Podcasting since 2005! Listen to our latest podcast here:

Podcasting since August 2005! Listen to Latest SolderSmoke

Showing posts sorted by date for query "Open Circuits". Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query "Open Circuits". Sort by relevance Show all posts

Friday, May 29, 2026

A Quick Review of "Open Circuits" by Eric Schlaepfer and Windell H. Oskay


Wednesday's post about this book caused me to pull it off my shelf and to take another look.

Highlights from the SolderSmoke perspective: 

Page 34  Glass Capacitors.  Phil W1PJE left me some. 

Page 48  Ferrite Beads.  Underrated.  People often don't think they will work. 

Page 66 Glass-Encapsulated Diodes.  Yes, 1N4148's in our Direct Conversion Receiver. 

Page 70 2N2222.  In a metal can. 

Page 72 2N3904.  We use them so often. 

Page 90 Color LEDs.   The Green Hornet beacon in Cap Cana, Dominican Republic. 

Page 116  Electromagnetic Relay.   We use them a lot. 

Page 142 DIP sockets  I recently struggled with them with my NE602 chips. 

Page 182  12AX7.    Thermatron! 

Page 186 Cathode Ray Tube.   I have some. CuriousMarc recently fixed one. 

Page 190 Mercury Tilt Switch. I had one as a kid.  You can change a reflector to a director.  

Page 196  Dipped Silver Mica Capacitor.    We use them.  A lot.  Sometimes as NP0 caps. 

Page 198  IF transformer.  S-38E.  HQ-100.

Page 206 - 207 Point Contact Diode and Germanium Diodes.  Crystal radios. Great fun. 

Page 210 Windowed EPROM. Was this the Rom chip in the TW-100s? 

Page 212 Core Memory.  Rope!   As used in the Apollo spacecraft. 

Page 228 Single-Side Printed Circuit Boards.  Almost (but not quite) Manhattan. 

Page 238 MicroSD Card.  I have one in my Drone. 

Page 262 Crystal Oscillator.     TCXO?  In a can?  As in Dean's WSPR transmitter? 

What do you guys think? 

Wednesday, May 27, 2026

Eric KK6GZM of CuriousMarc is the Author of Open Circuits



I've been watching the CuriousMarc YouTube channel for a while now.  I am sure that many of you also watch.  We know that Marc is a ham (AJ6JV).  But I didn't know that Eric (who appears on the show a lot) is the author of the Open Circuits book.  This book has a lot of photos of electronic components that are cut or filed open to show what is inside.  I came across the book some time ago, and could not resist.  I didn't know that Eric was an author!  Is Eric also a ham? (With the social media handle TubeTimeUS, there is a good possibility.) 

NOTE:  Our friend Walter KA4KXX checked and found that indeed, Eric is a ham!  He is KK6GZM.  FB! 

Here is what Gemini has to say about this: 

On the CuriousMarc YouTube channel, Eric is Eric Schlaepfer, a highly skilled hardware engineer and hardware reverse-engineering expert who frequently collaborates on the channel's most complex vintage electronics restorations.

Online and on social media, he is widely known by his handle, TubeTime (@TubeTimeUS).

When Marc and the team hit an incredibly stubborn digital or silicon-level roadblock, Eric is often the "reinforcement" they call in. He brings massive engineering expertise to the bench, along with a suite of specialized diagnostic tools.

A few things he is best known for on the channel and in the broader electronics community include:

  • Deep-Dive Troubleshooting: He famously helped Marc debug a dead IBM PS/2 Model 77 computer by hookup up a logic analyzer and using Ghidra software to reverse-engineer the custom BIOS down to the binary level, successfully tracking down a deeply hidden motherboard ASIC failure.

  • The Open Circuits Book: Eric co-authored the popular book Open Circuits: The Inner Beauty of Electronic Components (with Windell Oskay of Evil Mad Scientist Laboratories). On CuriousMarc, he has featured cross-section videos where he literally slices electronic components—like old resistors, capacitors, and ICs—perfectly in half and polishes them to reveal their intricate internal engineering under a microscope.

  • The MOnSter6502: Outside of the channel, he is famous in the retro-computing world for designing and building a fully functional, giant-sized MOS 6502 processor made entirely out of thousands of discrete, individual transistors and surface-mount LEDs so you can visually watch the data flow through the registers.

Whenever Eric shows up in the lab next to Marc, Carl Claunch, and Ken Shirriff, you know the video is about to dive deep into microscopic component analysis, logic analysis, or advanced circuit reverse-engineering.

-------------------------------------------------

Here is the CuriousMarc video about the bad French resistor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2UXwW55kAI

Here is the cover of the book: 



Friday, January 10, 2025

"The Magic That Only Comes from a Radio you Built Yourself" -- The Many Benefits of True Homebrew

 Receiver on the bottom,built around 1997. 
Transmitter upper right, built in 1993. Power supply upper left, 1998.  


Adventures on the road to HB

Homebrew Radios in the age of the Internet

By Bill Meara, N2CQR


MAGIC

"I listened to the magic that only comes from a radio that you built yourself." In that one sentence (posted to an Internet e-mail group), Mike, VE2GFU, nicely described the feeling that can arise in the midst of a room full of solder smoke... and the reward that awaits those who endeavor to build their own radio receivers. In an age of mass produced, homogenized, high price commercial equipment, there is still magic to be found in the production and use of simple homebrew radios. I recently put together my first superhetrodyne communications receiver - I had so much fun with it that I thought my fellow amateurs might be interested in the project.

I was a frustrated teenage radio builder....

When I put my first homebrew low power transmitter on the air a few years ago, I thought I'd maximized my ham radio satisfaction. I gleefully reported to other stations that "RIG HERE IS HOMEBREW". For a while, I really thought that my fun meter was pegged! But everytime I looked at the commercial receiver that sat alongside my QRP transmitter, I knew in my heart of hearts that I still had some work to do. The truth was that only half my station was homebrew. Until I built my own receiver, I would not be able to enjoy the warm glow of satisfaction that comes from running a completely homebrew station. As a kid, I'd always looked with wonder and envy at the exotic homebrew stations in the DX column of QST magazine. I wanted to do what those intrepid foreigners had done. I decided to finish the job. I decided to build a receiver.

"Receivers are Difficult!!!"

I approached the project with some trepidation. Since my earliest days in the hobby I'd heard that "receivers are difficult." There seemed to be a deeply believed and long-standing bit of conventional wisdom that said that most hams could sucessfully build transmitters, but receivers were somehow beyond our capabilities. During radio club meetings, old timers would share tales of homebrew adventures from days-gone-by. They told of tube transmitters built on chassis fashioned from purloined street signs. There were a lot of great stories, but they were all about transmitters. When I'd ask about receivers, the old timers would look a bit sheepish as they admitted that their receivers were all commercial.

Receivers are difficult. I knew from personal experience that there was some truth in this axiom. As a teenager I had tried to barge into the ranks of the homebrewers with an audacious attempt at reproducing a varactor diode-controlled receiver I'd seen in one of the ham magazines. I never got it to work. As I approached this recent receiver project, I think a desire for vindication - and a desire to finish the job I started in 1974 - was part of my motivation.

Barebones, no frills, one step at a time

The "Barebones Superhet" presented in a July 1982 QST article by Doug DeMaw seemed to be just what I was looking for. As the title imples, it is a very simple, easy-to-understand circuit. Most of the stages were built around discrete solid state components - no mysterious IC black boxes. 

Remembering my bitter defeat in my earlier receiver project, I decided to take a fool-proof approach to this one. I took Doug DeMaw's very simple schematic and made it even simpler by dividing it up into separate stages. I would build each stage one at a time, each on a separate printed circuit (PC) board. For my receiver there would be separate boards for the Radio Frequency Mixer, the Variable Crystal Oscillator (VXO), the intermediate frequency (IF) amplifier, one board for the Product detector/beat frequency oscillator (BFO) and one audio amplifier board. I would test each stage before going on to the next.

Parts acquisition in the age of the Internet

As a teenage wanna-be radio maker, parts acqusition had been a major problem. I'm happy to report that the Internet and Express mail services have largely eliminated the tortuous "waiting for the mailman" vigils that many of us endured back in the dark ages. I kicked off my project with a brief session involving several parts catalogs, my computer and a credit card. A few short days later, the boxes started coming in and actual construction was about to begin.

While the catalog houses provided many of the parts, my junk box, hamfests and fellow hams were the sources for many of the components. I think that this diversity of parts sources adds to the character of the final product. When I look at my receiver, I can see parts that came from my old friend (now SK) Pericle, HI8P. There are components in there that were sent to me by Tom, W1HET and several other ham friends. There is a reduction drive from an old Swan 240 and a grommet from a deceased Heathkit Luchbox. The LM386 audio amplifier chip (a concession to modernity!) came out of a Kanga Kits direct conversion receiver; I didn't have an eight pin socket for it, so I scrounged through my junk box, found a 16 pin socket and cut it in half. Like I said, this approach to parts acquisition gives the radio some character. 

Lunch time PC board design

My "one stage at a time" approach resulted in some special challenges and opportunities. I had to design the PC board patterns myself. For hams accostomed to using ready-made PC boards, or simply reproducing patterns made by others, this might seem like an intimidating task, but since I was dealing with only one stage on each board, it turned out to be easy and rewarding. I was using boards that fit very conveniently in the front pocket of my shirts. I made PC board design a lunch-hour project. I would go to work with my schematic and a couple of index cards in my pocket. I'd cut the cards down to PC board size and used them to plan the layout of the boards. I usually had to do two or three "drafts" before I was satisfied, but I found that I was able to do about one board per lunch hour. Doing the layout myself definitely added to the "I did it myself" feeling at the end of the project.

I set a goal of completing one board per week - most of the design and planning would take place during the lunch hours, most of the construction took place early on Saturday and Sunday mornings.

Testing, testing....

My arsenal of test gear is far from laboratory grade! I have a little (ancient) Eico 435 oscilliscope and an old Heathkit signal generator. I bought the scope for 25 dollars on the Internet. The generator was a 15 dollar hamfest purchase. The 'scope will only read up to about 5 Mhz, but since the IF of my receiver would be 3.579 Mhz, I knew it would be very useful.

Testing the stages was a lot of fun. The VXO and BFO were easy to test - I just listened for the signal on a Radio Shack general coverage receiver. For the IF AMP I used the signal generator to put some 3.579 Mhz energy into board and used the 'scope to make sure it was amplifying.

One of the most difficult parts of HF superhet construction is the IF filter. Doug DeMaw's circuit employed a three crystal ladder filter. Doug described it as simple and easy, but to me it looked a bit intimidating. One of the benefits of homebrewing is that you can really "have it your way". Wishing to avoid a frustrating battle with a complicated filter, I searched through the QRP/Homebrew literature for a simpler approach to IF filtering. I found what I was looking for in another article by DeMaw. In this cicuit he used one crystal with a resistor to ground. I decided to use this simple filter and put off construction of the more sophisticated (and narrow) three crystal circuit until later.

So I redesigned the RF mixer board to accomodate my simplified filter. I wasn't quite sure if this little foray into electrical engineering would be successful (my degree is in economics!) so the testing of this stage was tinged with some anxiety. I set the signal generator for the low end of the 20 meter band. I got the VXO oscillating and put the scope on the output of my simple filter. Slowly I tuned the generator across the 20 meter CW band. All of a sudden, at one very specific point, a big 3.579 Mhz signal popped onto the 'scope screen! Eureka! My mixer was mixing and my filter was filtering!

Holy cow! It really works!

After about a month and a half of this, I had assembled an impressive looking collection of small circuit boards. I couldn't resist putting them all together on the workbench to see if this thing would really receive. Armed with a set of alligator clip test leads I connected inputs to outputs. It was early in the morning and 20 wasn't really open yet, but it was Saturday and I figured there were some folks out there trying to coax the ionosphere into action. As I was checking the test leads, I started to hear - almost imperceptiably at first - CW. At first I thought the sound was coming from my Drake 2-B, but a quick check showed the Drake was completely off. My little creation was actually receiving radio signals!

As late afternoon rolled around I decided to see how my still incomplete device would handle SSB. As luck would have it, my crystal let me tune around 14.200 Mhz. There I found the very melodious tones of EA3OT. Echo Alfa Three Oooold Timer, with his "six over six over six" antenna system filled my shack with beautiful phone signals. My relatively wide, one crystal filter was ideal for reception of Mike's fine signal. There really was something quite magical about looking at my little collection of boards and realizing that they were receiving signals from far-away Barcelona. I was experiencing "the magic that only comes from a receiver that you built yourself..."

Enclosure (sort of)

Now it was time to start putting the radio in a proper enclosure. A few years ago, Paul Carr, N4PC, * (*Described in several editions of the CQ magazine during 1993) built a 40 meter solid state rig on a wooden base. Disliking metal work, I immediately appreciated the wisdom of this approach. Realizing that I'd probably want to add additional circuits later on, I decided to make the chassis about twice the size I really needed. A visit to Home Depot yielded a suitable (16"X11") piece of pine. I also picked up some very light sheet metal that I thought would help with the front panel.

I had three large double sided PC boards in the junk box. The circuit boards were attached to these PC "base" boards with some Radio Shack spacers and 4X40 screws. The Base boards were bolted to the wooden base.

I used the sheet metal to fashon an L shaed front panel. The material was not quite rigid enough, so (in keeping with a very old ham tradition of stealing radio materials frm the kitchen) I put a little "cookie baking sheet" between two layers of the Home Depot sheet metal. The L shaped panel was afixed to the pine base. A smaller L shaped piece of scrap aluminum was attached to the back side of the pine chassis - this would serve as the mounting point for the antenna and power connectors.

My creation was starting to look like a radio. Better yet, it resembled one of those impressive homebuilt rigs that I used to see in the DX column of QST. I felt I was getting close to membership in the that elite group of intrepid hams who had actually "rolled their own." I was starting to feel a kinship with all of those intrepid, creative wackos who build things in their basements or garages. I felt part of the same homebrew tradition that dates from in the early days of ham radio. Just like the guys who build small airplanes in their backyard shops, just like those guys in California's Homebrew Computer Club, I was approaching the point when I could begin sentences with the proud phrase, "I built..."

Debugging

But of course, I was not done yet. Not by a long shot. When you are homebrewing, you have to be patient. You have to start out realizing that you are definitely not involved in "plug and play" radio.  Very few homebrew receivers will work properly the first time you fire them up. The radio needs to be properly aligned. Amplifiers and oscillators need to be tamed. But I think this is one of the most satisfying part of the homebrew experience. It is during this phase that you really get the sensation that you are molding your creation to satisfy your requirements. You are physically molding it by deciding where you want the control knobs and external connectors. And (even better) you are molding it electronically by deciding how you want to to sound. It is during this phase that you really put electronic theory to work.

I had a few very common problems. My audio amplifier would scream like a banshee if I turned the gain up. My variable crystal oscillator was kind of sluggish - it sometimes wouldn't start up right away when I applied power. A preacher from the 22 Meter broadcast band urged me to repent every time fired up my new radio. And worst of all, 80 meter CW signals from the venerable W1AW jumped right over my receiver's front end filters, landing right in my 3.579 Mhz IF frequency. These signals not only appeared to be mocking my technical abilities, but they also seemed to be making fun of my code speed.  Like I said, this was definitely not plug and play.

In my effort to fix these problems, modern technology provided me with resource that was completely unavailable during my earlier (1974) battle with a superhet: the Internet. The 'net puts the radio builder in almost instantaneous contact with a worldwide network of entusiastic solder melters. I found the rec.radio.amateur.homebrew USENET group to be an excellent source of information, advice and moral support.

The internet can turn your homebrew project into a multinational enterprise. Hams from around the world chimed in with helpful hints. It was a lot of fun to encorporate suggestions from distant Australia into my little HB receiver. And it was very reassuring to know that all those far-flung Elmers were available if I got into a real jam.

I was particularly gratified when I got some e-mailed words of encouragement from the guy who had designed the receiver I was building, Doug DeMaw, W1FB. Doug's son had spotted one of my pleas for help in one of the USENET groups and had relayed my message to his father. Doug sent me a very nice and encouraging note. I was saddened to learn that shortly after our exchange he became a silent Key.

Solutions to most of my problems came very quickly - and I learned something with each of them.

The screaming banshee audio amp turned out to be the result of a simple circuit error - I'd failed to ground one of the bypass caps on the LM386 AF amp chip (the only IC in the rig).

The Variable Crystal oscillator was made more obedient by playing a bit with the values of the two capacitors that madeup the feedback network in the Colpitts oscilator.

The preacher and W1AW required a little more effort. I decided that I needed a bit more filtering at the front end of the radio. I could have easily just thrown in one or two more tuned circuits between the antenna and the mixer, but I was concerned that losses in these circuits would adversely affect receiver sensitivity. Roy Lewllan, W7EL, had advised me (via the net) to perform a simple check of receiver sensitivity: I was told to listen to the receiver output while connecting and disconnecting the antenna. If connecting the antenna resulted in a noticeable increase in the noise output of the receiver, there would be no need for additional front end amplification. My receiver was not really doing well on this test, so I was concerned that adding more tuned circuits at the front end would worsen the sensitivity problem. It seemed to me that a stage of RF amplification that included a couple of tuned circuits might help me banish the unwanted preachers and code practice sessions without further degradation of receiver sensitivity.

Doug Demaw's QRP Notebook pointed to a simple, grounded gate FET amplifier with tuned circuits at the input and output. I quickly put this stage together on its own small PC board and put it between my antenna connection and the mixer board. The amp was obviously amplifying, but it seemed to be getting carried away. Whenever I'd tune both the input and output circuits to peak, the amp would begin to oscillate. I turned to the Internet and aske for advice. Help quickly came from afar. A fellow named PK Singh sent me an email with the solution: I had to "tap down" on the toroidal coils in the two tuned circuits. This deliberately introduced impedence mismatches that effectively reduced the stage gain and thus stopped the howling. (A side benefit was a noticeable increase in tuned circuit Q - a big help in my battle with the 22 Meter station). With the tapped down amp in the circuit, my receiver passed Roy Lewellan's noise test with flying colors and I was no longer the subject of harrassment from 22 meters and W1AW. Viva el Internet!

Coffee can frequency readout

My frequency readout scheme needed some work. The tuning capacitor I was using had a little venier reduction drive built into the cap. This made for very smooth tuning, but it made it impossible to work out any kind of frequency readout on the front panel. I had to peer over the panel and look at the variable capacitor to determine where I was in the band. In an age of multidecimal numeric digital readout, I was clearly behind the times.  And my neck was starting to bother me. 

To upgrade, I found a junkbox 365 pf variable cap with no built in reduction drive. This was about twice the capacitance that I needed, so I simply plucked out about half of the rotor plates. I also found a Johnson 6:1 reduction drive in a junker Swan 240 transceiver. With a piece of scrap aluminum, I engineered a little mount for the capacitor. The Johnson drive allows for the attachment of a frequency readout dial. I found that the top of a coffee can (the metal part you always throw away) was ideally sized for my front panel. Soon I had the modified cap, reduction drive and coffee can readout dial mounted on the front panel. A triangular piece of electrical tape provided a sharp looking pointer. A few pieces of masking tape on the coffee can top served as frequency markers. I realize that my "coffee can readout" will seem incredibly crude to those accostomed to glowing numerals, but I get a real kick out of it every time I spin that little homebrew mechanism.

Filter Finale

In a certain sense I was done. I was able to pair my new receiver with my QRP transmitter and was easily able to make QSO's. I was working European stations regularly with 3 watts out. But my simplified crystal filter was a too wide for serious CW work. I could hear several CW signals simultaeously and - worse yet - I could hear the "other sideband" on the stronger signals. So I hadn't really achieved the coveted "single signal reception" status that is - after all - one of the main reasons for going the superhet route.

There are a number of excellent article out there on the design of CW crystal ladder filters. Unfortunately the building of these filters requires the use of some special test gear to determine the electrical charecteristics of the particular crystals that will be used.

Wishing to avoid the construction of test gear that would be more complicated than my radio, I decided to simplify filter construction. I bought a bag of 50 3.579 Mhz TV color burst crystals from Dan's Small parts. I then built a simple Colpitts oscillator circuit on a Radio shack breadboard. I tuned my Drake 2-B receiver to 3.579 Mhz and started plugging crustals into my breadboard oscillator. I screened out those rocks that were signficantly off frequecncy, then I went through the pile again, judging by ear (using the tone from the Drake 2-B) to select three crystals that were very close in frequency. (I know that a frequency counter would have made this easier, but I don't have one so I had to "make do.")

I simply pugged these crystals into the filter circuit described in Doug DeMaw's 1982 article. Essentially I was "hoping for the best", hoping that the characteristics of my rocks would not be significantly different from those employed by Doug DeMaw.

It all worked out very well. The new filter significantly sharpened my receiver's selectivity. I could no longer hear strong signals at two points on the dial. Single signal reception had been acheived!

My filter proved to be far to sharp for confortable SSB reception, so I worked out a little switching arrangment that allowed me to switch between my original (wide) filter and the new, sharp CW filter. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

I found that my technical skills improved dramatically during the course of this project. I even noticed a marked impovment in manual dexterity. By the time the receiver was finished, I was much more confident about putting together my own circuits. In order to be truly "100 percent homebrew", I needed to whip up a power supply for my station and a sidetone oscillator for my transmitter. These projects were quickly completed and I was soon on the air with a 100 percent HB station.

Homebrew is good for you! It really doesn't matter what band or mode you build for, a homebrew radio will provide a kind of satisfaction unavailable from store-bought units. A project like this will improve your skills, expand your knowledge and will put you in league with all of those intrepid inventors who have turned piles of parts and wires into devices that magically extract signals from the ether.

-----------------------------------

More details on this homebrew rig here: https://soldersmoke.blogspot.com/2022/09/fixing-up-old-homebrew-rig-barebones.html


Monday, October 2, 2023

"Sunburst and Luminary" author Don Eyles was a Ham, a Hacker, and a user of Plywood who Understood Juju

-- As a kid, Eyles took a summertime shop class with W4LRO.  Eyles himself went on to get his ham license -- he was K4ZHF and was active for a while on the 40 meter and 6 meter bands. 

-- He writes of how the Apollo software acquired more "juju as labor and logic were poured into them." Juju. 

-- He describes the electronics lab in the MIT Instrumentation Laboratory: "If you had a private project you could sometimes get some simple milling done for a smile, and you could scrounge the odd resistor or capacitor... On the second floor there was a small "hackers shop" with a drill press, metal shear, a bending brake, and a few hand tools which was open to anyone, including software engineers. That was the first use of the term "hack" in a technical context, that I can recall hearing. I took the term as referring to the sometimes messy process by which perforations of suitable sizes were made in the aluminum boxes, or chassis, that were used for constructing electronic devices."  Indeed.  We hack.   

-- After describing the first integrated circuits, Eyles looks back at high school and notes that he and a friend, "after learning about truth tables, James Chambers and I had experimented with similar devices composed of relays mounted on a piece of plywood."  Plywood.  

  

More to follow on this book. 

Tuesday, April 18, 2023

CuriousMarc Powers up (and Explains) Old Cathode Ray Tubes


Wow, really cool video from CuriousMarc and the guy who wrote the "Open Circuits" book.  But fellows, you really need to be more careful with the high voltage. Remember poor Ross Hull.  One hand behind the back would help.  Volts jolt, but mills kill.    

Sunday, April 16, 2023

Inside "Open Circuits"


Here is a cool video about a very cool book.  I wasn't going to buy it, but when I saw it in a book store, I opened it up to a random page and found myself looking at the 2N3904. TRGHS.  So I bought it. 


Friday, February 10, 2023

SolderSmoke Podcast #243 -- HI7/N2CQR, uBITX mods for 10 meters, High-School Direct Conversion Receiver Project Launched (Success!) Mailbag

 
DC RX and one of the PTO boards we built as demos last night. 

February 10, 2023


SolderSmoke Podcast #224 is available. 


http://soldersmoke.com/soldersmoke243.mp3


Video here: (32) SolderSmoke Podcast 243 (video) Hi7/N2CQR, uBITX, Success with High School Receiver Project - YouTube


Pete N6QW had technical difficulties this morning.  He insisted that the show must go on.  Pete will be back for the next episode. 

 

Travelogue: 

Bill in the Dominican Republic for all of January.  

HI7/N2CQR  Eastern tip of the island. uBITX and dipoles. 

20, 17, 10.  CW and SSB.  SSB was tough and I had reports of RF getting into the signal.

Went to CW. 

Worked VWS Mike KA4CDN, and Walter KA4KXX on 20CW.

Finally moved up to 10 CW.  Lots of contacts. Even though uBITX very QRP on ten.

I am modifying the uBITX now.  

Copper tape shielding to keep RF out.

 Low power out not the fault of the IRF-510s.  The problem is the 2N3904s.

Will replace with 2N2222 in To-18 cans.

Dean KK4DAS putting KD8CEC software into Arduino.  I gave up.

Who sent me this orphan uBITX?

SolderSmoke Shack South in final phase of construction.

 

SHAMELESS COMMERCE DIVISION:

Patreon!

Bezos Shopping!

 

DC Receiver Project

Local High School radio club. 

Simple:  Like Herring Aid 5 and Wes’s original.

Farhan’s four stages:

BP Filter, Diode Ring, PTO, AF amp. 

Simple Colpitts PTO SURPRISINGLY STABLE.

Simple and easy.  No chips.  No complicated circuits.

Guys have helped test out the design:  Rick N3FJZ, Walter KA4KXX,

Daniel VE5DLD, Stephen VK2BLQ and others. 

First session last night:  We demonstrated build of the PTOs.  

They worked (thank God).

 

Open Circuits book.

Envelope Detection Controversy

Save the Antenna – Book “Losing the Nobel Prize” K1JT

 

MAILBAG

--Dean KK4DAS 10 meter DSB!  Tiny SA ULTRA! FB

--John AC2RL on Elmer W3PHL DSB guy

--AC3K reports inventor of Fender Stratocaster guitar was a ham: W6DOE

--AF8E was doing POTA.  I worked him. He said my rig had presence. FB

--Alain F4IET FB DSB rig with mic in Cigar can!

--Daryl N0DP worked him on SSB.  He is homebrewing

--Steve N8NM was in for repairs but is on the mend.

--Rick G6AKG working with sub-harmonic mixers and logic chips

--Paul HS0ZLQ Built DC receiver but looking for something else to build. No DSB!

--Steve AB4I – Coherer, Jagadish Chandra Bose, and Marconi

--Eldon KC5U    Worked VK5QD right after me and mentioned SolderSmoke FB

--Todd K7TFC is building the DC RX.

--Tony G4WIF and Ian G3ROO using automotive relays for antenna switching. FB.

--Dave WA1LBP Great to hear from my fellow Hambassador (Okinawa)

Older post comments:

--Scott VO1DR was also in CF Rockey’s class! (Blog comment)

--Aurora Aug 4, 1972: Twelve people shared memories.  (Blog comment)

--Will WN1SLG Googled novice call and was led to my Novice log.(Blog comment)


Friday, January 20, 2023

Open Circuits: The Inner Beauty of Electronic Components

I was not going to buy this book.   But then, Elisa and I were in a book store and there it was.  I decided to take a look.  I opened it to a random page:  2N3904.  TRGHS.  Sold.    

It is really interesting. 

You can order yours through the Amazon Search block in the right side column of the blog.  

https://spectrum.ieee.org/open-circuits

Monday, September 26, 2022

Open Circuits: Cutting Open Components for a Look inside -- First Chapter Free

 

Bob KD4EBM sent me this: 

“…. Eric Schlaepfer (@TubeTimeUS) and Windell Oskay (co-founder of Evil Mad Scientist)’s latest book, Open Circuits, is a celebration of the electronic aesthetic, by literally opening circuits with mechanical cross-sections, accompanied by pithy explanations and illustrations. Their masterfully executed cross-sectioning process and meticulous photography blur the line between engineering and art, reminding us that any engineering task executed with soul and care results in something that can inspire feelings of awe (“wow!”) and reflection (“huh.”): that is art. …”

I saw on Hack-A-Day today that the first chapter of the book is available as a free download: 

https://nostarch.com/download/OpenCircuits_Chapter1.pdf

Many of our favorite parts are dissected in that chapter.  The innards of a ceramic disc capacitor, for example, are shown above.

Thanks Bob! 



Saturday, September 10, 2022

The Cure for Frequency "Bunching Up" in Analog LC VFOs -- It Is Not So Simple. But we have a good calculator. Comments sought!

Bob's calculator shows good tuning linearity with an ordinary SLC capacitor 

One of the complaints about analog LC VFOs is that they have non-linear tuning -- when you turn the dial (usually attached to a variable capacitor) the space between frequencies is NOT constant.  This is especially apparent at the high end of the frequency scale where frequencies (and stations) appear to be severely bunched together, making tuning difficult.  This problem contributes to the defection of some great homebrewers:  They give up on LC VFOs and they switch to digital VFOs.  Sad. 

But there is hope:  Not all LC VFOs tune this way.  Even on rigs from "back in the day," back when the Si5351 hadn't even been thought of,  some LC VFO rigs tuned linearly.  My beloved Drake 2-B and my almost equally beloved HT-37 are good examples.  How did they do this?  How did they escape the dreaded "bunching up?"  

For a while, I thought that it might have had to do with the use of the series tuned Clapp circuit.  But on further noodling, this didn't seem to make much sense. 

Then -- like others -- I thought that it  must be caused by the adroit use of special capacitors. You see, in ordinary variable capacitors when you turn the dial, the capacitance increases linearly.  But in the LC circuit, frequency changes as the inverse of the square of the capacitance. Thus the bunching up. So the solution must come from the use of the special capacitors that compensate for this, that -- because of the shape of their plates --  produce linear tuning.  With these variable caps, frequencies on the dial are spaced out nicely, there is no bunching up. Great right?  

From Terman, Radio Engineers Handbook, 1943, page 123

Over the years, many hams have jumped to the conclusion that rigs with good tuning linearity MUST be using these special caps. For example, in 2013 a ham posted in the Antique Radio forum this message: 

There are three types of open, variable plate caps;
SLC= straight line capacitance where the capacitance varies linearly,
these are the most common and have half-circle plates
SLF= straight line frequency where the plates are tapered to allow
for linear tuning of the frequency
SLW= straight line wavelength, you get the idea...

SLF and SLW caps have oblong plates.

The effect on tuning a receiver can be dramatic. One example is the
Hammarlund SP series of receivers where the ham bands are very
compressed at one end of the tuning range. They used SLC caps
in the VFO. On the other hand rigs like the Kenwood TS-520
and FT-101 series have linear tuning across each band. These use
SLF variable caps. Most old 1920's battery radios used SLW
where stations were identified by their wavelength.

Well, not really.  

-- I now have several VFOs from the extremely linear-tuning FT-101.  But when you open them up to look at the tuning capacitor, it is NOT a Straight Line Frequency capacitor.  

-- Many of us over the years have built VFOs that are quite linear in their tuning without resort to these special capacitors -- we did it with ordinary Straight Line Capacitance caps.

-- When you look at the "How to build VFO" literature in the ham radio books, you see a lot of good recommendations about using solid, brass-vaned caps with ball bearings at either end.  But never do you see circuits that require the use of SLF or SLH capacitors. If they were the key to tuning linearity, we'd see them mentioned in the literature. But we don't.   

So where does the linearity -- or bunching up -- come from?  

The answer comes to us from a really neat calculator from Bob's Electron Bunker: 

http://electronbunker.ca/eb/BandspreadCalc.html

This calculator allows you to select your frequency range, and the tuning range of your variable cap. It then displays for you what the tuning range will look like on your dial.  You can see if there will be bunching up, or if the frequencies will be nicely spread out.  And -- and this is the really cool part -- you can then specify if your capacitor is SLF, SLW, SLC or Midline-Centerline.  This really illustrates the effect of the different capacitor types. 

I used Bob's calculators to do some experiments with various types of capacitors, various frequency ranges, and various combinations of trimmers and padders.   You can see what I did here: 

http://soldersmoke.com/VariableCapsSLCSLF.pdf

One important thing to keep in mind:  The SLF caps were made for AM broadcast receivers that were tuning from 540 to 1600 kc.  That is a 3:1 tuning range.  Most of the time in HF ham radio, we are tuning across a much smaller range, say from 5 MHz to 5.5 MHz.   That is a 1.1:1 tuning range. In those cases where we ARE tuning across a wide tuning range -- for example with a receiver covering 3-9 MHz, the SLF cap can help prevent the bunching up. 

But we can have fairly good linear tuning without resort to SLF caps.  Bob and his calculator point out that by narrowing the frequency range of interest, and by using either smaller range caps (ordinary SLC caps), or SLC caps with trimmers and padders, we can achieve tuning linearity.  And sometimes, when you have achieved this nice tuning linearity with a plain SLC cap, putting a fancy SLF cap makes tuning linearity worse. 

One piece of VFO tribal wisdom that is confirmed by all this:  It is better to use a smaller variable cap with a maximum capacity of about 30 picofarads. 

I think we should spend as much time focusing on VFO tuning linearity as we do on VFO frequency stability.  Bob told me that in the old days, the calculations for various tuning linearity scenarios were difficult.  But now we have Bob's calculator.  When building a VFO, just use Bob's calculator, plugging in the numbers to get a preview of what your tuning linearity will be like. If it is bunched up, you can play with the trimmer and padder values to achieve the tuning linearity you desire.   


Thanks to Bob of Bob's Electron Bunker for this great calculator. 

You can see another discussion of "bunched-up" tuning in the comments section of this article: https://www.nutsvolts.com/?/magazine/article/may2015_Whipple

What do you folks think of this?   Please put comments below. 

Monday, September 5, 2022

Why Do Some VFOs Tune More Linearly Than Others?

This has been one of the major complaints about our beloved analog LC VFOs:   The frequency tuning on these circuits is often not linear.  For given amount of VFO frequency dial turn you can get vastly different changes in frequency.  At one end of the tuning range the frequencies are nicely spaced and tuning is easy.  But at the other end of the tuning range all of the frequencies are bunched together.  This is one of the problems that leads some homebrewers to defect to the sad land of "digital VFOs." 

But wait.  It appears that the old designers found a solution to this problem.  Just look at the tuning dial of my HT-37.  The frequencies are all spaced out evenly.  How did they do that? 

I had been thinking that this success may have resulted from Hallicrafters' engineers using the series-tuned Clapp circuit.  Here the main frequency determining element is a series-tuned LC circuit and not the parallel tuned LC circuit that we see in the more commonly used Colpitts circuit.  

But hold on -- how could that be?  The frequency bunching problem that we attributed to the Colpitts circuit must also exist in the Clapp, right?  I went back to SSDRA where there was a good discussion of Colpitts and Clapp VFOs.  The advantage of the Clapp was said to be in its use of a larger value coil which helped minimize the effects of stray inductances.  But there was no mention of the Clapp offering improved linearity in tuning.  

I have in front of me two transceivers:  The Mythbuster uses a 9 MHz Clapp circuit (see below).  The 17-12 rig uses a Colpitts Circuit.  I checked the tuning linearity of both.  Both appeared quite linear in tuning, with no real difference between the two.  

Then I looked at the tuning capacitor in the Mythbuster 17-12 rig.  It came out of an old Hallicrafters transmitter, probably the HT-44.  I looked closely at the stator and the rotor plates.  Both are curved.  I'm guessing that this may yield a more constant change in capacitance for a given movement of the main tuning dial.  

Next I opened up the VFO on the Mythbuster.  (It is the VFO from an old Yaesu FT-101.)  I couldn't see the stators very well but it appears that their shape is different from the square shape we often see in variable capacitors.  Could it be that this variable capacitor was also made to provide linear tuning?  

Back in 2013 Norm Johnson wrote about all this in the Antique Radios.com forum: 

A capacitor that has uniform increase in capacitance with rotation will have the stations at the high end of the band squeezed together. Another type known as the straight-line frequency variable capacitor has, as you might guess, a characteristic that gives even spacing of frequencies with shaft rotation. These were popular in the 1920's but weren't very good for superhets where you needed to have a dual section capacitor that would tune both the RF and local oscillator, and have them track each other properly. The midline variable capacitor is more compatible with a superhet, and easier to make both sections track properly. This is the type that you see in most receivers from the late 1930's to the end of the tube era. They don't have quite the equal spacing between stations across the band that the old straight-line frequency caps had, but they're much better than the variables that change capacitance linearly with rotation.

I wrote an online calculator that helps in the design of the tuning. It shows what frequency range you'll get with a specific type of variable capacitor, including the effects of padder and trimmer capacitors. It also displays a dial scale that shows how the frequencies are lined up accross the dial.
http://electronbunker.ca/eb/BandspreadCalc.html

Steve W6SSP also provided some really good info back in 2013: 

There are three types of open, variable plate caps;
SLC= straight line capacitance where the capacitance varies linearly,
these are the most common and have half-circle plates
SLF= straight line frequency where the plates are tapered to allow
for linear tuning of the frequency
SLW= straight line wavelength, you get the idea...

SLF and SLW caps have oblong plates.

The effect on tuning a receiver can be dramatic. One example is the
Hammarlund SP series of receivers where the ham bands are very
compressed at one end of the tuning range. They used SLC caps
in the VFO. On the other hand rigs like the Kenwood TS-520
and FT-101 series have linear tuning across each band. These use
SLF variable caps. Most old 1920's battery radios used SLW
where stations were identified by their wavelength.
Steve W6SSP

These two variable caps came out of my junkbox.  Both are Eddystones, made in England.  My guess is that the one on the left is SLF.  But could the one on the right (out of an old regen) be SLW?   

The Drake 2-B also has perfectly linear tuning.  I looked at the manual:  "The tuning condenser is of special design..."   I'm guessing that they used an SLF variable capacitor. The 2-B had no need for ganged capacitors -- the "preselector" was tuned via a separate front panel control. 

I looked at the tuning dials on my Hammarlund HQ-100 receiver.   It is fairly linear in its tuning, but not as linear as the HT-37 or the Drake 2-B; on all of the tuning ranges the frequencies seem to spread out a bit at the lower end.  My guess is that Hammarlund used the midline variable described above by Norm Johnson.  The HQ-100 did use a ganged variable cap, with one section tuning the RF amplifier and the other tuning the local oscillator. 

Mythbuster on the bottom.  17-12 rig on the top


Monday, August 8, 2022

Polyakov (RA3AAE) Direct Conversion Receiver: 40 meter DC RX with VFO at 3.5 - 3.6 MHz (with video)

I've been reading about Polyakov (or "sub-harmonic") Detectors for a long time: 

https://soldersmoke.blogspot.com/search/label/Polyakov--Vladimir

But until now, I never built one.  Recently,  Dean KK4DAS and the Vienna Wireless Makers group have been building a Direct Conversion receiver.  Their receiver uses an Si5351 as the VFO, but of course Dean and I have decided to try to do things the hard way by building non-digital VFOs.  At first we just came to the conclusion that my earlier Ceramic Resonator VFO wasn't much good (it drifted too much).  This led us into standard Colpitts and Armstrong VFOs, and the fascinating world of temperature compensation.  Then I remembered the Polyakov circuit -- this would allow us to use a 3.5 MHz VFO on the 7 MHz band.  Lower frequency VFOs are easier to stabilize, so I started building my first Polyakov receiver.  You can see the results (on 40 meters) in the video above. 

I started working with a circuit from SPRAT 110 (Spring 2002). Rudi Burse DK2RS built a Polyakov receiver for 80 and 40 that he called the Lauser Plus.  (Lauser means "young rascal" or "imp" in German.) For the AF amplifier, I just attached one of those cheap LM386 boards that you can get on the internet.  With it, I sometimes use some old Iphone headphones, or an amplified computer speaker. 

The Polyakov mixer is a "switching mixer."  The book excerpt below shows how I understand these circuits.  The enlightenment came from the Summer 1999 issue of SPRAT (click on the excerpt for an easier read): 


Leon's circuit shows us how a simple switching circuit in which the switches are controlled by the VFO can result in an output that has the sum and difference components. That is the hallmark (and most useful part) of real mixing.  Remember -- we say that mixing happens in non-linear circuits when the passage of one signal depends on what is happening with the other signal.  A switch is as non-linear as you can get! And that switch is being controlled by the VFO.  

In a Direct Conversion receiver we usually run the VFO at the operating frequency. This results in audio just above and just below the operating frequency. 

The Polyakov Direct Conversion circuit is a bit different.  It has the switches (the diodes)  turned on twice each cycle:  When the VFO voltage goes to a positive peak, this turns on one of the diodes.  When the VFO goes to a negative peak, this turns on the other diode.   So in effect the switch is being turned on TWICE each cycle.  So with the Polyakov you run the VFO at HALF the operating frequency.  For a DC receiver designed to run around 7.060 MHz, you build a VFO at around 3.53 MHz.  This has some immediate advantages.  My favorite is that it is easier to get a VFO stable at a lower frequency.  It is easier to stabilize a VFO at 3.53 MHz than it is at 7.060 MHz. 

When you open that SW 1 switch in the Lauser Plus, you no longer have a Polyakov mixer.  Now you just have a diode mixer.   It will be opening and closing once each cycle at the VFO frequency.  DK2RS used this to cover not only the 40 meter band (in Polyakov mode) but also the 80 meter band (in single diode detector mode).  That is why DK2RS has that big variable capacitor in the input circuit -- that LC circuit needs to tune all the way down to 3.5 MHz and all the way up to around 7.3 MHz.  (I used a coil of about 6.5 uH to do this.) 

With just one diode and operating at 80 meters, it works, but not as well as it does in the Polyakov mode on 40.  I can pick up 80 meter signals, but in this mode there seems to be more of an "AM breakthrough" problem. "Experimental Methods in RF Design" on page 8.11  describes what is going on (the last sentence is most relevant here): 

Here are some very good links with information on the Polyakov receiver: 



LA8AK SK: http://www.agder.net/la8ak/   Almost seventeen years after his death he continues to help his fellow radio amateurs through his web sites.  TNX OM!  FB! 



I will post a video tomorrow showing the receiver in operation on 80 meters.  

Three cheers for Vlad Polyakov, RA3AAE

Saturday, June 11, 2022

Putting the "Mate for the Mighty Midget" Back to Work -- With a DX-100 on 40 Meter AM

After working on it for a while I got so fond of my old Hammarlund HQ-100 that I moved it from the AM/Boatanchors operating position over to a more convenient spot right next to my computer.  This left a big gap on the receive side of the AM station.  

I briefly put my HRO-ish solid state receiver above the DX-100, but I'm afraid that receiver needs some work.  More on that in due course. 

I thought about putting my SOLID STATE Lafayette HA-600A atop the thermatronic DX-100, but this just didn't seem right. The Radio Gods would NOT approve. 

So I turned my attention to the Mate for the Mighty Midget that I built in 1998 and have been poking at and "improving" ever since

This receiver worked, but not quite right. It received SSB stations well enough, but when I turned off the BFO I could no longer hear the band noise. I wasn't sure how well the RF amp's grid and plate tuned circuits tracked.  And I had serious doubts about the detector circuit that Lew McCoy put in there when he designed this thing back in 1966. 

As I started this latest round of MMMRX poking, I realized that I now have test gear that I didn't have in 1998:  I now have a decent oscilloscope.  I have an HP-8640B signal generator (thanks Steve Silverman and Dave Bamford).  I have an AADE LC meter. And I've learned a lot about building rigs. 

FRONT END TRACKING

The MMRX has a tuned circuit in the grid of the RF amplifier, and another in the plate circuit of the RF amplifier.  There is a ganged capacitor that tunes them both.  They need to cover both 80/75 and 40 meters. And they need to "track" fairly well:  over the fairly broad range of 3.5 to 7.3 MHz they both need to be resonant at the same frequency.  

McCoy's article just called for "ten turns on a pill bottle" for the coils in these parallel LC circuits.  The link coils were 5 turns.  No data on inductance was given.  Armed now with an LC meter, I pulled these coils off the chassis and measured the inductances of the coils.  I just needed to make sure they were close in value.  They were: 

L1 was .858uH L2 was 2.709         L3 was .930uH  L4 was 2.672

Next I checked the ganged variable capacitors.  At first I found that one cap had a lot more capacitance than they other.  How could that be?  Then I remembered that I had installed trimmer caps across each of the ganged capacitors. Adjusting these trimmers (and leaving the caps connected to the grid of V1a and V2A, I adjusted the trimmers to get the caps close in value.  I think I ended up with them fairly close: 

C1: 63.77-532 pF          C2 64.81 -- 525.1 pF

I put the coils back in and checked the tracking on 40 and on 80/75.  While not perfect, it was close enough to stop messing with it.  

DETECTOR CIRCUIT


I've had my doubts about the detector circuit that Lew McCoy had in the MMMRX.  In his 1966 QST article he claimed that the circuit he used was a voltage doubler, and that this would boost signal strength.  But I built the thing in LT Spice and didn't notice any doubling.  And consider the capacitors he had at the input and output of the detector:  100 pF.  At 455 kHz 100 pF is about 3500 ohms.  At audio (1 kHz) it is 1.5 MILLION ohms. Ouch.  No wonder years ago I put a .1 uF cap across that output cap just to get the receiver working. 

Scott WA9WFA told me that by the time the MMMRX appeared in the 1969 ARRL handbook, the second "voltage doubling" diode was gone, as were the 100 pF caps.  Now it was just a diode, a .01 uF cap and a 470,000 ohm resistor.  I switched to the 1969 Handbook circuit (but I have not yet changed the 1 meg grid resister to 470k -- I don't think this will make much difference).  Foiled again by a faulty QST article, again by one of the League's luminaries. 

6U8s out, 6EA8s in 

We learned that the 6U8 tubes originally called for by Lew McCoy are getting old and not aging well.  So I switched all three to more youthful 6EA8s.  This seemed to perk the receiver up a bit. 

MUTING from the DX-100

My K2ZA DX-100 has a T/R relay mounted in a box on the back of the transmitter.  When the Plate switch goes up, it switches the antenna from receiver to transmitter.  The box also has a one pole double throw switch available for receiver muting.  I put the common connection to ground, the normally connected (receive position) connect the ground terminal of the AF output transformer to ground -- it is disconnected from ground on transmit.  The other connection (normally open) is connected to the antenna jack -- on transmit this connection ground the receiver RF input connection.  These two steps mutes the receiver very nicely. 

Replacing Reduction Drive

Over the years I have had several different reduction drives on the main tuning cap.  I had a kind of wonky Jackson brothers drive on there that needed to be replaced.  I put in a new one -- this smoothed out he tuning considerably. 

Ceramic Resonator

I never could get McCoy's 455 kc two crystal filter to work right.  So at first I made due with the two 455 kc IF cans.  This made for a very broad passband.  Then I put a CM filter in there.  This was more narrow, but with a lot of loss.  There may have been others.  But the filter spot is currently held by a 6 kHz wide ceramic filter.  This one is my favorite so far. 

Digital Readout

When I was running the DX-100 with the Hammarlund HQ-100 I built a little frequency readout box.  The box was from a Heath QF-1 Q multiplier (I am sorry about this).  The readouts are in Juliano Blue and come via e-bay from San Jian.  I now have it hooked up to the DX-100's oscillator.  I haven't tapped into the MMMRX's oscillator yet.