TheRadioBoard

Forum for the homemade radio builder. Newbies and Experts and everyone else are welcome here!
It is currently Fri May 24, 2013 6:59 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 11:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 8:52 pm
Posts: 1996
Location: Australia
Quote:
This should not discourage from trying it as a challenge though, which it certainly is Smile Lack of practicality does not mean lack of originality or fun (our hobby is a proof of it).

I agree. Too often in these discussions, people tend to be steered towards the same narrow group of receiver architectures.
To the point that (eg.) reflexing tends to be frowned upon.
I think the idea of this Board was to encourage all types of receiver construction and also innovation using those designs.

It's not all about Q, "furthest DX ever", minimal noise etc. - it's about maintaining an interest in your hobby, whatever form that may take.

....................................


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 11:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:02 am
Posts: 1198
Location: Saskatoon
While I probably wouldn't be bothered to do this with a regen, I am still considering it for a possible future triode autodyne superhet.

Meanwhile, here's another non-radiating idea based on a coil with assymmetrical coupling. It's a 6SN7 regen that I built several years ago.
Image
Note the strange looking coil at the upper right. The primary (enameled magnet wire) is tightly wound around the ferrite toroid, and the secondary (purple insulated wire) is wound in big loops as shown. The result is that coupling is nearly 100% from primary to secondary, but from secondary back to primary, it is much less. As to how much less, I couldn't tell you, because I didn't do any accurate measurements at the time. I guess I should dig it out and see if I can get some measurements.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 8:52 pm
Posts: 1996
Location: Australia
Now that's cool. (Can 65 yearolds use that word?)
Beats an ASIC hands down.

Those results would be interesting if you ever get around to it.

.......................................


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 7:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 2:12 pm
Posts: 1021
Bob Weaver wrote:
Note the strange looking coil at the upper right.

It's impossible to miss! What a lovely coil. How did you physically manage to wind it? Is that transformer design your own, or have those sorts of coils been used in the past?

Thanks for sharing that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 7:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 8:52 pm
Posts: 1996
Location: Australia
!920's doughnut coils.
http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/t ... ning-coils

http://i53.tinypic.com/5zr4o3.jpg

.......................


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 8:52 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:58 pm
Posts: 2528
Location: South Florida
qrp-gaijin wrote:
How did you physically manage to wind it?

Guess you could wind a solenoid coil, slip it off the form, then form the toroid by bringing the ends together. Or wind on a donut (not glazed), then eat the form.

73,

_________________
Image
http://kr1s.kearman.com/
http://qrp.kearman.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 10:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 8:52 pm
Posts: 1996
Location: Australia
A slinky is a good example - it starts off as a solenoid.

Supposedly Hi-Q, as it is "semi-spacewound" and a greater proportion of the field is contained within the coil (as in a toroid). Downside is that due to the separation of the windings, the inductance value is less per length of wire used, than in a close wound coil.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... spiral.jpg

............................


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:02 am
Posts: 1198
Location: Saskatoon
Quite easy to do. I just wound it as a solenoid on a broomstick, slid it off and then, essentially, screwed it onto the toroid. It was standard #22 PVC insulated hookup wire and was stiff enough to hold its shape.

Can't say that the receiver was a resounding success by any means, but the coil was pretty. Actually, it was one of the worst performing receivers I've ever built. Though, I wouldn't mind finding another project to use one of those coils.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 10:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:02 am
Posts: 1198
Location: Saskatoon
golfguru wrote:
Downside is that due to the separation of the windings, the inductance value is less per length of wire used, than in a close wound coil.


Yes, and that is only one of its many drawbacks. :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2012 5:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 7:15 am
Posts: 430
Location: NJ, USA
Bob Weaver wrote:
Note the strange looking coil at the upper right.
Looks like this thing came from a nuclear fusion physics lab :).
Is there any reference explaining how the cancelling works with the asymmetric coupled inductors ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2012 9:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:02 am
Posts: 1198
Location: Saskatoon
vladn wrote:
Bob Weaver wrote:
Note the strange looking coil at the upper right.
Looks like this thing came from a nuclear fusion physics lab :).
Is there any reference explaining how the cancelling works with the asymmetric coupled inductors ?


http://www.g3ynh.info/zdocs/magnetics/i ... uction.pdf
Pages 36 & 37


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 02, 2012 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 2:12 pm
Posts: 1021
vladn wrote:
As far as the solid state WBR receiver by N1BYT - I've read the paper and disagree with his realization. Without separating the tanks in the two sides of the bridge the concept does not work. All that is achieved (unless I miss some critical point) is extremely low coupling between the tank and the antenna. This indeed reduces the antenna radiation but equally degrades RX SNR.

There is an interesting thread at qrp-tech about improving the sensitivity of the WBR. You have to join the group to see the thread, but here it is:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qrp-tech/message/3874


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group