Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 15 Jun 2014, gareth wrote:
If one were to be building an RX around a scrapped Xtal filter, that would certainly resolve the SSB bandwidth requirement, but what of CW? How about then using one of the USB / LSB CIO Xtals as a crystal-plus-phasing control to circumvent the paying out of shekels? But then what do you use for the BFO? Cascading the filters makes sense. The single crystal filter will be nice and sharp, but have a lousy skirt. Keeping the SSB filter inline ahead of it means that will limit the skirt selectivity of the overall receiver. Given the synthesizers and DDS boards around, a different consideration is to forget about matching SSB and CW filters, and just build a separate IF strip running in parallel with the SSB strip. Just program the right offset into the synthesizer when changing modes. Terminate the mixer with a broadband amplifier, and then feed the two IF strips in parallel. Then you can find a decent CW filter, the frequency doesn't matter so long as it's high enough that image rejection isn't a problem. Or, pick a frequency where crystals are nice and cheap, and build a ladder filter that will have better shape than a single crystal filter. It's apparently easier to build a narrow filter than a wide one. Or, there was a time when those single crystal filters (with the phasing controls) were cascaded to improve skirt selectivity. Instead of the IF transformers, they'd use a triode or bipolar transistor, the cathode or emitter wasn't bypassed so there was the needed 0 and 180degree outputs for the crystal and phasing capacitor, just cascade a few of those. Or another scheme, though likely not as good selectivty, used a string of IF stages with the cathode or emitter bypassed not with a capacitor, but a crystal or ceramic resonator. Certainly a very easy filter, I'm not sure how narrow it gets. The reality is needing crystals can cause rejection of some ideas or otherwise decent filters. One could go with an HF range SSB filter, then convert that down to 455KHz where a mechanical or ceramic filter provides CW selectivity. But then you have to buy a crystal to make that conversion down to 455KHz, not likely to find the right crystal except for paying for a custom ground one. It's easy to find them to get from 10.7MHz to 455KHz, but there aren't many SSB filters at 10.7MHz. If you can get the synthesizer to also output the needed frequency, then it becomes less messy crystal wise. Or, there was that scheme seen in the early days of SSB, where upper or lower sideband was selected by using a conversion oscillator, one frequency above the IF, the other below, so one would cause inversion. A neat trick, and with the right frequencies they'd get away with one crystal properly multiplied, but that sort of thing is difficult nowadays unless one is willing to pay for the crystals. A bit fiddley in the switching from USB / LSB / CW though, but the other CIO should be VXOable to pull it into range. (ISTR that VXO statistics suggest a shift of 1kHz per MHz should be possible) That just sounds messy. YOU complicate things so you can use the BFO crystal for the filter, then have to make do with another BFO crystal. Michael (Train of thought triggered by a pile of bits left over from a scrapped FTDX560 from 30 years ago, and an IF frequency of 3.18MHz.) |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
BPL idea | Dx | |||
Any Idea What This Is? | Scanner | |||
[Fwd: Any Idea What This Is?] | Scanner | |||
PC controlled reciever --- good idea? bad idea? or a just plain ugly one? | Scanner | |||
Any idea on what is better? | CB |