that your two examples aren't comparable. The first example you say multiplies by 17, while the second only multiplies by 6. Even in the old days, it wasn't uncommon to see a jump like 6, but something like 17 was less common. The real trick seems to be to start with as high a frequency as possible. Then the multiplication needed is limited, and it's far easier to filter out harmonics from a higher frequency crystal than a lower one. Michael VE2BVW |
Multiplier chains
On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:00:40 +1000, Alan Peake wrote:
Hello all, I am trying to muliply a 72MHz crystal oscillator to 1296 MHz. My first approach was to just make a series of X2 or X3 transistor mulipliers to get the require X18 multiplication fact. However, I have found two pieces of equipment in the junk box which just use diode multipliers. One is an old Electrophone UHF CB radio which multiplies the crystal oscillator by 17 (I think, from memory)then uses helical resonators to filter the desired harmonic. The same approach is used in an old King aircraft transponder where the 138 MHz crystal is multiplied to 960 MHz with just a diode and uses the first two stages of an interdigital mixer to get rid of unwanted harmonics. So, the question is, which is the better approach? Are you building tens of thousands like Electrophone and King did? There was more than 'good' engineering involved with those boxes. The bean counters were all over it, too -- I'm sure. Jonesy -- Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux 38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2 *** Killfiling google posts: http://jonz.net/ng.htm |
Multiplier chains
On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:00:40 +1000, Alan Peake
wrote: However, I have found two pieces of equipment in the junk box which just use diode multipliers. One is an old Electrophone UHF CB radio which multiplies the crystal oscillator by 17 (I think, from memory)then uses helical resonators to filter the desired harmonic. Sounds like a step recovery diode (SRD) multiplier, which generates a very broad spectrum. In extreme multiplication situations a tunable harmonic analyser could be used to select out a single harmonic from the broad SRD spectrum (mix down with a VFO, filter with a crystal filter with bandwidth comparable to the fundamental and mix up the filtered harmonic up to the original frequency using the _same_ VFO, effectively canceling out any VFO drift). However, since there have been prescalers available for quite a while for satellite-TV indoor units, which are capable of at least 2 GHz, why not use a PLL. Put a VCO at 1296 MHz, use a divide it by 64 using the prescaler and phase lock it to a 20.25 MHz crystal. With such high reference frequency, the loop filter can be quite broad, greatly attenuating the VCO phase noise. Paul OH3LWR |
Multiplier chains
You could consider another approach -- phase locking a 1296 MHz
oscillator to your 72 MHz xtal. Dr. G. Alan Peake wrote in news:4833C898.2090302 @nosspam.activ8.net.au: Hello all, I am trying to muliply a 72MHz crystal oscillator to 1296 MHz. My first approach was to just make a series of X2 or X3 transistor mulipliers to get the require X18 multiplication fact. However, I have found two pieces of equipment in the junk box which just use diode multipliers. One is an old Electrophone UHF CB radio which multiplies the crystal oscillator by 17 (I think, from memory)then uses helical resonators to filter the desired harmonic. The same approach is used in an old King aircraft transponder where the 138 MHz crystal is multiplied to 960 MHz with just a diode and uses the first two stages of an interdigital mixer to get rid of unwanted harmonics. So, the question is, which is the better approach? I just want a reasonably clean signal source to test a 1296 MHz down-converter. The diode approach seems simpler but is it likely to contain more spurious signals than a transistor multiplier chain? Alan VK2ADB |
Multiplier chains
Is there some magic to using the 72 MHz oscillator? Gigahertz synthesizers
are cheap and simple these days. Back in the bad old days multiplication was the cheap and easy way to get stable high frequencies. Today, that helical resonator would probably buy the synthesizer chip and associated support circuitry, and you needn't fiddle around with stage after stage. ... "Alan Peake" wrote in message ... Hello all, I am trying to muliply a 72MHz crystal oscillator to 1296 MHz. My first approach was to just make a series of X2 or X3 transistor mulipliers to get the require X18 multiplication fact. However, I have found two pieces of equipment in the junk box which just use diode multipliers. One is an old Electrophone UHF CB radio which multiplies the crystal oscillator by 17 (I think, from memory)then uses helical resonators to filter the desired harmonic. The same approach is used in an old King aircraft transponder where the 138 MHz crystal is multiplied to 960 MHz with just a diode and uses the first two stages of an interdigital mixer to get rid of unwanted harmonics. So, the question is, which is the better approach? I just want a reasonably clean signal source to test a 1296 MHz down-converter. The diode approach seems simpler but is it likely to contain more spurious signals than a transistor multiplier chain? Alan VK2ADB |
Multiplier chains
xpyttl wrote: Is there some magic to using the 72 MHz oscillator? Gigahertz synthesizers are cheap and simple these days. Back in the bad old days multiplication was the cheap and easy way to get stable high frequencies. Today, that helical resonator would probably buy the synthesizer chip and associated support circuitry, and you needn't fiddle around with stage after stage. I just wanted to do it with existing bits. Alan |
Multiplier chains
Michael Black wrote: I don't know, and one thing to remember is that what was done years ago may no longer be the solution because other things have come along. Yes, as others have pointed out, a VCO and PLL is a better solution. A single stage of multiplication is of course simplest. But, if you do it in one step, the signal may be so weak that you need stages of amplification at the ultimate frequency. Once upon a time, frequency limits may have made that unfeasible. I have a supply of MAR-1s that should do the trick there. Also, if you have one stage that basically generates harmonics, and then you expect to pick off the desired frequency, that filtering may need to be much better than multiple stages. If you start with a low enough crystal frequency, the next harmonic may be too close and some of it will get through the filter on the ultimate frequency. If you have a string of multipliers, each does filtering so the next stage only has to deal with filtering out a relatively high frequency. I wouldn't try a diode to go from 72 to 1296 but will double or triple the oscillator and perhaps try the diode from there. Note that your two examples aren't comparable. The first example you say multiplies by 17, while the second only multiplies by 6. Even in the old days, it wasn't uncommon to see a jump like 6, but something like 17 was less common. Sorry, it was a factor of 9, not 17. I just found the circuit:) The xtal was 17 MHz. The real trick seems to be to start with as high a frequency as possible. Then the multiplication needed is limited, and it's far easier to filter out harmonics from a higher frequency crystal than a lower one. Michael VE2BVW Thanks for your thoughts. Alan |
Multiplier chains
Allodoxaphobia wrote: Are you building tens of thousands like Electrophone and King did? There was more than 'good' engineering involved with those boxes. The bean counters were all over it, too -- I'm sure. Jonesy No, this is a "one-off" from my junk box. Alan |
Multiplier chains
Paul Keinanen wrote: Sounds like a step recovery diode (SRD) multiplier, which generates a very broad spectrum. ...... I have a couple of SRDs but they seem to be optimised for 500MHz input and I don't know if they would work at lower frequencies. I would assume that the diodes I mentioned are some sort of SRD or "snap" diode so I might pull one out and try it. Paul OH3LWR |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:11 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com