Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id w0QNwBmW010116 for ; Sat, 27 Jan 2018 00:58:14 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1efDnJ-0007TF-DJ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 23:52:29 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1efDnH-0007T6-HW for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 23:52:27 +0000 Received: from mail-pg0-x236.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c05::236]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1efDnD-0001D8-Iv for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 23:52:26 +0000 Received: by mail-pg0-x236.google.com with SMTP id k68so1227669pga.3 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 15:52:23 -0800 (PST) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xsMhvYzOzDPPjn+tXZEgMaQC/+XTT2PkCqAPTmRg2IE=; b=PHq/BSUYIxGstNZLacuMQj0IsMfrg4oqWfsXmUGC9EyhvZwpwVpzPnJy+2G6AVWujc rKxfl+0Z8OXl6QvFzpo4Tyt79mG9R3MDncutV4hZp9uj1OkYduUloUK+XGmT7KW8eiPA ky8ugTPIui1CkNl0OP01hmcIpHkmXs8EI5GFCsTTftHx/yt2ot9LoBuYeoR6OQ5NSZMD N1IODOaLBAjLfao0rDf2IQNoY7JHiqWfiLJHgqKHLA5JFJrnT5ijsDzRKen48122/HGF vGg28nP62va77JevpyS4mCBlvaKQJhm+rl6nZYMPiZ0BlxI3Unu5gghbe3LrqiNkF+Tf iVHA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=xsMhvYzOzDPPjn+tXZEgMaQC/+XTT2PkCqAPTmRg2IE=; b=asS4XRxKsUAO0MvJ427vPGxMgVXPvLs8d7OIKH7h5zoaz4E3AwOCbqfxUUjub9JpJH 7Wp4SXTaAxWnAqOM+KKaF4gCAMyGdOLaYunaPr9FYC3MRi2rXMQmCjLwKjOl6/6X4Faa W7S9oOvz4HX8a0DXEW9CWyNaowUlPWwLlf3AkCcbYoa9E65CmuULmFAnq0SSjsbG5Afm Ye8LyuV6N/Euh6ukWU6c64kYt6+n42AMi96hjWOWicDsKs5slhUX6F1I81jvkQUcn0At kpF1dVz+9TLkjG1Y00Osukfpusc5z6ogbPWu1Uyyih0SrYqWtPi+JyVWZshYyewLnZwc 9D7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytfK9ZojPbM07lsZl/CDqMALEwLzq3fRJoPf7liBPJWyzerQ8aGx 9KhzG/uBhalIGbaZhC6O/D/ISCYDty3LhGS57GE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225w0soqWHJ1qi+OclKiFDZ2Dl996txI88Mtg/NBRPSLffP2w1CMjNcM4gxr0nTbVb0BkFB6KlNwxtUiKDZPkZ4= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:5497:: with SMTP id e23-v6mr15393949pli.194.1517010740718; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 15:52:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.170.68 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 15:52:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <791320206.20180126221646@gmail.com> References: <1371247928.20180126134524@gmail.com> <1397698645.2553258.1516983835152.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxbe7.tb.ukmail.iss.as9143.net> <686847880.20180126193617@gmail.com> <791320206.20180126221646@gmail.com> From: M0FMT Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 23:52:20 +0000 Message-ID: To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi again Well all seems well if you are getting a good wave at the flip flop output. Just a comment about your input wave forms yes the MF does show a second harmonic petty low and as you have said the MF version works OK. Please remember a square wave is in fact and infinite number of harmonic frequencies so this is not an issue the dominant wave is overwhelmingly the fundamental so that will be processed into a square wave by the Flip Flop. If the drive to the multiplexer is good as you say (I can not open the JPG but it doesn't matter) it sounds like the local oscillator divider chain is correct. I can only conclude the instability reported is at the oscillator suggest you concentrate on that as a source of your problem. ..... I have run out of ideas. [...] Content analysis details: (1.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (peteg8fmt[at]gmail.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid 1.0 FREEMAIL_REPLY From and body contain different freemails X-Scan-Signature: 611f9af8a0f6ba007b1ec6dce409caf4 Subject: Re: LF: Softrock RX divider IC problem, unexpected frequency out Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005230510563b69626" 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=HTML_MESSAGE 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 --0000000000005230510563b69626 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi again Well all seems well if you are getting a good wave at the flip flop output. Just a comment about your input wave forms yes the MF does show a second harmonic petty low and as you have said the MF version works OK. Please remember a square wave is in fact and infinite number of harmonic frequencies so this is not an issue the dominant wave is overwhelmingly the fundamental so that will be processed into a square wave by the Flip Flop. If the drive to the multiplexer is good as you say (I can not open the JPG but it doesn't matter) it sounds like the local oscillator divider chain is correct. I can only conclude the instability reported is at the oscillator suggest you concentrate on that as a source of your problem. ..... I have run out of ideas. Anyway good luck and please report the solution there are a lot of people very interested. 73 petefmt On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:16 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Hello Tobias and everyone else. > > > Thanks for the detailed info, much appreciated. > > I managed to change the divider again, but this is probably the last > time as a pad is lifting. I also put back a 22k resistor for the 10K > R16. The new divider one didn't have any output at all, save the > tiniest bit of ripple:( So I put back the 10K and output was > intermittent and much like before. But I noticed if i touched the > divider on its plastic shell the the thing gave a much better output, > good square waves, but they would either stop themselves, or if power > to the board was removed then re-applied, it wouldn't start. The input > was on frequency and strong. But now I could sometimes just hover > a finger right above the divider chip and it appeared a capacitive > effect would start it. > > When it did output clean square waves they too were on frequency. > There was a proper 90 degree phase shift. I then put in a 6.8k for R16 > and it's better still. Dare I go lower, or is this telling me > something I am not hearing?I haven't changed the crystal yet. I don't > think the issue is now the oscillator itself, but driving the divider. > I am sure Andy is right that a Schmitt trigger buffer would be best, > but I didn't really want to start redesigning something I know others > have had running 24 hours a day with superb results. > > I'll upload the oscillator wave form at pin 3 of the divider as it is > now. > > http://www.gatesgarth.com/newR17-to--pin3.jpg > > > Friday, January 26, 2018, 9:33:04 PM, you wrote: > > > Hi Chris ! > > > The first screenshot shows an un-symmetrical square-wave that will > > generate two frequencies to the 1:4 divider and Tayloe-mixer. An FFT of > > this signal (R17-to-pin3) should show two peaks and not only one as > > expected. A standard frequency counter will show only the arithmetic > > mean value of both frequencies, as it is just adding zero-crossings > > during gate-time. > > > The Softrock series 6.x had a different type of I/Q divider that used > > three flips-flops. They did not have a problem with such an > > un-symmetrical square-wave, as there was an inherent divider by two, > > which forced the oscillator signal to be symmetrical to the mixer. > > > You could try to move the bias-level of Q2 transistor to a voltage where > > the output (square-wave) signal of Q2 will be almost symmetrical. > > If the oscillator at Q1 is not running smoothly, this is where to look > > for variations of C's or R's to make it run stable. > > > 73 de dg3lv Tobias > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Chris mailto:dead.fets@gmail.com > > > --0000000000005230510563b69626 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi again

Well all seems well= if you are getting a good wave at the flip flop output. Just a comment abo= ut your input wave forms yes the MF does show a second harmonic petty low a= nd as you have said the MF version works OK. Please remember a square wave = is in fact and infinite number of harmonic frequencies so this is not an is= sue the dominant wave is overwhelmingly the fundamental so that will be pro= cessed into a square wave by the Flip Flop.=C2=A0 If the drive to the multi= plexer is good as you say (I can not open the JPG but it doesn't matter= ) it sounds like the local oscillator divider chain is correct. I can only = conclude the instability reported is at the oscillator suggest you concentr= ate on that as a source of your problem. ..... I have run out of ideas.

Anyway good luck and please report the solution there= =C2=A0are a lot of people very interested. 73 petefmt

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:= 16 PM, Chris Wilson <dead.fets@gmail.com> wrote:


Hello Tobias and everyone else.


Thanks for the detailed info, much appreciated.

I=C2=A0 managed=C2=A0 to change the divider again, but this is probably the= last
time=C2=A0 as=C2=A0 a pad is lifting. I also put back a 22k resistor for th= e 10K
R16.=C2=A0 The=C2=A0 new=C2=A0 divider=C2=A0 one=C2=A0 didn't=C2=A0 hav= e any output at all, save the
tiniest=C2=A0 bit=C2=A0 of=C2=A0 ripple:(=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0So=C2=A0 I=C2= =A0 put=C2=A0 back the 10K and output was
intermittent=C2=A0 and=C2=A0 much=C2=A0 like=C2=A0 before.=C2=A0 But I noti= ced if i touched the
divider=C2=A0 on its plastic shell the the thing gave a much better output,=
good=C2=A0 square waves, but they would either stop themselves, or if power=
to=C2=A0 the board was removed then re-applied, it wouldn't start. The = input
was=C2=A0 =C2=A0on=C2=A0 frequency=C2=A0 and=C2=A0 strong. But now I could = sometimes just hover
a=C2=A0 finger=C2=A0 right=C2=A0 above=C2=A0 the divider chip and it appear= ed a capacitive
effect would start it.

When it did output clean square waves they too were on frequency.
There was a proper 90 degree phase shift. I then put in a 6.8k for R16
and it's better still. Dare I go lower, or is this telling me
something I am not hearing?I haven't changed the crystal yet. I don'= ;t
think the issue is now the oscillator itself, but driving the divider.
I am sure Andy is right that a Schmitt trigger buffer would be best,
but I didn't really want to start redesigning something I know others have had running 24 hours a day with superb results.

I'll=C2=A0 upload the oscillator wave form at pin 3 of the divider as i= t is
now.

http://www.gatesgarth.com/newR17-to--pin3.jpg<= br>

Friday, January 26, 2018, 9:33:04 PM, you wrote:

> Hi Chris !

> The first screenshot shows an un-symmetrical square-wave that will
> generate two frequencies to the 1:4 divider and Tayloe-mixer. An FFT o= f
> this signal (R17-to-pin3) should show two peaks and not only one as > expected. A standard frequency counter will show only the arithmetic > mean value of both frequencies, as it is just adding zero-crossings > during gate-time.

> The Softrock series 6.x had a different type of I/Q divider that used<= br> > three flips-flops. They did not have a problem with such an
> un-symmetrical square-wave, as there was an inherent divider by two, > which forced the oscillator signal to be symmetrical to the mixer.

> You could try to move the bias-level of Q2 transistor to a voltage whe= re
> the output (square-wave) signal of Q2 will be almost symmetrical.
> If the oscillator at Q1 is not running smoothly, this is where to look=
> for variations of C's or R's to make it run stable.

> 73 de dg3lv Tobias





--
Best regards,
=C2=A0Chris=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mailto:dead.fets@gmail.com



--0000000000005230510563b69626--