Continue to Site

Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

RF Siggen Franklin VFO

Status
Not open for further replies.

rohitkhanna

Banned
Full Member level 6
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
341
Helped
76
Reputation
150
Reaction score
75
Trophy points
1,308
Location
New Delhi, India
Visit site
Activity points
0
While planning a simple lC based Siggen - hopefully working upto 100MHz & down to 0.5Mhz, and allowing use of inductance switching & varactors - I was examining the Franklin dual active device topology. Frequency stability by use of Huff'n'puff or similar, uC control for everything else. Oh - and an AGC system for start-up and amplitude management.

The Franklin seems to be an excellent candidate, simulations show promise, active elements can be standard ones like J310/ 2N4416/ S9018/ etc ....... but what are the potential down-sides and why is it not that popular ?

Just wanted the collectives wisdom before I got trapped into prototyping a possible dead-end.

cheers!
 
Last edited:

You were missing a link in your post. I was planning to build an RF siggen too, and I was planning to use many hartley oscillators (if you are winding your own coils anyway, then it is not expensive), and space for a future PLL. However, you need to build a lot of oscillators to cover a reasonable spectrum (I wanted to go to 500MHz). And, lots of filters. So it becomes more than a small project : ( As an idea, you could design a base board and build your oscillators and filters on small 'plug-in' vertical mount boards, so that you can build just a few oscillators initially, in a spectrum of interest, and
gradually expand it. It would also help with tweaking each oscillator, or if you wanted to change oscillator topology per band.
In the end, I gave up, because it just sounded too large a project, but if you can manage it, I think it would be awesome.
Alternatively you could use a DDS, but depending on your use-case, you may need lots of filters for that too.
 

You were missing a link in your post.

which link do you mean ?!

I was planning to build an RF siggen too, and I was planning to use many hartley oscillators (if you are winding your own coils anyway, then it is not expensive), and space for a future PLL. However, you need to build a lot of oscillators to cover a reasonable spectrum (I wanted to go to 500MHz). And, lots of filters. So it becomes more than a small project : ( As an idea, you could design a base board and build your oscillators and filters on small 'plug-in' vertical mount boards, so that you can build just a few oscillators initially, in a spectrum of interest, and
gradually expand it. It would also help with tweaking each oscillator, or if you wanted to change oscillator topology per band.
In the end, I gave up, because it just sounded too large a project, but if you can manage it, I think it would be awesome.

I played with the other topologies too - but Hartley requires switching of TWO points, Colpitts needs the feedback caps to be ALSO changed, etc etc. Thats why the Franklin topology looked so good, with a parallel LC to ground, not the series LC. Switching the L with PIN diodes under uC control I could possibly get 100MHz with 4 coils. I think. Virtually no filters needed - though I think the harmonics are down only around 40db. Anyhow I wanted to make it all automatic & supposedly seemless.

Alternatively you could use a DDS, but depending on your use-case, you may need lots of filters for that too.

I'm specifically staying away from DDS on this one - just to see where it gets me. And also because there is potential to go upto 500MHz & maybe beyond, with the exact same topology though plenty of care in the design/ layout etc. The L and C start becoming really small at those frequencies !!

The DDS would be (supposedly) much much simpler with all its intrinsic capabilities of sub-hertz resolution, but where's the fun in that ? And going to more than around 100Mhz the chips start to become a bit expensive anyhow. Not to mention the complexity of the very stable & even higher frequency clock source required. And you DO need some carefully made filters - especially if you want to push it to the limits.

Though I did put together a slightly improved version of Jespers (poor mans DDS) method and got a decent 0.125Hz -- 700KHz DDS based on AtMega48 + some old DAC chips i had lying around. Usual LCD & keypad controls for freq/ amplitude/ offset.

- - - Updated - - -

My point of concern is .... why does the Franklin oscillator topology look so good to me, and why do I not see it used more often ? Whats the downside... what am i missing ?
 

This Franklin
Oh, by 'this' I thought you were intending to show a link to a particular circuit. Unfortunately I've never heard of a Franklin VFO before.
It is missing in my textbooks! (But I don't have that many, so maybe it is well known to others).
40dB is extremely good without filters, however.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top