|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 다음의 항목 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew |
|
|
22개의 메시지 중 1 - 22개 |
|
|
|
| 항목 - 트리로 보기 의 총 22개의 메시지 |
|
|
Have found the 4066 mixer interesting, particularly for the low drive Some application uses 50 ohm on the RF/IF ports, while some say Some applications have DC-termination on IF port, but I don't An interesting application is found on 73, |
|
|
Hi, J M Noeding wrote: > Have found the 4066 mixer interesting, particularly for the low drive > Some application uses 50 ohm on the RF/IF ports, while some say > Some applications have DC-termination on IF port, but I don't > An interesting application is found on > 73, |
|
|
Perhaps I should add, the IC mixer was comparable to a passive DBM fed Steve Ratzlaff wrote: > Hi, > J M Noeding wrote: > > Have found the 4066 mixer interesting, particularly for the low drive > > Some application uses 50 ohm on the RF/IF ports, while some say > > Some applications have DC-termination on IF port, but I don't > > An interesting application is found on > > 73, |
|
|
The on resistance of these devices according to the data sheet is about Richard news:3CDB32E5.EB52F15A@flash.net... > Perhaps I should add, the IC mixer was comparable to a passive DBM fed > by a +7dBm LO input, not a high-level DBM. > Steve > Steve Ratzlaff wrote: > > Hi, > > J M Noeding wrote: > > > Have found the 4066 mixer interesting, particularly for the low drive > > > Some application uses 50 ohm on the RF/IF ports, while some say > > > Some applications have DC-termination on IF port, but I don't > > > An interesting application is found on > > > 73, |
|
|
On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:25:24 GMT, Steve Ratzlaff <sratz...@flash.net>
>Hi, thanks for the reply. >I have done rather extensive tests with both the HC4066 and the HC4053 >used as a mixer. These tests include checking mixer output (IF) IMD at >various impedances. Best IMD is achieved with both IC's when all ports >are terminated in 50 ohms, exactly like the passive DBM requires. My >particular application was for an LF to HF upconverter. I initially >tried the "standard" diplexer at the mixer output, but further tests >showed I could not achieve a flat IF response--the diplexer had a >narrower bandpass than the 500kHz I wanted. I ended up terminating the >mixer with a simple wideband one-transistor amp, with 50 ohm in/out >impedances, and adjusting its gain to give an overall mixer conversion >loss of 0 dB. >The mixer input was fed with a wideband ferrite trifilar transformer; >the oscillator port from an HC04 oscillator output (not necessarily 50 >ohms). >Performance of this upconverter is good. >Perhaps I should add, the IC mixer was comparable to a passive DBM fed >by a +7dBm LO input, not a high-level DBM. >Steve AA7U Want to use Philips or Motorola HC4066 on 12V supply. The maximum signal level is 4.28V RMS. Using 200 ohm impedance the power level is max 92mW or +19.6dBm, 6dB higher with 50 ohm RF/IF termination, and still 16.6dBm with 400 ohm terminations. My idea is to use a grounded gate amplifier with MPF105 or BF245B. Understood that you ended up without diplexer and the 50 ohm amplifier wonder if somebody has tried 2/3 4053 instead of 4/4 4066? 73, Jan-Martin LA8AK |
|
|
Hi, J M Noeding wrote: > On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:25:24 GMT, Steve Ratzlaff <sratz...@flash.net> > >Hi, > thanks for the reply. > My idea is to use a grounded gate amplifier with MPF105 or BF245B. > Understood that you ended up without diplexer and the 50 ohm amplifier > wonder if somebody has tried 2/3 4053 instead of 4/4 4066? > 73, Jan-Martin LA8AK |
|
|
I have been using 4066, 4016, and 4053 switch ICs. in mixers for about 20 I aklso have a new receiver architecture using these mixers in a number of |
|
|
On Tue, 14 May 2002 17:45:46 +0800, "Rodney Green"
<rodagr...@bigpond.com> wrote: tnx. >I have been using 4066, 4016, and 4053 switch ICs. in mixers for about 20 >years or so, and I have found them to be very insensitive to termination >impedance. I developed a mixer using 74hc4053 called The Ned Kelly mixer >(Ned kelly was an armour wearing bullet proof bush ranger in the 1800s) This >was published in Electronics World Jan 1999 P59. >I aklso have a new receiver architecture using these mixers in a number of this is what I expected, but it seems often to be lot of experience presented by hams which is not based in any facts, so you may wonder what is the secret in 50 ohm terminations. In my opinion 200 ohm is better for RF, and for my purpose - on 136kHz - I don't see the need to use a diplexer for proper termination on 100MHz or above So I am pleased to learn about your experience regarding termination. 73 |
|
|
I would expect 200 ohms would be a good range although there are I would make sure to match the output of the Antenna to the same You do lose a little of the maximum input level, due to the impedance As for terminating the LO frequencies at the mixer output with a diplexer, ---------------------- So, the tradeoff choice is, lower conversion loss/lower intermod point You can more or less predict the distortion point, since the RF will clip I'd supply DC on the output side of the mixer, and AC couple the input. Given the noise level at the VLF frequencies you want to use, I'd be Jim Pennell |
|
|
as far as I have not enough expirance with a 4066 mixer, but Markus DL8MBY |
|
|
> as far as I have not enough expirance with a 4066 mixer, but The FST 3125 from Fairchild, Texas Instruments, Perricom and others exhibits > what about the adg711-712-713 ic from AD. > The ON resistance is between 4 to 8 ohm depending on the > supply voltage. > The ic is much more expansiv, but is suitable up to 200MHz. > Would be great to find someone to make some test with it. under 4 ohms of Rdss, works to somewhere well above 30 MHz, has the switch drivers on board, and an Ip3 of above +42 dBm, (With square wave LO) . It costs under a buck in single quantities from DigiKey. (TI is $1.02). I've measured under 5 dB conversion loss in the "H" mode configuration with both MCL TT4:1A transformers at 200 ohms and MCL T1:1T's at 50 ohms, both at 20 meters. Slightly more using T4:1's. It all gets better (But not a lot) when you raise Vdd from 5 volts to 7 volts, max ratings. Available in both SSOP and TSSOP. W4ZCB |
|
|
is such a switch ic suitable for qrp (means power consumption) Would be great to get some hints what to pay attention for when Markus DL8MBY "Harold E. Johnson" schrieb: > > as far as I have not enough expirance with a 4066 mixer, but > The FST 3125 from Fairchild, Texas Instruments, Perricom and others exhibits > W4ZCB |
|
|
"Markus Wolfgart"
> Hallo Harold and the world, I don't know the power consumption. Not being green or into QRP, I've never > is such a switch ic suitable for qrp (means power consumption) measured it. My board layout includes 3 digital 74AC IC's in a variable divider chain and all 4 chips draw 60-100 mA at 5 volts, depending on LO frequency. (110 mA at 150 MHz, about the upper limit of AC logic). I use the 3125 for RF mixing to an RF IF frequency. I have used the FST 3253 (Only takes one for both I and Q) in my construct of Rod Greens Bedford receiver. As far as either of us know, it was the first one built. (After his, and his great article in QEX) Works fine. I use the Burr Brown INA 103 op-amp amplifiers post detection ahead of the phasing networks.
> Would be great to get some hints what to pay attention for when package with it's 0.025 leads! W4ZCB |
|
|
now I've built the new converter using 74HC4066 with 10V supply. Use a Lowest CW signal level easily tuned is -120dBm (75 ohm) and lowest The idea for input circuit (although it seems to be somewhat wrong as A xtal filter described by SM5BSZ was planned, but I didn't succeed 73 On Wed, 15 May 2002 19:34:17 -0700, "Jim Pennell"
<NoS...@killspam.com> wrote: -- > I would expect 200 ohms would be a good range although there are >tradeoffs. > I would make sure to match the output of the Antenna to the same > You do lose a little of the maximum input level, due to the impedance > As for terminating the LO frequencies at the mixer output with a diplexer, >---------------------- > So, the tradeoff choice is, lower conversion loss/lower intermod point > You can more or less predict the distortion point, since the RF will clip > I'd supply DC on the output side of the mixer, and AC couple the input. > Given the noise level at the VLF frequencies you want to use, I'd be > Jim Pennell remove ,xnd to reply |
|
|
Many thanks for this info Harold. Markus DL8MBY -- ============================================= Markus Wolfgart DLR ============================================= "Harold E. Johnson" schrieb: > "Markus Wolfgart" > > is such a switch ic suitable for qrp (means power consumption) > I don't know the power consumption. Not being green or into QRP, I've never > > Would be great to get some hints what to pay attention for when > Layout Symmetry!!! And square wave LO. And a steady hand if using the TSSOP > W4ZCB |
|
|
> Would like to make my own experience, but by the way I've used a pair of 9851's (Without the 6X PLL, too much jitter in that for > did you ever try a DDS IC for the LO for example > the ad9854 (10bit DAC). This chip provide tow outputs, > one for I and one for Q channel. > I was told, that it's not so easy to make the low pass > filter following the DDS IC to reduce the frequencies > above clock/2 when taking the phase into account especially > when trying to construct a I&Q-DC-Rx. But this is another story. > Markus the application) in a VNA. Fine for that purpose, but I wouldn't want to use a straight DDS for a LO without PLLing it to a VCO to kill the spurs. I sure wouldn't want my neighbor at the foot of the hill to be using one at any power level above a watt or two, his phase noise at a couple hundred KHz is bad enough now. You can make a perfect quadrature output with a pair of 7474's, but it cuts W4ZCB |
|
|
I have read some articles in the German ham magazine Funkamateur 73 & gd dx Markus DL8MBY ============================================= Markus Wolfgart DLR ============================================= |
|
|
On Sat, 11 May 2002 03:17:13 GMT, Steve Ratzlaff <sratz...@flash.net>
>Hi, in my circuit CD4069UBE draws only 10mA. I wasn't sure how much >My experiments were with 5 and 6volts, VCC on the IC; I didn't try >12volts. Performance was somewhat improved (better IMD) with 6 volts, so >I would assume significantly better at 12VCC. That is a huge max input >signal you're expecting. A high-level DBM (+23dBM LO) would be straining >to stay linear with such a large input. I would guess this IC mixer will >not be linear with such a large input, but perhaps your application is >not as a receiving mixer but as a transmitting mixer, where strict >linearity may not need to be as desirable. voltage was safe to use with such inverter in linear mode, so I reduced the voltage with a 220 ohm resistor from 12V. Suppose it is the first limiter which draw current and the next two inverter stages of CD4069UBEand HC4066 draw very little current, so I really don't understand the 23dBm LO level you mention.. LO frequency is 196kHz 73, |
|
|
I used a pair of 9851s phased 90 degrees apart to run one of my DC However, my experience was that the 9851's generated a fair number of - Dan Tayloe, N7VE; Phoenix, Az; Az ScQRPions Markus Wolfgart wrote: > Hallo Harold, > I have read some articles in the German ham magazine Funkamateur > 73 & gd dx > Markus > DL8MBY > ============================================= > Markus Wolfgart > DLR > ============================================= |
|
|
Dan Tayloe wrote: Those 10-bit DDS parts are junk (IMNSHO). Fine for a BFO, but I > I used a pair of 9851s phased 90 degrees apart to run one of my DC > However, my experience was that the 9851's generated a fair number of wouldn't use them for anything else.... certainly not to drive any mixer that doesn't have a sharp filter in front of it. The 9852/9854 generation is much better, and they're not really that -- jm ------------------------------------------------------ |
|
|
Actually the extra two bits (12 vs 10) for the 9854 vs the 9851 don't My experience showed me that the 9851 was not a good part for direct use On the other hand, the even less complex 9835 does well in the DSW I myself am trying to pursue very high end receiver performance with One good thing I noticed when using the dual 9851s, the quadrature drive - Dan, N7VE John Miles wrote: > Those 10-bit DDS parts are junk (IMNSHO). Fine for a BFO, but I > The 9852/9854 generation is much better, and they're not really that > -- jm > Dan Tayloe wrote: > > I used a pair of 9851s phased 90 degrees apart to run one of my DC > > However, my experience was that the 9851's generated a fair number of |
|
|
On Thu, 16 May 2002 10:43:22 GMT, "Harold E. Johnson"
<W...@mchsi.com> wrote: A TI 74HC4066 has ON-resistance of 15 ohm typical, see >The FST 3125 from Fairchild, Texas Instruments, Perricom and others exhibits >W4ZCB http://www-s.ti.com/sc/ds/cd74hct4066.pdf while Philips 74HC4066 has 20 ohm at 9V supply, see http://www.philipslogic.com/products/hc/pdf/74hc4066.pdf You normally connect two and two switches in parallel, then you have The CD4069UBE buffer draws 10mA@10V, not certain if the 74HC86 will It is so easy to wind your own transformers, so I don't see the point One problem remain. Since everybody is only concerned about using 50 73 |
| 메시지의 끝 |
| « 최근 - BC-348 | Ham project, Maryland area - 이전 » |
| 다음의 항목 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew |
|
| ||||||
| ||||||
|
|
| Google 홈 - 이용 약관 - 개인정보 보호정책 - 보도자료 & 도움말 |
©2006 Google