Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V (fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. Ed K7AAT |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ed wrote:
I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V (fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. _________________________________________________ That design was common in the car radios of the late '50s to early '60s. They used tubes for all functions except the output amplifier, which was a transistor. You can probably find old Sams manuals on ebay, or just copy an existing HV schematic and substitute the 12v tubes. There isn't a very great difference. Incidentally, if you have trouble finding the tubes designed for 12v on the plate, ordinary HV tubes worked fairly well but with somewhat lower gain. My first job after high school was repairing those radios. Also, the 12v tubes were quite prone to develop microphonic problems. The design only lasted a few years until good transistors became available cheap. They are an interesting bit of electronic history, but not really practical today. A five cent transistor will outperform what has become a very scarce and expensive 12v tube. But have fun anyway. :-) -- Bill, W6WRT |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V
(fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. Operating tube plates down to 12 VDC supply is pushing things a bit far, to be honest with you. Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or BC-1206. I bought a couple of them many years ago, surplus, principally to get the nice compact 3-gang variable capacitor. Fired one up in the company lab at 26 VDC and it was still in-spec although those specs weren't the best. At 24 VDC the spec rating was marginal. At 22 VDC it was below spec...but then the filaments were also running cooler at 11 V each. Don't remember what the IF (135 KHz) BW was, but, running with a crystal-controlled converter ahead of it, the 195 to 500 KHz tuning range could cover 75 or 40 meters no problem. A thought. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm
wrote: I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V (fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or BC-1206. Don't remember what the IF (135 KHz) BW was, but, running with a crystal-controlled converter ahead of it, the 195 to 500 KHz tuning range could cover 75 or 40 meters no problem. A thought. I've got one of those in the junk box. I was thinking of converting it to solid state using cascaded (J310-311 and 2N2222) transistors, perhaps a differential set of J310's for the mixer and a single J310 for the oscillator. Not sure about the audio and detector stages yet. There was an article in an old '73 magazine on converting one of those sets to solid state and adding a crystal controled converter to receive 40 meters. I've misplaced that issue though. Converting a "Q5-er" from tubes to FETs would be rather easy. No real need for the 2N2222s. Would have gobs of space left over inside an already compact box. If the 135 KHz IF has an equivalent total Q of 100, the BW would be about 1.3 KHz, not all that swift for CW and too shart for SSB. However, the BC-1206 tuning range of 195 to 500 KHz results in an image at the converter input of 390 to 1000 KHz away from the desired band. That's worse than the 910 KHz image of an old 455 KHz IF. The BC-1206 tuning drive wouldn't be fine enough for today's narrowband style of operating so that would need a fair amount of mechanical rework. User's choice there. The linear-in-capacity rotation of the 3-gang variable is good for an RX Noise Bridge having an expanded parallel-C range... which is what I used them for. :-) |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm wrote: I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V (fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or BC-1206. Don't remember what the IF (135 KHz) BW was, but, running with a crystal-controlled converter ahead of it, the 195 to 500 KHz tuning range could cover 75 or 40 meters no problem. A thought. I've got one of those in the junk box. I was thinking of converting it to solid state using cascaded (J310-311 and 2N2222) transistors, perhaps a differential set of J310's for the mixer and a single J310 for the oscillator. Not sure about the audio and detector stages yet. There was an article in an old '73 magazine on converting one of those sets to solid state and adding a crystal controled converter to receive 40 meters. I've misplaced that issue though. Converting a "Q5-er" from tubes to FETs would be rather easy. No real need for the 2N2222s. Would have gobs of space left over inside an already compact box. If the 135 KHz IF has an equivalent total Q of 100, the BW would be about 1.3 KHz, not all that swift for CW and too shart for SSB. However, the BC-1206 tuning range of 195 to 500 KHz results in an image at the converter input of 390 to 1000 KHz away from the desired band. That's worse than the 910 KHz image of an old 455 KHz IF. The BC-1206 tuning drive wouldn't be fine enough for today's narrowband style of operating so that would need a fair amount of mechanical rework. User's choice there. The linear-in-capacity rotation of the 3-gang variable is good for an RX Noise Bridge having an expanded parallel-C range... which is what I used them for. :-) If I convert it to solid state, I'll probably use it for it's original purpose as an aircraft NDB receiver. Although I don't fly anymore, I have a private pilot's license and still like to listen in. Most NDB's just send their call signs in A2 morse, but some also have live weather reports as well. Only problem is that it only goes up to 400khz and IIRC some of the NDB's in this area are a bit higher in frequency, I could modifiy the tuning range a bit. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm wrote: I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V (fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Can anyone point me to info on this? Thanks. Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or BC-1206. Don't remember what the IF (135 KHz) BW was, but, running with a crystal-controlled converter ahead of it, the 195 to 500 KHz tuning range could cover 75 or 40 meters no problem. A thought. I've got one of those in the junk box. I was thinking of converting it to solid state using cascaded (J310-311 and 2N2222) transistors, perhaps a differential set of J310's for the mixer and a single J310 for the oscillator. Not sure about the audio and detector stages yet. There was an article in an old '73 magazine on converting one of those sets to solid state and adding a crystal controled converter to receive 40 meters. I've misplaced that issue though. Converting a "Q5-er" from tubes to FETs would be rather easy. No real need for the 2N2222s. Would have gobs of space left over inside an already compact box. This is the idea of a cascade fet-bipolar circuit. The drain of the fet drives the emitter of the bipolar and the bipolar's base is biased so that the base sits about half way up the power supply (two resistors). The fet is self biased with a source resistor for the desired current. The gain of this circuit is higher than a fet by itself, and the output impedance will be higher. ____ __ -|_ \_/ | | If the 135 KHz IF has an equivalent total Q of 100, the BW would be about 1.3 KHz, not all that swift for CW and too shart for SSB. The AnArc-5 Q5'ers had 6 tuned circuits in their If but the '1206 only has 3 or 4. So it's BW might be a tad wider. The 1206 also has no bfo. However, the BC-1206 tuning range of 195 to 500 KHz results in an image at the converter input of 390 to 1000 KHz away from the desired band. That's worse than the 910 KHz image of an old 455 KHz IF. The 1206's dial only goes up to 400khz, but it tunes past that. Maybe it goes to 420 or 450khz, I don't think it goes as high as 500khz. (so maybe I don't have to expand the range for my needs). The BC-1206 tuning drive wouldn't be fine enough for today's narrowband style of operating so that would need a fair amount of mechanical rework. User's choice there. The vernier drive isn't that bad. I could put an elcheapo 1.5" vernier dial to drive the tuning knob (if I modify the drive to remove the 180 degree stop). But I think all it really needs is a better bigger knob. The linear-in-capacity rotation of the 3-gang variable is good for an RX Noise Bridge having an expanded parallel-C range... which is what I used them for. :-) True, but the rig is just to cute to canabilze. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Ken Scharf on Sun 26 Jun 2005 22:41
wrote: From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm wrote: I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V (fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or BC-1206. Converting a "Q5-er" from tubes to FETs would be rather easy. No real need for the 2N2222s. Would have gobs of space left over inside an already compact box. This is the idea of a cascade fet-bipolar circuit. The drain of the fet drives the emitter of the bipolar and the bipolar's base is biased so that the base sits about half way up the power supply (two resistors). The fet is self biased with a source resistor for the desired current. The gain of this circuit is higher than a fet by itself, and the output impedance will be higher. ____ __ -|_ \_/ | | If the 135 KHz IF has an equivalent total Q of 100, the BW would be about 1.3 KHz, not all that swift for CW and too shart for SSB. The AnArc-5 Q5'ers had 6 tuned circuits in their If but the '1206 only has 3 or 4. So it's BW might be a tad wider. The 1206 also has no bfo. The ARC-5 LF version has IF TRANSFORMERS but the insides are easy to see for detail. The 6 to 9 MHz version IFs (2830 KHz) had only one tuned circuit in each IF can. Can't remember what the BC-1206 used in their IF cans, but that is easy to change inside the present can (it will look just the same on the outside). I can't see any advantage of going cascode (JFET-bipolar) when an insulated gate FET would closely approximate a vacuum tube for both input impedance (all capacitive) and drain/output impedance (many hundreds of KOhms). Depends on what is available for the vacuum-to-solid conversion. Note: Both input and output impedances will affect the impedance and Q of the tuned circuits...and the GAINS...for a conversion with minimum circuit changes. All that has to be taken into account. However, the BC-1206 tuning range of 195 to 500 KHz results in an image at the converter input of 390 to 1000 KHz away from the desired band. That's worse than the 910 KHz image of an old 455 KHz IF. The 1206's dial only goes up to 400khz, but it tunes past that. Maybe it goes to 420 or 450khz, I don't think it goes as high as 500khz. (so maybe I don't have to expand the range for my needs). The variable tuning capacitor max:min ratio is roughly 11:1 (no external parallel capacity). Since the resonant tuning range is the square root of that, you could have it tune 190 to 570 KHz with a 9:1 max:min change in resonance capacity. The only real problem is getting the variable LO tuning to track the front end since it would tune 325 to 705 KHz (for the high-side) and that would be a 2.169:1 frequency ratio or 4.706 capacity change ratio. The linear-in-capacity rotation of the 3-gang variable is good for an RX Noise Bridge having an expanded parallel-C range... which is what I used them for. :-) True, but the rig is just to cute to canabilze. Heh heh heh. I agree with you there. It probably is most dense of any other 1940s era design using 8-pin "medium" size tubes, including the very compact ARC-5 receivers. Not quite as dense as the SCR-300 Walkie-Talkie (BC-1000) which stuffed 18 7-pin "miniature" tubes, a half-dozen coil/transformer cans, and a five-gang (!) variable capacitor into an approximate 5" x 10" chassis. [Galvin/Motorola did real good in packaging there] KEEPING the tubes as-is, with the possible exception of the AF out (28D7 ?) would yield a straight-AM receiver. ADDING a BFO via under-chassis bipolar transistor would result in minimum cannibalization (one extra switch on front panel)...RF and IF could remain the same. I've forgotten the audio output circuit of it but recall that AF output power for old aircraft was rather high (ambient noise in old warbirds was terrible). In a quiet land environment, the audio output needed is rarely 200 milliWatts into a speaker, much less for headphones. The SCR-300 walkie-talkie (headphones only) had a maximum of 3 mW audio out! Hint on supply conversion: A 12.6 V "filament" transformer can do the job for all-12 V filaments in parallel. A voltage doubling rectifier (even a tripler if need be) will yield the quite-low B+ for plate and screen. I once did that (long time ago) with a single transformer and voltage tripler for B+, all working into a set of power resistor load boxes, all in a half hour of tack-soldering. Got 30 VDC for B+ at 115 VAC line, less than 5% ripple. Didn't have the BC-1206 then. A critic looking on said "that isn't a good enough test...gotta have the 'real' load on it to 'prove' it." :-) [some folks just aren't convinced until someone else has made a finished production product!] |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
From: Ken Scharf on Sun 26 Jun 2005 22:41 wrote: From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm wrote: I am looking for a nice schematic, and perhaps additional info, on a 12V (fil. & plate) tube superhet Rx; just something fairly simple for CW/SSB reception without bells and whistles, and preferably for 75M/40M reception. Setchell-Carlson managed to do it with loctal-base tubes running off of a 24/28 VDC aircraft bus back in WW2 times. No dynamotor, just that cute little box referred to as a "range receiver" or BC-1206. Converting a "Q5-er" from tubes to FETs would be rather easy. No real need for the 2N2222s. Would have gobs of space left over inside an already compact box. This is the idea of a cascade fet-bipolar circuit. The drain of the fet drives the emitter of the bipolar and the bipolar's base is biased so that the base sits about half way up the power supply (two resistors). The fet is self biased with a source resistor for the desired current. The gain of this circuit is higher than a fet by itself, and the output impedance will be higher. ____ __ -|_ \_/ | | If the 135 KHz IF has an equivalent total Q of 100, the BW would be about 1.3 KHz, not all that swift for CW and too shart for SSB. The AnArc-5 Q5'ers had 6 tuned circuits in their If but the '1206 only has 3 or 4. So it's BW might be a tad wider. The 1206 also has no bfo. The ARC-5 LF version has IF TRANSFORMERS but the insides are easy to see for detail. The 6 to 9 MHz version IFs (2830 KHz) had only one tuned circuit in each IF can. Can't remember what the BC-1206 used in their IF cans, but that is easy to change inside the present can (it will look just the same on the outside). I seem to remember two trimmer caps so I guess there were a total of four tuned circuits. I think the ham radio article I saw on converting the rig did add a bfo using a tv horizontal coil cut down as the bfo coil. I could also remove some wire from an old BC453 bfo coil, of which I have a few in the junk box. (Not to metion about a dozen 85khz if cans). Which reminds me..... I was thinking of building a solid state version of the old Drake 2B receiver with it's 80meter first (tunable) IF, 455khz second if, and 85khz third if (using Arc5 IF transformers) instead of Drakes 50khz (close enough). I'd use a BC454 tuning cap padded down to cover 3.5-4.1mhz just like Drake. The first oscillator would be a PLL to cover everything (beats grinding on ft243 rocks). I can't see any advantage of going cascode (JFET-bipolar) when an insulated gate FET would closely approximate a vacuum tube for both input impedance (all capacitive) and drain/output impedance (many hundreds of KOhms). Depends on what is available for the vacuum-to-solid conversion. Junction fets are rather low gain, though compared to tubes with 28 volts on their plates, probably a good match. The cascade circuit can be built with either two jfets, or one jfet and one bipolar. The jfet/bipolar version combines the high gain of a bipolar transistor with the high input impedance of the fet. That's the reason I'd give it a try (plus I enough of BOTH kinds in the junk box). I'd replace the converter tube with three fets, two in differcial for the mixer, and one for the oscillator. Note: Both input and output impedances will affect the impedance and Q of the tuned circuits...and the GAINS...for a conversion with minimum circuit changes. All that has to be taken into account. However, the BC-1206 tuning range of 195 to 500 KHz results in an image at the converter input of 390 to 1000 KHz away from the desired band. That's worse than the 910 KHz image of an old 455 KHz IF. The 1206's dial only goes up to 400khz, but it tunes past that. Maybe it goes to 420 or 450khz, I don't think it goes as high as 500khz. (so maybe I don't have to expand the range for my needs). The variable tuning capacitor max:min ratio is roughly 11:1 (no external parallel capacity). Since the resonant tuning range is the square root of that, you could have it tune 190 to 570 KHz with a 9:1 max:min change in resonance capacity. The only real problem is getting the variable LO tuning to track the front end since it would tune 325 to 705 KHz (for the high-side) and that would be a 2.169:1 frequency ratio or 4.706 capacity change ratio. Well that doesn't take into account the distributed capacitance of the coil windings, which would be considerable at this frequency what with the required inductance. (ever wonder why a grid dipper covers a much higher min-max frequency ratio as the frequency band goes up?) Also IIRC there are trimmer caps in parallel with the tuning caps for alignment as the coils are fixed. To make the oscillator track, a series padder cap is used to reduce the max. capacitance value of the oscillator section. -OR- a parallel padder could be used to swamp out the range of the section. The linear-in-capacity rotation of the 3-gang variable is good for an RX Noise Bridge having an expanded parallel-C range... which is what I used them for. :-) True, but the rig is just to cute to canabilze. Heh heh heh. I agree with you there. It probably is most dense of any other 1940s era design using 8-pin "medium" size tubes, including the very compact ARC-5 receivers. Not quite as dense as the SCR-300 Walkie-Talkie (BC-1000) which stuffed 18 7-pin "miniature" tubes, a half-dozen coil/transformer cans, and a five-gang (!) variable capacitor into an approximate 5" x 10" chassis. [Galvin/Motorola did real good in packaging there] KEEPING the tubes as-is, with the possible exception of the AF out (28D7 ?) would yield a straight-AM receiver. ADDING a BFO via under-chassis bipolar transistor would result in minimum cannibalization (one extra switch on front panel)...RF and IF could remain the same. I've forgotten the audio output circuit of it but recall that AF output power for old aircraft was rather high (ambient noise in old warbirds was terrible). In a quiet land environment, the audio output needed is rarely 200 milliWatts into a speaker, much less for headphones. The SCR-300 walkie-talkie (headphones only) had a maximum of 3 mW audio out! You can't get much power out of a tube at 28v on the plate. The 28D7 was up to the task being a double power pentode with the sections in parallel (why not push pull?). I wouldn't call solid state conversion canabilzing. Hint on supply conversion: A 12.6 V "filament" transformer can do the job for all-12 V filaments in parallel. A voltage doubling rectifier (even a tripler if need be) will yield the quite-low B+ for plate and screen. I once did that (long time ago) with a single transformer and voltage tripler for B+, all working into a set of power resistor load boxes, all in a half hour of tack-soldering. Got 30 VDC for B+ at 115 VAC line, less than 5% ripple. Didn't have the BC-1206 then. A critic looking on said "that isn't a good enough test...gotta have the 'real' load on it to 'prove' it." :-) [some folks just aren't convinced until someone else has made a finished production product!] |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Ken Scharf on Jul 7, 10:19 pm
wrote: From: Ken Scharf on Sun 26 Jun 2005 22:41 wrote: From: Ken Scharf on Jun 25, 6:26 pm wrote: The 1206's dial only goes up to 400khz, but it tunes past that. Maybe it goes to 420 or 450khz, I don't think it goes as high as 500khz. (so maybe I don't have to expand the range for my needs). The variable tuning capacitor max:min ratio is roughly 11:1 (no external parallel capacity). Since the resonant tuning range is the square root of that, you could have it tune 190 to 570 KHz with a 9:1 max:min change in resonance capacity. The only real problem is getting the variable LO tuning to track the front end since it would tune 325 to 705 KHz (for the high-side) and that would be a 2.169:1 frequency ratio or 4.706 capacity change ratio. Well that doesn't take into account the distributed capacitance of the coil windings, which would be considerable at this frequency what with the required inductance. (ever wonder why a grid dipper covers a much higher min-max frequency ratio as the frequency band goes up?) Also IIRC there are trimmer caps in parallel with the tuning caps for alignment as the coils are fixed. To make the oscillator track, a series padder cap is used to reduce the max. capacitance value of the oscillator section. -OR- a parallel padder could be used to swamp out the range of the section. As an aid to setting a tuning range, check out the February 1977 issue of Ham Radio magazine (under my byline). It covers adding parallel caps, series caps, series-parallel and parallel-series combinations. Easy formulas, all algebraic. Worst case distributed capacity with typical inductances used at this frequency might be 12 pFd. Given a 32 to 352 pFd variable min:max, the C ratio = 11:1 Add 12 pFd to each section and C ratio = 8.0889:1 and F ratio = 2.8441:1. Add a total of 18 pFd in parallel and C ratio - 7.3800:1 with F ratio = 2.7166:1 and that is good from 190 to 516 KHz. There's a near-infinite number of solutions for series-parallel combinations for the LO but only a few will track adequately with the antenna and RF amp stage. I suggest doing a simple computer program for that kind of thing. It can check resonance of the LO tank against the Antenna-RF tanks and find the difference in resonance at as many frequencies within range as you want. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
1930's Futuristic Shortwave Wood Radio - Searchlight radio - info wanted | Shortwave | |||
Needed: Info or manual for Fisher 1800 Tube Receiver | Swap | |||
102-E Western Electric Tube info needed | Boatanchors | |||
102-E Western Electric Tube info needed | Homebrew | |||
102-E Western Electric Tube info needed | Homebrew |