Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Jon Noring wrote: [Following up on a thread dating back to January, similar to one I started recently. Responding to Patrick Turner's comments.] Patrick Turner wrote in January 2004: Jerry Wang wrote: 1. Even it is a single channel [AM] receiver, I would still suggest the use of one or two intermediate frequency (IF) stages. Because to achieve good sensitivity you need to have enough gain. Since you only want one channel, there is no need for a frequency converter or any IFTs or IF amps, and a TRF with four tuned circuits in the form of two critically coupled RF trannies will do nicely. Interesting. As I noted in a recent message, it is very intriguing to build a modernized, high-performance AM tube tuner using the "channel" approach. This takes advantage of the fact that licensed broadcasters today must broadcast on specific frequencies, every 10 khz in North America and 9 khz in Europe and elsewhere. So, instead of trying to be able to continuously tune across the BCB spectrum, we can think outside the box for the moment and consider the alternative of building reasonably optimized tuning circuits for each listened-to frequency. There'd be a switch to select from a number of channels, each associated with a specific frequency the user wants to listen to (suggesting a plugin mini-board for each channel, but there are other possible configurations.) The problem is that if you want a channel at 9 kHz intervals to choose from across the band, you need around 12 perfectly set up tuning circuits all with multiple LC circuits. Then you need sitable switching. Far better is to forget all that BS and use a PC to decode the antenna signal. I infer from what Patrick said that it is unnecessary for a single frequency AM tuner to be a super-het design, and that (I assume) a much simpler two RF amp TRF design is sufficient for good to excellent audio quality and good to excellent sensitivity and selectivity. (John Byrns implies the same in his various comments on TRF AM tuners.) But you won't sell many kits set up optimally for just one F. As soon as the owner moves to another area, the radio becomes useless. So, with respect to the channel approach, the next question to ask is if we can use the same two critically coupled RF transformers (as Patrick notes), and *independently* vary several of the other smaller components (e.g., capacitors, resistors, and even inductors) in the two or three tuning stages (if we include the antenna tuner) so as to maintain, from channel to channel in the BCB, reasonably optimal bandwidth and other desirable tuning characteristics? This has al been investigated before, and the conclusions were about as simple as possible by about 1927. Try studying basic L,C, & R theory, and work all this out for yourself. I once fixed a 1932 TRF Radiola with only two single tuned circuits. It gave OK local reception with about 5k of audio BW where the stations were 100 kHz or more apart. It used the then high tech new fangled type 22 tetrode. [With traditional continuous tuning, achieved with multiganged air capacitors, we do indeed vary a few capacitors in the tuning circuitry, but because all of them track each other, in reality we only have one degree of freedom, leading to circuit design constraints for continuous "single knob" tuning. Now imagine, for each channel frequency, to *independently* vary the value of several components at the same time -- we now have several degrees of freedom to play with and thereby hope to achieve reasonably constant (as a function of frequency) bandpass characteristics. 1925 TRFs had 3 or 4 separate tuning gangs, each set to a certain numbered position for reception of a given station. Finding stations was exciting. Try studying the history of radio, and you won't need to ask such questions here. Obviously, architecturally implementing this in a practical AM tuner design is not trivial (we do benefit by throwing away the multigang air capacitor.) However, several ideas suggest themselves. The 1932 Radiola did have its two single capacitor gangs connected by cables, which had corroded, so I used builder's line. It worked OK. For example, we can imagine having multiple plugin slots, where we plug into each slot a PCB mini-board specific to a particular frequency. ? The board will contain the few components whose values *independently* change as a function of frequency. They probably will have trimmers for fine calibration of the center frequency and other bandpass filter characteristics. We may need multiple mini-boards for each channel (one for each tuning stage) if necessary for shielding purposes (to prevent oscillation by stage-to-stage interference if that is a problem.) And if higher frequency channel boards require some minor changes in the circuitry configuration, and not just component value changes, that can easily be done, too. In principle, this tuner might even be able to extend a little beyond (on both sides) the 500-1800 khz MW band -- just plugin the right mini-board circuitry for the frequency desired. This idea is totally impractical for 120 different stations, and plug ins get lost or broken, or worn out. Of course, others here will probably have much better ideas as to how to implement the channel approach. You bet there are, and only possible with chip technology, with press button station selection, and digital station F read out, with digitally generated oscillator frequency for the F converter of a superhet, with ceramic filter IF. Grundig have been multiband radios for about 20 years +. Not a tube in sight inh these lightweight plastic radios bought cheaply by the masses to allow connection to the world's AM, FM, and HF bands, and even amateur SSB stations. But how to improve such designs to make wider AF BW is unknown to me. Try examining the history of Yeasu. Thoughts? Comments? Criticisms? Jon Noring (It's interesting to think of doing the same "channel" approach for an FM tube tuner. Will that also confer several advantages in simplifying the circuit design for the same overall performance level?) Study the way most post 1980 AM/FM tuners are constructed. Tubes cannot be used with such methods. I reckon you got a pile of reading to do. Patrick Turner. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC: Broadband Power Line Systems | Policy | |||
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade | Homebrew | |||
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade | Homebrew | |||
a page of motorola 2way 2 way portable and mobile radio history | Policy | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna |