Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
I have checked the local walmart shelves, nope, nothing like I have
mentioned... Warmest regards, John -- When Viagra fails to work--you are DOOMED!!! wrote in message oups.com... | From: Paul Keinanen on Sun,May 8 2005 11:54 pm | | On Sun, 08 May 2005 10:44:27 -0700, Tim Wescott | wrote: | | The basic difference is that with a digital system you either end up | with a clean signal or a useless signal. In an analog system the | character and purity of the signal must be carefully guarded, at | least | until you manage to digitize it. This means that there will be a | much | greater chance that adding a new card to the radio will degrade not | only | the function of the new card, but the function of all the other | cards. | | Second, the PC market is a huge one, with great advantages to be | derived | from common equipment and software, and much smaller advantages to be | | derived from commonality. This is the exact obverse of the radio | market, including homebrew radios. To make a "card" radio would be | to | define a basic radio architecture, probably down to the IF frequency | (or | at least to the point of forcing you to match your IF and front end). | | While improvements could be made within this structure an independent | | experimenter couldn't play around with such things as | direct-conversion, | different IF schemes, etc., without extensive modification. | | I agree that it would be quite hard to make a good quality radio with | some common backplane structure. However, connecting various | functional modules with 50 ohm input and output impedance could be | used to make quite different radios with good specifications. | | That's already been done in the RF industry for a half | century. | | As one example, take the U.S.' AN/PRC-8, -9, -10 series | of manpack transceivers covering high-HF into low-VHF. | Still in the vacuum tube era, all of the IF modules | included the IF tuned circuits as well as the subminiature | tube. If the tube filament burned out, the entire module | was replaced. NO alignment tweaking was required. Design | was done back around 1950. | | As for standards on control...start with the ATLAS (for | USAF test equipment) and continue on to the IEEE-488 | interface. Those standards worked with "modular" | components capable of testing receiver sensitivity down | to noise level with KNOWN signal levels. By the way, | test equipment for RF has been standardized at 50 Ohms | since WW2 days. | | For | instance Mini-Circuits also makes various diode ring mixers, | amplifiers and apparently also VCOs that are boxed and have BNC or SMA | connectors. With each functional module in a metallic enclosure, | controlling the spurious radiation between modules is much easier. I | don't know that anyone would make filter modules, which would be | required to build a complete radio. Also SSB-Electronics sold separate | amplifier, mixer, frequency multiplier and crystal oscillator modules | mainly intended for a 10 GHz transverter. | | Unfortunately the cost of these modules is quite high, apparently due | to low production volumes and large amount of manual labour needed to | assemble them. If there would be a large demand for such modules, it | would make sense to design them to require less manual labour to | assemble them and hence get the price to more affordable levels. | | Define "more affordable." :-) | | "Filter modules" have and are built to order by dozens | (if not hundreds worldwide) of companies. The costs | ARE high because they are built TO specifications and | such have to be TESTED to meet those specifications. | Is there comparable KNOWN/calibrated test equipment | in the average homebrewer's hobby workshop that is | comparable...even at "low" frequencies of HF? Actually, | Kaylie's Mini-circuits DOES use calibrated, automatic | test equipment to check out each module, small | quantities to large quantities. Mini-Circuits doesn't | have the market demand to do production runs in the | 10,000-lot quantities. | | The mystique on L-C filters is largely that...mystique. | Without some good, calibrated test equipment, it is | very difficult to determine what a "filter module" | has for performance. Synthesis (design) of the values | for a particular filter type was arduous until folks | came out with computer-aided design. I have a working | freeware program for PCs on that...send a message in | private e-mail if you want one transmitted to you. | | As to cost, just look at a cellular telephone handset. | Those can cost around US$ 50 each, new. They work in | a band roughly centered at 1.0 GHz. Microwaves. | Complete microwave Rx-Tx with synthesized tuning. | For half a hundred US dollars here. A mere 30 years | ago that would be almost inconceivable. Three years | ago the U.S. Census Bureau said that one in three | Americans have a cell phone subscription. That's | roughly 100 MILLION units either out there or waiting | to be used. Market quantity and competition in that | market are the key to bringing down costs. Radio | hobbyists just cannot possibly get close to such | market quantities. | | While a backplane would not be suitable for running the RF signals, it | would be a good idea to have a common control interface standard. This | might be some sort of serial interface or perhaps a CANbus interface | as used on some AMSAT satellites. | | Who says a "backplane would not be suitable?" :-) | Those PC backplanes carry terribly broad spectra of | RF...from (literally) DC on up to the low microwaves. | No "perhaps" about it. Thing is, the layout can NOT | be done as if it were wire-wrap; i.e., in random | order of wire placement. With broadbanding anything, | every single adjacent trace becomes a COUPLER and | unwitting layouts can produce remarkable crosstalk | effects. Designers have known that for decades and | handle it...all kinds of Application Notes and info | out in public access available for anyone...just too | specialized for the "weekender" small-project | assembler hobbyist. | | The IEEE-488 is a mature standard for control and | interface for computer-controlled, interconnected | systems. Would be a bit TOO all-inclusive for a | special-purpose new design. The "interface" does | NOT have to be some kind of "new" thing used on the | latest whatever out in space. It's just a control- | and-response avenue carrying signals of a standardized | kind...a few wires/traces perhaps...laid out properly | if required to be broadbanded or broad in dynamic | signal range. Not a big thing, but needs some | THOUGHT before becoming hardware. | | | |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Any GE Progress Line Units Still Around? | Boatanchors | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline(tm) Report 1394 - April 30, 2004 | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline(tm) Report 1394 - April 30, 2004 | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline(tm) Report 1394 - April 30, 2004 | General | |||
Why do hams always stand in the way of progress? | Scanner |