Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-da02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id F1CFD38000087; Sun, 7 Oct 2012 20:37:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TL1LS-0001jP-0h for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2012 01:37:18 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TL1LR-0001jG-HG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2012 01:37:17 +0100 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TL1LP-00050h-KQ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2012 01:37:16 +0100 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q980bEPb022915 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2012 02:37:15 +0200 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id q980bEvS027503 for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2012 02:37:14 +0200 Message-ID: <50722034.7090304@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2012 02:37:08 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <5070C574.4030005@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <5071A24A.2000105@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <6616A6979A1D48D8AD7E1CC48E89C0B0@gnat> In-Reply-To: <6616A6979A1D48D8AD7E1CC48E89C0B0@gnat> X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de id q980bEPb022915 X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi Alan, Yes, that's it! :-) Crazy, what a day again! Today i discovered and solved several problems, eeeh i mean challenges :-) [...] Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [129.206.210.211 listed in list.dnswl.org] -2.1 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: ebba021850e0a5d4120636e52401e975 Subject: Re: LF: GRRRRR!! Now i know... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d404a50722066448f X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Alan, Yes, that's it! :-) Crazy, what a day again! Today i discovered and solved several problems, eeeh i mean challenges :-= ) First the AFN signal, overloading the probe. Now i've added a series LC=20 of 100uH and 180+4.7 pF across the drain-source of the first JFET,=20 forming a notch filter with this frequency response=20 https://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/MF/1143kHz%20dip2.png This reduced the AFN signal to a level similar to DLF 153 kHz, i.e.=20 arround 0.5 Vp. There are still IM issues though but i discovered that i have protection=20 diodes on the RX input, single antiparallel 1N4148 diodes, which of=20 course begin to conduct at 0.5Vp. So i will change this into 3x=20 antiparallel 1N4148 diodes in series. This will certainly help, if it=20 was the main reason now. And i think i have to spend some care to a correct termination of the=20 cables with 50 Ohm. I measured the output impedance of the MF mechanical=20 filter circuit i'm using on MF and found that i have to add 22 Ohm in=20 series to achieve 50 Ohm. During the measurements i saw that i forgot to=20 add a 100 nF C behind the 220 uF coil in the supply. This killed the=20 input JFET which explains why the MF signals dropped by 20 dB and have=20 been very close to the RX noise today... Lastly i found that the BF862=20 seems to make VHF oscillations, giving a strange AM modulation on the=20 output signal. After adding a ferrite perl, everything was/is fine now!! The circuit is now updated=20 https://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/MF/MF%20Filter%20schematic.png VHF oscillations on the probe (?), bad termination of the 30m long RG58=20 cable and the single 4148 protection diodes on the RX are now the most=20 probably reasons why the system still suffers from QRM. Tasks for=20 tomorrow and new reasons to be optimistic! :-) Thanks to all for the discussion about the AFN signals and probes. 73, GN, Stefan/DK7FC Am 07.10.2012 22:18, schrieb Alan Melia: > Hi Stefan Problems ?? .....no problems on LF, just interesting=20 > challenges :-)) > Alan > G3NYK > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stefan Sch=E4fer"=20 > > To: > Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2012 4:39 PM > Subject: Re: LF: GRRRRR!! Now i know... > > >> Hi Roelof, >> >> Thanks for your comments and nice to see you'r arround here :-) >> >> Am 07.10.2012 17:04, schrieb Roelof Bakker: >>> Regarding strong signal handling capabilities of the antenna, are=20 >>> you sure that the JFET is the problem? >> Not sure. Maybe it happens in the 2nd stage, i.e. the 2N3053. 4Vpp=20 >> should still be managable. >> >>> You can try to increase the standing current in the output=20 >>> transistor or try a LPF between the first and the second stage. >> This is the plan for the coming few hours :-) >> >>> Raising the supply voltage to 24 volt will also help; this depends=20 >>> on the transistor you use of course. >> Yes, looks we have the same ideas :-) >> >> I'm really looking forward to the new results. Thanks for your=20 >> comments and suggestions. It makes me even more optimistic. >> >> BTW What would this hobby be without having problems from time to=20 >> time !!?? :-) >> >> OK, the show starts now. Must go out before it becomes dark... Slept=20 >> until 14 o'clock local today ;-) >> >> 73, Stefan/DK7FC >> >>> >>> 73, >>> Roelof, pa0rdt >> >