[time-nuts] KD2BD WWVB receiver/decoder in QEX

[paul swed]

By using the NE5532 ICs I have an operational KD2BD wwvb receiver and it
has just locked for the first time. Made a few other changes like the vco
loop chip is a TLE2071. Thats because it was available much like the
article. I also used a PTI 10 MHz oscillator. A nice unit picked up at a
flea market so really keeping with the whats available mode.
I built only the elements needed to lock the oscillator. Thats still a lot
of stuff. There is room to add more pieces if needed. No need for the
microprocessor yet.

WWVB is being itself tonight. I think MSF is doing a great job of
interfering.

Happy Thanks giving to everyone.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:41 PM, paul swed <paulswedb at gmail.com> wrote:

> Charles great suggestion on the NE5532. Just bread boarded the first
> section of the receiver very quickly and the component values work as is.
> Thats also as it should be. I need to do a noise check tomorrow but it
> appears I can heat up the ole soldering iron and build quite a bit of the
> receiver.
> Ah the smell of burning insulation and flux in the evening.
> Regards
> Paul WB8TSL
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:28 PM, paul swed <paulswedb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles I did see the slew rates and bandwidth and came to the conclusion
>> those were not issues. Thats why I will build up a test board pretty
>> quickly to confirm the component values still work. They should. It also
>> means I do not need to wait for the LM873s to showup. Lots can be wired
>> without the LMC6484s.
>> Regards
>> Paul
>> WB8TSL
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Charles Steinmetz <
>> csteinmetz at yandex.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Paul wrote:
>>>
>>> post down conversion to 10 Khz I was scratching my head as to why not
>>>> the TL08X series.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Input voltage noise.  Unless you need the low input current of the FET
>>> part, there is no need to take the noise hit.  If you *do* need the low
>>> input current, there are 4 or 5 generations of FET-input opamps that are
>>> all far superior to the TL0xx parts.  Take a look at the OPA134/2134/4134,
>>> for example.  (I haven't used TL0xx opamps since the '70s.)
>>>
>>> BTW:  I suggested using NE5532s instead of LM387s and said they were
>>> better in every way.  Comparing the LM387 to the NE5532, one might notice
>>> that the bandwidth spec of the 5532 is lower (10MHz) than that of the 387
>>> (15MHz).  But what is important for most applications is not the
>>> small-signal BW, it is the power BW (full-output BW), which depends on the
>>> slew rate, not on the SSBW.  The 5532's 9v/uS slew rate supports a PBW of
>>> 140kHz, while the 387's PBW is only 75kHz (S/R is not stated).  (This tells
>>> us two things -- first, that the 387's slew rate must be <5v/uS; and
>>> second, that the 387 has less phase margin than the 5532.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Charles
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>
>>
>