Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/5/2014 9:42 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Sun, 5 Oct 2014, gareth wrote: Being somewhat of a polymath (just spent all day fence judging at a horse trial) I find that I have a string of ideas faster than I could ever implement them (rather unkindly described in one area as vapourware), but I think it to be useful to punt them for a wider discussion. Musing upon the Huff-and-Puff technique, I wondered if there was a better way to improve the frequency stability of older RXs, because the Huff-and-Puff necessarily brings about a punctuated frequency span (eg, multiples of 32 Hz), and this is what I came up with ... It's worth pointing out that the "Huff and Puff" seems to have been done originally without a frequency counter. The circuitry is similar, but it's just done with counters and gates, no inherent need for the latches and decoders and readouts. I'm pretty sure that came first, unless the concept came from two different places about the same. So you could take any old receiver, so long as it had a decent dial, and add some stability. it was later that the same concept appeared (or so I remember) as an extension of a frequency counter. That makes sense, since there was a transition to frequency counters, and the "lock" circuit was just a bit more. Using the ubiquitous timers to be found en masse in most micros that seem to sell for only a few pence / cents these days, implement a frequency counter to measure the local oscillator. Then, when the user presses a Lock button (yet to be provided) the same micro can program an si570 to generate the same frequency indefinitely and to switch the mixer stage from the original to this new oscillator. As a standalone, the odd lock points are because of the way the counters are arranged, I don't think it was anything to do with some design need (other than simplicity). Once you are adapting a frequency counter, you end up with decade type steps. But (and I've never tried the circuitry) I don't think these tune the way you are expecting. It takes time to count, so you aren't snapping between steps like with an FM broadcast receiver with AFC or a synthesizer of the type in the HRO-500. The notion of the circuit is to keep it locked, with in the nearest step. So only if it drifts beyond the specified step does it jump back (and "jump" is probably the wrong word here). I don't think what you are describing and what the OP is describing are the same thing. His approach is to let the receiver tune normally, but when a button is pushed, the receiver's VFO is replaced with a digital VFO automatically tuned to the same frequency. I don't see any problems with doing that. A frequency counter takes some time to make a measurement which is related to the resolution desired. But it is not in any way limited to decades or even Hertz. But there are other ways of measuring frequency. The Si570 can be tuned in 10 ms, if I read the data sheet correctly when I scanned it. A relative measurement of frequency can be done nearly instantaneously (relatively speaking). So doing a binary search will let you tune to 1 ppm accuracy in 19 steps or about 190 ms. Actually the Si570 can tune faster than that once you get within 3500 ppm so every bit after the first 9 is much faster. At some point taking the measurement takes more time than the tuning as finer resolutions take more and more time. Hmmm, I was thinking as I typed this and I think I realize the binary search doesn't help you much if at all. The measurements are fast in the beginning, but even to determine if your synthesized frequency is high or low for the final bit takes as long as a complete measurement by frequency counter... maybe. If a phase detector with a proportional output is used, it can speed up the measurement. In essence use the Si570 as the VFO in a PLL until it is locked and then hold the settings and make the switch so the receiver is using the synthesized reference. More thinking on the fly... a two stage approach may give the fastest lock. A coarse measurement of frequency to get the VFO in the right ballpark would be fairly fast. Then use a phase detector to lock the Si570 to the VFO through the MCU. It could be used as a digital frequency readout when you are manually tuning. If anyone thinks there could be a market for this device I would be interested in making it. I can see it being sold for as little as $50 in a case with a button and a couple of BNC connectors. This unit would need to be spliced into the VFO signal path somehow. Do receivers typically have inputs and outputs for the VFO? -- Rick |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
an example of delerans accuracy | Shortwave | |||
an example of delerans accuracy | Shortwave | |||
an example of delerans accuracy | Shortwave | |||
Accuracy of Q meters | Antenna | |||
VU4 log accuracy... | Dx |