From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Tue Apr  2 18:17:01 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Alvin J. Bernard)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:17:01 -0500
Subject: [HBR] Filter
Message-ID: <20020402.131703.-163931.1.ni4q@juno.com>


On Sun, 31 Mar 2002 16:32:41 -0500 "Jeff Noel" <k4zku@erols.com> writes:
> Does anyone have a 9.0 mHz SSB crystal filter and carrier oscillator
> crystals
> such as used in many of the ARRL receiver and transmitter projects 
> they
> would
> like to sell?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jeff  K4ZKU
=============================================================
Jeff,

I have the  filter but not the crystals.  Filter is brand new still in
original packaging.
9MHz crystal filter,  Bandwidth at 6db points 2.20 KHz, input/output
impedance 500 ohms,
6 crystal poles; 3 L-C poles;   Insertion loss less than 6 db;   USB
crystal freq: 8998.5 KHz;
LSB crystal freq: 9001.5 KHz. Make offer  if interested $ or trade.

                 NI4Q    Orlando, FL








________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Tue Apr  2 21:25:07 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:25:07 -0600
Subject: [HBR] Re: FW: RE: Making coils ...some data
Message-ID: <20020402.152513.-288217.8.windy10605@juno.com>

I also took some 3 strand data and put it all, and the "winder" info,
on the Radio Homepage in the coil winding section. Next, some
actual IF transformers....that work.   

73s  Kees K5BCQ
Radio Homepage  http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Tue Apr  2 22:36:43 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:36:43 -0600
Subject: [HBR] HBR-15
Message-ID: <20020402.163649.-288217.9.windy10605@juno.com>

Don Knotts provided a schematic of Ted Crosby's HBR-15 which 
Ted sent out to several HBR-14 builders somewhere between the 
HBR-14 and HBR-16 timeframe. Tube lineup and info is on the web 
site.

Anyone have schematic data on the HBR-18 ?

73s  Kees K5BCQ

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Wed Apr  3 02:28:42 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (R.J. Mattson)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:28:42 -0500
Subject: [HBR] Home brew Coil winder
Message-ID: <003401c1dab7$46ad08e0$0c6ddbd0@rjmattson>

Hi Kees,
Linsay Publications has a booklet on making your own coil winder.
Quote....."this amazing little machine will professionally wind universal
 and honeycomb coils, single layer and multilayer solenoids,
 close-wound and space wound coils, and even pi-spaced coils
 such as used for RF chokes and transformers."........
http://www.lindsaybks.com/dgjp/djgbk/coil/index.html
Regards,
Bob Mattson....W2AMI    WN2AMI  1962

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sandy and Kees Talen" <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <HBR@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:25 PM
Subject: [HBR] Re: FW: RE: Making coils ...some data


> 
> I also took some 3 strand data and put it all, and the "winder" info,
> on the Radio Homepage in the coil winding section. Next, some
> actual IF transformers....that work.   
> 
> 73s  Kees K5BCQ
> Radio Homepage  http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/




From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr  5 21:07:04 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 15:07:04 -0600
Subject: [HBR] 5-pin connectors- sold
Message-ID: <20020405.151241.-163213.10.windy10605@juno.com>

Funds received and the qty10, 5-pin connectors will be sent in 
the morning.

thanks,
Kees

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr  5 21:30:23 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 15:30:23 -0600
Subject: [HBR] 5-pin connectors- sold
Message-ID: <20020405.153241.-163213.13.windy10605@juno.com>

Sorry that note was supposed to go to Jerry Rego,
not the reflector.

Kees

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr  8 15:17:29 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Jim Amos)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 10:17:29 -0400
Subject: [HBR] 5-pin connectors- sold
In-Reply-To: <20020405.151241.-163213.10.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <PIECKNEOMOBIMJCDFJMPGEPJELAA.jimamos@cisco.com>

Can you provide the manufacturers part number for these connectors?  

Thanks,
Jim N8CAH

-----Original Message-----
From: hbr-admin@mailman.qth.net [mailto:hbr-admin@mailman.qth.net]On
Behalf Of Sandy and Kees Talen
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 4:07 PM
To: hbr@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [HBR] 5-pin connectors- sold


Funds received and the qty10, 5-pin connectors will be sent in 
the morning.

thanks,
Kees

************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 

Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net


HBR mailing list
HBR@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr  8 13:49:09 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 07:49:09 -0500
Subject: [HBR] HB 67 Receiver or others like that under construction
Message-ID: <20020408.080222.-251647.1.windy10605@juno.com>

One of the guys at the Williamson County ARC is interested in
building a HB 67 or similiar unit (I believe Darrell is building one).
He's not on the reflector and would like to hear from some of you 
to discuss it's design points. Please respond to him directly and
copy the HBR reflector, since we're all interested. His e-mail
is     cliff_white@dell.com

73s  Kees K5BCQ

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr  8 14:13:33 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 08:13:33 -0500
Subject: [HBR] 5-pin connectors- sold
Message-ID: <20020408.081432.-251647.4.windy10605@juno.com>

All I know is that they were Amphenol, but all have been sold
and I don't have one to look at. You might contact Jerry Rego
jerryrego@mindspring.com  that's where the last 10 went.

73s  Kees K5BCQ

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr  8 18:44:16 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Diane Swynar)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:44:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HBR] HB 67 Receiver or others like that under construction
In-Reply-To: <20020408.080222.-251647.1.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20020408.080222.-251647.1.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <58104.198.208.223.35.1018287856.squirrel@webmail.durham.net>

Hi Kees & Darrell...

Well, count me in as one who is building that rig--or at least, a version
thereof...

I have, I believe, ALL of the parts in hand now, but plan on a few changes,
including:

-The addition of a 3rd IF stage;
-A p-p pair of 6AQ5's in the final AF stage;
-A switchable AM diode detector in addition to the product detector, and,
-More than one switchable mechanical/crystal bandpass IF filter.

I'm one project away from starting this one---first up is a 1929-style
superhet, as inspired by Lindsay's piece in the newest issue of THE OLD
TIMER'S BULLETIN. This is the one that uses REAL glow-in-the-dark
bottles...things like 224A's, 227's, & 245's!

Will keep you guys posted---please do likwise for my benefit!

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ









> One of the guys at the Williamson County ARC is interested in
> building a HB 67 or similiar unit (I believe Darrell is building one).
> He's not on the reflector and would like to hear from some of you  to
> discuss it's design points. Please respond to him directly and
> copy the HBR reflector, since we're all interested. His e-mail
> is     cliff_white@dell.com
>
> 73s  Kees K5BCQ
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>  construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr




From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr  8 23:39:30 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:39:30 -0500
Subject: [HBR] HB 67 Receiver Introduction
Message-ID: <558DC7C51772B3489A342EC141F973A516C133@AUSXMPS306.aus.amer.dell.com>

All-
First a quick introduction: name here is Cliff White WB5DYA and the QTH is
Cedar Park Texas within a few miles of Kees.

I visited with Kees this weekend on the subject of constructing a tube ham
bands only receiver with enough performance to encourage regular use on the
bands.  My assessment is that the typical earlier designs detailed on Kees'
website would not yield enough performance to meet my criteria.

Years ago (1964) while in undergraduate school, I read and got very
interested in the "miser's dream receiver" article and followed the
subsequent articles with a great deal of interest.  This receiver design
followed the principles outlined in a couple of the earlier articles from
Goodman and Squires about a different approach toward receiver design.

Years later (1974) bought a used commercial version of this receiver at the
Dallas sidewalk in real bad shape.   I am talking about a Hallicrafters
receiver model SX-146.  This receiver is very close to the "miser dream"
with the following modifications:  
* Added a RF stage
* Low gain RF amplifier followed by low noise triode mixer
* Band switching
* Did not use 7360 beam deflection tube
* Single conversion with IF at 9.0 MHz
* All selectivity provided by a single crystal filter
* Switched filters for each mode: CW, SSB, AM
* Very simple mechanical & electrical design 


I am very interested in building a single conversion receiver very similar
to the miser's dream or HB-67.  My design parameters are:
* Basic single band 20 meter receiver
* Use an external vacuum tube crystal controlled converter to cover other
bands 
* Probably  mounted in a separate cabinet with a speaker and some form
adjustable passive audio filter and speaker 
* Include adjustable attenuator in crystal converter design
* Design around low noise tubes/circuits 
* Possibly an external power supply to reduce size and enable use of
aluminum cabinet for receiver
* Running a 7360 mixer in same cabinet with power transformer without a lot
of steel or mu-metal shielding will result in 120 Hz modulation of the
electron beams in the tube with resulting hum 
* Power supply could fit into a separate steel cabinet with speaker and
crystal controlled converter or 
* Emphasis on simple mechanical design 
* Aluminum metal for receiver and converter
* Steel chassis or steel shielding for power supply
* Good dial mechanism (probably an Eddystone since I have a couple)Include
an low noise RF amplifier stage
* Switchable RF attenuator between antenna terminal and RF amplifier
* Retain the basic 7360 tube mixer circuit for superior mixer performance
* Single conversion at 9.00 MHZ (I have some 9.00 MHz SSB & CW filters and
crystals)
* Use small relays to switch between filters (this simplifies construction
and front panel layout)
* Probably have some form of tail end filter before the product mixer for
SSB and CW 
* This may require an additional stage of IF amplification
* Having three stages is good news since this provides a much greater AGC
range
* Probably no provisions for AM unless I can find some AM filters which are
difficult to find
* Dual balanced diode product detector
* This will probably require a cathode follower as the last stage of IF
amplification for impedance matching
* Some form of audio low pass filter after product detector to reduce hiss 
* AGC applied to RF amplifier and all IF amplifiers using some form of low
impedance circuit in tube cathode circuits
* This approach  is described in some 73 or CW magazines of which I have
copies
* I modified an old HQ-110 years ago with good success.
* IF notch filter using tuned crystal to ground using circuit from Yaesu
FT-301/FT-902 (this is a very simple circuit with a crystal in series with a
variable capacitor shunted to ground)
* Some form of RIT if at all possible for us with a matching CW/SSB
transmitter to be designed in the future


And so on.  

I would be glad to communicate with anyone wanting to build any receiver
similar to the HB-67 or something improved.   I think we can buy additional
SSB/CW  6 pole 9.0 MHz filters and matching oscillator crystals cheap from
England.   If interested, I will send copies of schematics and articles that
I think would apply to this receiver project. 

In short, I want to build a high performance receiver system that justifies
the effort.   I want to build a receiver I will use on the air and could use
as a possible building block for a subsequent transmitter project.


Thanks and CUL - Cliff



 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Diane Swynar [mailto:gswynar@durham.net] 
Sent:	Monday, April 08, 2002 12:44 PM
To:	hbr@mailman.qth.net
Cc:	windy10605@juno.com; cliff_white@exchange.dell.com
Subject:	Re: [HBR] HB 67 Receiver or others like that under
construction

Hi Kees & Darrell...

Well, count me in as one who is building that rig--or at least, a version
thereof...

I have, I believe, ALL of the parts in hand now, but plan on a few changes,
including:

-The addition of a 3rd IF stage;
-A p-p pair of 6AQ5's in the final AF stage;
-A switchable AM diode detector in addition to the product detector, and,
-More than one switchable mechanical/crystal bandpass IF filter.

I'm one project away from starting this one---first up is a 1929-style
superhet, as inspired by Lindsay's piece in the newest issue of THE OLD
TIMER'S BULLETIN. This is the one that uses REAL glow-in-the-dark
bottles...things like 224A's, 227's, & 245's!

Will keep you guys posted---please do likewise for my benefit!

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ









> One of the guys at the Williamson County ARC is interested in
> building a HB 67 or similar unit (I believe Darrell is building one).
> He's not on the reflector and would like to hear from some of you  to
> discuss it's design points. Please respond to him directly and
> copy the HBR reflector, since we're all interested. His e-mail
> is     cliff_white@dell.com
>
> 73s  Kees K5BCQ
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>  construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr




From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Tue Apr  9 13:06:38 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 08:06:38 EDT
Subject: [HBR] HB 67 Receiver Introduction
Message-ID: <b7.1ea7b857.29e4334e@aol.com>

Just a quick note....

Besides the "Miser's Dream", Squires and Goodman articles, there is one more 
"must read". QST for February, 1972 has an article titled "An Experimental 
Receiver For 75 Meter DX Work" by Doug Blakeslee, W1KLK (SK). 

This receiver is very similar to what Cliff wants to build. It uses four 
tuned circuits before the mixer, and a low-gain grounded-grid RF stage. Mixer 
is a single-ended 7360. The IF is 455 kHz, based on a Collins mechanical 
filter. Lots of good circuits, as well as design philosophy and layout ideas. 

More to follow but I'm out of time

73 de Jim, N2EY

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Tue Apr  9 16:09:25 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Diane Swynar)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 11:09:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HBR] HB 67 Receiver Introduction
In-Reply-To: <b7.1ea7b857.29e4334e@aol.com>
References: <b7.1ea7b857.29e4334e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <13340.198.208.223.35.1018364965.squirrel@webmail.durham.net>

Hi Jim...

Yes, that's quite a neat circuit and well worth looking into...

The designer's philosophy was to make the front end completely "bullet
proof" in the matter of selectivity---and that's ALL selectivity, i.e. both
immunity from the Novice keying his rig directly across the street from
you, as well as from junk on parts of the band slipping past the front ends
of less robust rigs.

He really did a job of it, too, with that "quad" set-up of L/C networks!
The grounded grid RF amplifier was put in place strictly to compensate for
circuit losses therein.

If one were to forgo the mechanical filter, conventional IF transformers
would be an absolute must in the IF chain...have you ever shorted out the
IF filter in an SB-301 to see what its effect might be on selectivity?
(Heath used a similar scheme). It'd be BROADER than any barn door you could
find!

That heterodyne nulling circuit would be a worthwhile addition to the HB-67
as well--simple, but effective, according to the author.

I don't know that the average Ham would really need all that elaborate a
front end, but as you say, the piece is full of good ideas & thought
starters!

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ





> Just a quick note....
>
> Besides the "Miser's Dream", Squires and Goodman articles, there is one
> more  "must read". QST for February, 1972 has an article titled "An
> Experimental  Receiver For 75 Meter DX Work" by Doug Blakeslee, W1KLK
> (SK).
>
> This receiver is very similar to what Cliff wants to build. It uses
> four  tuned circuits before the mixer, and a low-gain grounded-grid RF
> stage. Mixer  is a single-ended 7360. The IF is 455 kHz, based on a
> Collins mechanical  filter. Lots of good circuits, as well as design
> philosophy and layout ideas.
>
> More to follow but I'm out of time
>
> 73 de Jim, N2EY
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>  construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr




From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Wed Apr 10 01:06:49 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:06:49 EDT
Subject: [HBR] HB 67 Receiver Introduction
Message-ID: <181.681e21a.29e4dc19@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/9/02 11:11:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
gswynar@durham.net writes:

> Hi Jim...
>  
>  Yes, that's quite a neat circuit and well worth looking into...
>  
>  The designer's philosophy was to make the front end completely "bullet
>  proof" in the matter of selectivity---and that's ALL selectivity, i.e. both
>  immunity from the Novice keying his rig directly across the street from
>  you, as well as from junk on parts of the band slipping past the front ends
>  of less robust rigs.
>  
>  He really did a job of it, too, with that "quad" set-up of L/C networks!
>  The grounded grid RF amplifier was put in place strictly to compensate for
>  circuit losses therein.

Yup. The basic idea is as described by W1DX in "What's Wrong With Our Present
Receivers?" 15 years earlier. The design puts as much selectivity as near the 
antenna as possible.

Note also that the tunable oscillator is in its own heavy metal box, and the 
preselector is not ganged to it. 
While this can be a bit inconvenient, it makes mechanical and electrical 
design much simpler and eliminates
compromises. 
>  
>  If one were to forgo the mechanical filter, conventional IF transformers
>  would be an absolute must in the IF chain...have you ever shorted out the
>  IF filter in an SB-301 to see what its effect might be on selectivity?
>  (Heath used a similar scheme). It'd be BROADER than any barn door you could
>  find!

During development of the Southgate Type 6 series, I did just that. The whole 
band comes in at once!

The IF filter must be as close to the antenna as possible to give really good 
dynamic range, though. 
>  
>  That heterodyne nulling circuit would be a worthwhile addition to the HB-67
>  as well--simple, but effective, according to the author.
>  
It's derived from the 75A-4 circuit. 

>  I don't know that the average Ham would really need all that elaborate a
>  front end, but as you say, the piece is full of good ideas & thought
>  starters!

It all depends what kind of performance is the goal. W1KLK wanted a receiver 
that was all but impossible to
overload and had really good selectivity against both nearby and far off QRM. 
He also wanted a really good dial,
solid construction and no trick circuits. His design obviously delivers on 
all counts. One wonders how it would compare to a current model 
top-of-the-line ham transceiver.

73 de Jim, N2EY

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Wed Apr 10 15:26:32 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Jerry Rego)
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:26:32 +0100
Subject: [HBR] hbr article
References: <20020307.160103.-274543.4.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <002501c1e09b$b71f0260$6f4ec943@amd450>

Jerry Rego
903 Hare Road
Suffolk ,  VA         23437


Es, thank you for all your help.  If I lived closer I would Throw a Bar-B-Q
for you all.  Jerry Rego
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy and Kees Talen <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 11:00 PM
Subject: Re: [HBR] hbr article


> Sure, I made some copies of the Radio Handbook article
> ... Need your address
>
> Kees K5BCQ
>
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Wed Apr 10 21:53:54 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Jeff Noel)
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 16:53:54 -0400
Subject: [HBR] hbr article
References: <20020307.160103.-274543.4.windy10605@juno.com> <002501c1e09b$b71f0260$6f4ec943@amd450>
Message-ID: <001001c1e0d1$e8d8e600$d8282c42@hppav>

Jerry,

I missed something, are you planning to build the HBR 67?

Jeff


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 11 00:28:43 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 18:28:43 -0500
Subject: [HBR] Re: HBR11 found
Message-ID: <20020410.183105.-283973.7.windy10605@juno.com>

John Brewer (WB5OAU) recently acquired a HBR-11 which was 
originally built by Jon Zoller (W5ZWQ) ....looks like a really nice unit.
Pictures have been uploaded to the HBR web site..

73s  Kees K5BCQ  



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 11 01:04:57 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (LORNE BARBER)
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:04:57 -0700
Subject: [HBR] hbr article
Message-ID: <000c01c1e0ec$96a53e40$aebb17cf@default.sunwave.net>

Another receiver which is configured similar to the HBR series
is the HB65. I believe it is in the 1966 ARRL handbook.  Any
one built one?
Any one care to do a +ACI-product+ACI- review.
73
Lorne
VE7BOX



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Noel +ADw-k4zku+AEA-erols.com+AD4-
To: hbr+AEA-mailman.qth.net +ADw-hbr+AEA-mailman.qth.net+AD4-
Date: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: +AFs-HBR+AF0- hbr article


+AD4-Jerry,
+AD4-
+AD4-I missed something, are you planning to build the HBR 67?
+AD4-
+AD4-Jeff
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4AKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACo-
+AD4-Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of
receivers and
+AD4-construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
+AD4-
+AD4-Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4-HBR mailing list
+AD4-HBR+AEA-mailman.qth.net
+AD4-http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
+AD4-


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 11 18:31:32 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 13:31:32 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
Message-ID: <20020411173208.NZUT4773.out001.verizon.net@gemini>

Greetings,

After looking through my stack of QST's and stuff I can't seem to=
 
find anything on this HR-67.  Can someone direct me to it.

My own thoughts on building an HBR are two.  Either duplicate one=
 of 
the models exactly or use the general layout and ideas to build=
 one 
suited to one's own operating needs and desires.  Being that it's=
 
going to be used as a ham band receiver doesn't mean it has to be=
 
second class.  Being a bit of a receiver nut for years and have=
 spent 
most of my time lately laying out plans for a new one, I have=
 come to 
the following conclusions:

-Keep it simple (which can be very complicated)
-Single conversion using high freq. IF filter(s)
-The front end will use a 7360, or a 6J6 mixer
-No RF stage
-Modular construction
-There will be a couple of transistors and IC's in it
-For once, I'm also going to make it look attractive

part of my prerequisites  is that I also use as many parts as 
possible out of my Junque box/room. 
-- 
Helm.  WB2ADT



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 02:28:52 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 21:28:52 EDT
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
Message-ID: <14f.c23e21a.29e79254@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/11/02 1:33:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
vze2gmp4@verizon.net writes:

> After looking through my stack of QST's and stuff I can't seem to 
>  find anything on this HR-67.  Can someone direct me to it.

The HB-67 did not appear in QST. It was first described in the 1967 ARRL 
Handbook, and was designed by W1DX (Byron Goodman). A later version appears 
in the 1969 Handbook, but by 1971 the receivers are all sandstate.

The HB-67 is an 80 meter receiver having a 455 kHz IF, a crystal controlled 
converter for the 40,20,15, and 10 meter bands, and a solid state power 
supply all on one chassis. The coverter is switched out of the circuit on 80 
meters. Selectivity is fixed at 2.1 kHz by the use of an SSB mechanical 
filter. Audio-derived AGC is provided, and the 80 meter section uses a 
single-ended 7360 mixer. 
>  
>  My own thoughts on building an HBR are two.  Either duplicate one of 
>  the models exactly or use the general layout and ideas to build one 
>  suited to one's own operating needs and desires.  Being that it's 
>  going to be used as a ham band receiver doesn't mean it has to be 
>  second class.  Being a bit of a receiver nut for years and have spent 
>  most of my time lately laying out plans for a new one, I have come to 
>  the following conclusions:
>  
>  -Keep it simple (which can be very complicated)

Agreed! No reason to include features you won't use. 

>  -Single conversion using high freq. IF filter(s)

Yup.

>  -The front end will use a 7360, or a 6J6 mixer

There are other beam-deflection tubes that are more common and cheaper than 
the 7360. The 6JH8 and 6ME8 are often-overlooked examples. 

The Pullen mixer design is credited with high performance yet is simple and 
sure-fire. The recommended mod for the 75A-4 first mixer is a 6ES8 Pullen 
mixer over the 7360.

>  -No RF stage

This can cause problems with IF feedthrough, images and spurs, but is a good 
idea if you can get adequate RF selectivity ahead of the first mixer. I have 
often thought that a double-tuned input circuit using really BIG Miniductor 
or other high Q coils might be the answer. 

>  -Modular construction

A good idea but drastically increases construction time. 

>  -There will be a couple of transistors and IC's in it

If desired, sure. But there are very few things that cannot be done "hollow 
state" style. (I have built two complete and different bandswitching 100 watt 
output CW transceivers, and both of them have NO solid state devices at all - 
not even in the power supplies. I did use a pair of 1N34As in the SWR bridge, 
though). 

>  -For once, I'm also going to make it look attractive

Yup. A little spray paint can do wonders.
>  
>  part of my prerequisites  is that I also use as many parts as 
>  possible out of my Junque box/room. 

I have too many parts and too little time! 

Some things I would add:

- power supply and speaker should be a separate unit. 

- tunable oscillator should be of "unit" construction (think of the LMO in 
the Heath SB series or the PTO in the Collins sets). 

- allow lots of room on the chassis and panel. 

- design so that all parts operate below ratings to insure long life

- don't be afraid to create a one of a kind design that meets YOUR needs. 
Half  
   the fun of homebrewing is being able to choose what's important and what's 
not.

- don't be afraid to start small and work your way up, or to tear apart and 
rebuild if 
   you get better ideas.

73 de Jim, N2EY

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 04:11:24 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 23:11:24 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
In-Reply-To: <14f.c23e21a.29e79254@aol.com>
References: <14f.c23e21a.29e79254@aol.com>
Message-ID: <02041123112400.00199@darkstar>

>
> v
>
> The HB-67 did not appear in QST. It was first described in the 1967 ARRL
> Handbook, and was designed by W1DX (Byron Goodman). A later version appears
> in the 1969 Handbook, but by 1971 the receivers are all sandstate.

OK! That explains why I can't find it. Don't have those handbooks.
>
> The HB-67 is an 80 meter receiver having a 455 kHz IF, a crystal controlled
> converter for the 40,20,15, and 10 meter bands, and a solid state power
> supply all on one chassis. The coverter is switched out of the circuit on
> 80 meters. Selectivity is fixed at 2.1 kHz by the use of an SSB mechanical
> filter. Audio-derived AGC is provided, and the 80 meter section uses a
> single-ended 7360 mixer.

>From your description it does't sound like my cup of tea.
>
> >  -

>
> There are other beam-deflection tubes that are more common and cheaper than
> the 7360. The 6JH8 and 6ME8 are often-overlooked examples.
>
> The Pullen mixer design is credited with high performance yet is simple and
> sure-fire. The recommended mod for the 75A-4 first mixer is a 6ES8 Pullen
> mixer over the 7360.

That's basically the 6J6 dual triode mixer I mentioned.
>
> >  -No RF stage
>
> This can cause problems with IF feedthrough, images and spurs, but is a
> good idea if you can get adequate RF selectivity ahead of the first mixer.
> I have often thought that a double-tuned input circuit using really BIG
> Miniductor or other high Q coils might be the answer.

A couple of tuned circuits is the answer.  Many people think they HAVE to 
have an RF tube in there.  Not so until one hits 15 Mhz or so.  I have 3 
receivers that don't have an RF stage.  Don't miss it on 40 mtrs.  Choosing 
an IF freq.  is important.  Running only one mixer oscillator makes things 
alot easier to clean up.
>
> >  -Modular construction
>
> A good idea but drastically increases construction time.

Time I've got.  I'm really looking to make this receiver more flexible for 
future mods.  One receiver I have, I built with the front end modular.  I 
have 5 different modules built in 2.5 x 5.0 inch miniboxes.  The "standard" 
6xxx RF with a 6BE6 mixer is really the worst setup I have.  Cheap and it 
somewhat worked, for the manufactorers.  The dual triode is about the best 
(no RF stage).  The 7360 module I have is setup as a real balanced mixer and 
is a bear to keep balanced.  Using this tube single ended which most 
designers do seems to be defeating the purpose of using it. 

Thanks for the input.  CU on the list.

Regards,
Helm.  WB2ADT
>

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 17:07:09 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 12:07:09 EDT
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
Message-ID: <198.53c4e3e.29e8602d@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/11/02 11:13:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
vze2gmp4@verizon.net writes:

> OK! That explains why I can't find it. Don't have those handbooks.

>  > The HB-67 is an 80 meter receiver having a 455 kHz IF, a crystal 
> controlled
>  > converter for the 40,20,15, and 10 meter bands, and a solid state power
>  > supply all on one chassis. The coverter is switched out of the circuit on
>  > 80 meters. Selectivity is fixed at 2.1 kHz by the use of an SSB 
mechanical
>  > filter. Audio-derived AGC is provided, and the 80 meter section uses a
>  > single-ended 7360 mixer.
>  
>  From your description it does't sound like my cup of tea.

What sort of design do you favor? I'm partial to premixer designs, myself.

>  > There are other beam-deflection tubes that are more common and cheaper 
> than
>  > the 7360. The 6JH8 and 6ME8 are often-overlooked examples.
>  >
>  > The Pullen mixer design is credited with high performance yet is simple 
> and
>  > sure-fire. The recommended mod for the 75A-4 first mixer is a 6ES8 Pullen
>  > mixer over the 7360.
>  
>  That's basically the 6J6 dual triode mixer I mentioned.

OK. When I get building again, a Pullen mixer will be tried. 
>  >
>  > >  -No RF stage
>  >
>  > This can cause problems with IF feedthrough, images and spurs, but is a
>  > good idea if you can get adequate RF selectivity ahead of the first 
mixer.
>  > I have often thought that a double-tuned input circuit using really BIG
>  > Miniductor or other high Q coils might be the answer.
>  
>  A couple of tuned circuits is the answer.  Many people think they HAVE to 
>  have an RF tube in there.  Not so until one hits 15 Mhz or so.  I have 3 
>  receivers that don't have an RF stage.  Don't miss it on 40 mtrs.  
Choosing 
>  an IF freq.  is important.  Running only one mixer oscillator makes things 
>  alot easier to clean up.

The need for an RF amp depends on a number of factors. Usually their function 
is 
to compensate for a noisy first mixer and to deal with the losses in the RF 
coils. Plus
contribute some gain to the set. 

With a good set of hi Q coils and a lownoise mixer those concerns are reduced 
or
eliminated and the RF stage becomes less important. A good beam-deflection or
Pullen mixer is actually quieter than many RF stages. 

But eliminating the RF stage and therefore the pre-IF gain means that more 
attention
must be paid to the noise figure of the IF amplifier, particularly the first 
IF stage. 
>  >
>  > >  -Modular construction
>  >
>  > A good idea but drastically increases construction time.
>  
>  Time I've got.  I'm really looking to make this receiver more flexible for 
>  future mods.  One receiver I have, I built with the front end modular.  I 
>  have 5 different modules built in 2.5 x 5.0 inch miniboxes.  The 
"standard" 
>  6xxx RF with a 6BE6 mixer is really the worst setup I have.  Cheap and it 
>  somewhat worked, for the manufactorers.  The dual triode is about the best 
>  (no RF stage).  The 7360 module I have is setup as a real balanced mixer 
and 
>  is a bear to keep balanced.  Using this tube single ended which most 
>  designers do seems to be defeating the purpose of using it. 
>  
Agreed. 

I have found the 6BA7 to be a worthwhile improvement over the 6BE6, if you
have to use a pentagrid mixer. Almost any receiver that uses a 6BE6 can be 
easily
converted to the 6BA7. Toughest part is changing the socket to 9 pin. 6BA7 has
lower noise, more gain, and needs less LO drive.

>  Thanks for the input.  CU on the list.

73 de Jim, N2EY 

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 18:31:39 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Diane Swynar)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:31:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
In-Reply-To: <02041123112400.00199@darkstar>
References: <02041123112400.00199@darkstar>
Message-ID: <14769.198.208.223.35.1018632699.squirrel@webmail.durham.net>

Hi All...

A VERY interesting thread going on here in the matter of homebrew
receivers, one that I especially enjoy reading!

One little caveat to receiver builders who, like me, wind their own coils
in RF amplifiers, etc., and that is this: do NOT place your link coil too
close to the main tuning coil. I did just that with my version of the Mate
For The Mighty Midget receiver, hoping to maximize sensitivity of the final
product, above all...

The coils are over-coupled: when I'm trying to listen to AM on 1885-KHz
with an SSB or CW contest down the band, I can hear the junk all over the
dial! Now, I agree this receiver isn't the last word in complexity & all,
but I know if I had separated the two coils up to a maximum of 3/8" apart
(as suggested by Rocky in his regen books), the set-up would have had a LOT
more up-front selectivity, where it really counts.

I took a look at the underside of that little rascal the other
day...wouldn't take but two new pill containers & some enamelled wire to
make things right...!

Anyway, this subject is probably hardly ever seriously challenged or
questioned by builders who simply follow article instructions to the letter-
--now I know why! Hi Hi

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ







>
>>
>> v
>>
>> The HB-67 did not appear in QST. It was first described in the 1967
>> ARRL Handbook, and was designed by W1DX (Byron Goodman). A later
>> version appears in the 1969 Handbook, but by 1971 the receivers are
>> all sandstate.
>
> OK! That explains why I can't find it. Don't have those handbooks.
>>
>> The HB-67 is an 80 meter receiver having a 455 kHz IF, a crystal
>> controlled converter for the 40,20,15, and 10 meter bands, and a solid
>> state power supply all on one chassis. The coverter is switched out of
>> the circuit on 80 meters. Selectivity is fixed at 2.1 kHz by the use
>> of an SSB mechanical filter. Audio-derived AGC is provided, and the 80
>> meter section uses a single-ended 7360 mixer.
>
>>From your description it does't sound like my cup of tea.
>>
>> >  -
>
>>
>> There are other beam-deflection tubes that are more common and cheaper
>> than the 7360. The 6JH8 and 6ME8 are often-overlooked examples.
>>
>> The Pullen mixer design is credited with high performance yet is
>> simple and sure-fire. The recommended mod for the 75A-4 first mixer is
>> a 6ES8 Pullen mixer over the 7360.
>
> That's basically the 6J6 dual triode mixer I mentioned.
>>
>> >  -No RF stage
>>
>> This can cause problems with IF feedthrough, images and spurs, but is
>> a good idea if you can get adequate RF selectivity ahead of the first
>> mixer. I have often thought that a double-tuned input circuit using
>> really BIG Miniductor or other high Q coils might be the answer.
>
> A couple of tuned circuits is the answer.  Many people think they HAVE
> to  have an RF tube in there.  Not so until one hits 15 Mhz or so.  I
> have 3  receivers that don't have an RF stage.  Don't miss it on 40
> mtrs.  Choosing  an IF freq.  is important.  Running only one mixer
> oscillator makes things  alot easier to clean up.
>>
>> >  -Modular construction
>>
>> A good idea but drastically increases construction time.
>
> Time I've got.  I'm really looking to make this receiver more flexible
> for  future mods.  One receiver I have, I built with the front end
> modular.  I  have 5 different modules built in 2.5 x 5.0 inch
> miniboxes.  The "standard"  6xxx RF with a 6BE6 mixer is really the
> worst setup I have.  Cheap and it  somewhat worked, for the
> manufactorers.  The dual triode is about the best  (no RF stage).  The
> 7360 module I have is setup as a real balanced mixer and  is a bear to
> keep balanced.  Using this tube single ended which most  designers do
> seems to be defeating the purpose of using it.
>
> Thanks for the input.  CU on the list.
>
> Regards,
> Helm.  WB2ADT
>>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>  construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr




From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 18:57:11 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:57:11 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
In-Reply-To: <198.53c4e3e.29e8602d@aol.com>
References: <198.53c4e3e.29e8602d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <02041213571100.00431@darkstar>

Greeting,

I'm not to sure what you mean by a pre-mixer design?

I was thinking of using a 6BA7, mainly since Collins used them, but was 
steered away from it because it's supposed to be noiser than 6BE6's.  That's 
why they're several mixer mods out there for 75A4's.  Pentagrid mixers are 
noisy no matter which one, one uses.

One thing when design work is done is to look at the environment you're in.  
I live a rather noisy (electrically) area.  An RF stage doesn't do a thing 
for me except amplifie the noise along with everything else.  Now the place I 
have in PA is quiet.  Overhead AC lines are the only thing I have to be 
concerned about.  Heck, if I tune around 21 Mhz, I can tell if the farmer 
down the road is plowing his field by listening for his tractor's ignition 
noise, and he's 7 miles away.  Now that's a quiet area!  An  RF stage might 
be useful in this case.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that for one's own design you can go 
anyway you want and one of the errors people make is to duplicate an existing 
circuit because everyone doing it or if it was good enough for Collins it 
must be great.  Not so.  Having been a designer (I did computer interfaces) I 
had a ton of great of ideas and designs that didn't work.  Mainly since they 
were economically unfit or very user unfriendly, usually the former, but not 
because they didn't perform well.

In fact the HBR series design philosophy was to put out there a receiver that 
was fairly easy to build, and relatively half the price of a simliar 
commercial job.  It works well for a 50's design, but even Crosby never said 
it was a world beater.  Just very good.  I'd love to duplicate the HBR-16 but 
I don't have the wherewithal to dig up some major parts, like the variable 
cap, and 100 Kc transformers.  So for now it's up to my own devices.

So much so for now.  Once I get started...bla,bla, bla

Regards,
Helm.  WB2ADT

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 20:09:14 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 15:09:14 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
In-Reply-To: <14769.198.208.223.35.1018632699.squirrel@webmail.durham.net>
References: <02041123112400.00199@darkstar> <14769.198.208.223.35.1018632699.squirrel@webmail.durham.net>
Message-ID: <02041215091401.00431@darkstar>

> One little caveat to receiver builders who, like me, wind their own coils
> in RF amplifiers, etc., and that is this: do NOT place your link coil too
> close to the main tuning coil. I did just that with my version of the Mate
> For The Mighty Midget receiver, hoping to maximize sensitivity of the final
> product, above all...
>
> The coils are over-coupled: when I'm trying to listen to AM on 1885-KHz
> with an SSB or CW contest down the band, I can hear the junk all over the
> dial! Now, I agree this receiver isn't the last word in complexity & all,
> but I know if I had separated the two coils up to a maximum of 3/8" apart
> (as suggested by Rocky in his regen books), the set-up would have had a LOT
> more up-front selectivity, where it really counts.
>

Coupling coils used to drive me nuts.  The way I do my RF coils now is to get 
them on frequency (or about) and then instead of using a coupling coil I 
start making temporary taps up from the ground end of the RF coil while 
monitoring (with a scope or a meter) a very low level RF input ( signal 
generator or such).  Go for maximum and then tap back down 1/2 of of the 
signal level being monitored.  You could do pretty much the same with a 
coupling coil by adding or subtracting turns and/or spacing.  It usually 
turns out to be the best compromise between sensitivity and selectivity.  For 
me it's a bit more of a sane cut and try method.

Regards,
Helm.  WB2ADT

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 20:44:14 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 14:44:14 -0500
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
Message-ID: <20020412.145023.-212113.14.windy10605@juno.com>

Relative to finding parts....BG Micro had 3 section FM tuning capacitors
which measure 5-25pf per section and are a "good" substitute for the 
specified variable. Also BC 453 IF transformers are 85Khz, can be 
moved up to 100Khz if you want (or 50Khz), have an adjustable coupling
via that micarda rod out the top ("in" is overcoupled), they are readily 
available, and in my opion (and using the spectrum analyzer) are better
than the JW Miller IF transformers (higher "Q", ceramic or mica base, air
trimmer tuning, excellent shielding, top adjustment, variable coupling,
etc).

Also having access to a good Q meter is essential for selecting coil
form material, coil wire, coil doping, etc ....if you really want to peak
"Q".

73s  Kees K5BCQ

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 20:59:31 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 15:59:31 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
In-Reply-To: <20020412.145023.-212113.14.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20020412.145023.-212113.14.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <02041215593102.00431@darkstar>

On Friday 12 April 2002 15:44, Sandy and Kees Talen wrote:
> Relative to finding parts....BG Micro had 3 section FM tuning capacitors
> which measure 5-25pf per section and are a "good" substitute for the
> specified variable. 

BJ does't have any more and aren't sure if they're going to run into anymore. 
  emailed them about a month ago about them.

Also BC 453 IF transformers are 85Khz, can be
> moved up to 100Khz if you want (or 50Khz), have an adjustable coupling
> via that micarda rod out the top ("in" is overcoupled), they are readily
> available, and in my opion (and using the spectrum analyzer) are better
> than the JW Miller IF transformers (higher "Q", ceramic or mica base, air
> trimmer tuning, excellent shielding, top adjustment, variable coupling,
> etc).

I use a bc453 as a tunable IF for one of my receivers, the other bc453 I have 
is worth too much money to carve up into parts.  They're not as plentiful
or cheap as they once were.  At least as they once were.
>

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 12 21:41:08 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Eddy Swynar)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:41:08 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
References: <02041123112400.00199@darkstar> <14769.198.208.223.35.1018632699.squirrel@webmail.durham.net> <02041215091401.00431@darkstar>
Message-ID: <002701c1e262$60c6d3c0$e7d549c6@greg>

Hi Helm...

Nice tip! I'll keep that in mind...

I think a lot of guys look at basic stuff like coil spacing as some sort of
black magic---it's a science, true, but also a bit of an art, as you just
described...

Thanks again, Helm...

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ



----- Original Message -----
From: "Helmut Usbeck" <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
To: "Diane Swynar" <gswynar@durham.net>; <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Cc: <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>; <N2EY@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [HBR] HR-67


>
> > One little caveat to receiver builders who, like me, wind their own
coils
> > in RF amplifiers, etc., and that is this: do NOT place your link coil
too
> > close to the main tuning coil. I did just that with my version of the
Mate
> > For The Mighty Midget receiver, hoping to maximize sensitivity of the
final
> > product, above all...
> >
> > The coils are over-coupled: when I'm trying to listen to AM on 1885-KHz
> > with an SSB or CW contest down the band, I can hear the junk all over
the
> > dial! Now, I agree this receiver isn't the last word in complexity &
all,
> > but I know if I had separated the two coils up to a maximum of 3/8"
apart
> > (as suggested by Rocky in his regen books), the set-up would have had a
LOT
> > more up-front selectivity, where it really counts.
> >
>
> Coupling coils used to drive me nuts.  The way I do my RF coils now is to
get
> them on frequency (or about) and then instead of using a coupling coil I
> start making temporary taps up from the ground end of the RF coil while
> monitoring (with a scope or a meter) a very low level RF input ( signal
> generator or such).  Go for maximum and then tap back down 1/2 of of the
> signal level being monitored.  You could do pretty much the same with a
> coupling coil by adding or subtracting turns and/or spacing.  It usually
> turns out to be the best compromise between sensitivity and selectivity.
For
> me it's a bit more of a sane cut and try method.
>
> Regards,
> Helm.  WB2ADT


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 13 00:02:29 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 18:02:29 -0500
Subject: [HBR] HR-67
Message-ID: <20020412.180615.-212113.17.windy10605@juno.com>

Sorry that BG no longer carries the cap. If you are looking for "1"
I can help you out. 

I would not advocate cutting up a good BC-453 but there are 
plenty of parts units out there ....I've seen them for $7 and $5 
in the last 6 months at swapmeets and when I've put a wanted 
on the Boatanchors, Milsurplus, and ARC-5 reflectors I've always 
received no fewer than 8 offers.

I have provided 18  85KhzIFs (separate or in parts BC-453s) to 
various people on this reflector but I'll sure pick up any I see if 
it's cheap. They are out there. 

73s  Kees K5BCQ

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 13 03:15:51 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (John Finigan)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 19:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HBR] HR-67 / balanced 7360
In-Reply-To: <20020412.180615.-212113.17.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <20020413021551.25259.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>

> The 7360 module I have is setup as a real balanced 
> mixer and is a bear to keep balanced.  Using this
> tube single ended which most designers do seems to >
be defeating the purpose of using it. 
  

I think that Squiers-Sanders used it this way, but
I've never heard of someone doing it in a homebrew
design.  I'm very curious as to what sort of coils,
etc it takes??


John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 13 06:12:38 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 01:12:38 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67 / balanced 7360
In-Reply-To: <20020413021551.25259.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20020413021551.25259.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <02041301123803.00431@darkstar>

On Friday 12 April 2002 22:15, John Finigan wrote:
> > The 7360 module I have is setup as a real balanced
> > mixer and is a bear to keep balanced.  Using this
> > tube single ended which most designers do seems to 
> >be defeating the purpose of using it.
>
>
> I think that Squiers-Sanders used it this way, but
> I've never heard of someone doing it in a homebrew
> design.  I'm very curious as to what sort of coils,
> etc it takes??
>


John--

I'm not sure Squires-Sanders used the 7360 as a balanced mixer in there 
receivers.  I know that one of the two wrote up a paper describing it as a 
balanced front-end though.  The circuit I use I picked up from an old RCA 
application sheet on the tube and it's basically the same layout.  Some of 
the component values are different.  Also the RCA sheet had 2 methods of 
getting balanced input and output going. 

-Basically it fed the input signal to the grid.  
-The oscillator output comes from a center-tapped pot of about 500K feeding   
  the deflection plates. (which is a balance control)
-The output from the plates feeds a center tapped IF transformer or in my 
case I used 2 matched caps across the IF coil to simulate a center tap.  The 
IF end which is normally grounded goes to the second plate.  A split stator 
cap was used by RCA and used as a second balance control.  I used two matched 
caps because small value split-stator caps don't grow on trees.  
-A schematic is less scarier  looking than trying to describe the circuit.
-Your coils are pretty much the same as a single ended mixer, unless you 
decide to go for the center-tapped version.  

Running in balanced mode, was pretty hairy.  First the balance drifts out 
rapidly as the tube warmed up and then slowly drifts in and out.  It was 
quite microphonic, perhaps there was some regeneration in the circuit.  Its 
recommended to use a shield with the tube to prevent magnetic fields from 
effecting balance, but the shield itself would cause problems.  Also the only 
sure fire way of adjusting it was to use an oscilloscope.  I got pretty fed 
up with it.  Never had it going on the air long enough to be able to tell if 
it's really worthwhile using.  It sits in a corner now waiting to played with 
again sometime...and I think that's why one never saw a real balanced mixer 
in a commercial ham receiver either. Until someone had the idea of using 
diodes.

Egads, another dessertation!

Regards,
Helm.  WB2ADT

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 13 16:02:09 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 11:02:09 EDT
Subject: [HBR] HR-67 / balanced 7360
Message-ID: <3b.25181c23.29e9a271@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/02 10:41:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
john_finigan@yahoo.com writes:

> > The 7360 module I have is setup as a real balanced 
>  > mixer and is a bear to keep balanced.  Using this
>  > tube single ended which most designers do seems to >
>  be defeating the purpose of using it. 
>    
>  
>  I think that Squiers-Sanders used it this way, but
>  I've never heard of someone doing it in a homebrew
>  design.  I'm very curious as to what sort of coils,
>  etc it takes??
>  
Squires Sanders used two 7360s as balanced mixers in the SS-1R. The schematic
and manual are on the BAMA site. They used special IF transformers and a 
variety
of balancing adjustments.

They used balanced mixers because of concerns about LO radiation and IF 
feedthrough. IF feedthrough can be a real headache because most single ended 
mixers also amplify any signals at the IF, and the gain at IF is typically 
four or more times the conversion gain. If there is no RF stage, the 
sensitivity of the IF amplifer must be very high because the signal from the 
mixer can be at a very low level.

For example, suppose I have a nice set of 2215 kHz filters (thanks, Kees!!) 
and frontend tuned circuits that reject 2215 kHz by 40 dB relative to the 
signal frequency. If I use a typical single-ended mixer with 20 dB conversion 
gain, the
its gain at 2215 can be 26 dB or more. This extra gain effectively degrades 
the 
RF coils' rejection by 6 dB, so I really have only 34 dB of IF rejection.

Now if I am trying to listen to a 1 uV signal and an unwanted signal 100 uV 
signal appears on 2215, it will bury the desired 1 uV signal by 6 dB! So I 
need LOTS of IF rejection.

The SS-1R uses a tunable first IF of 5 - 5.5 MHz on all bands except 40 
meters, 
so IF rejection is very important, and a simple trap won't help much. 

My 4th edition of the RSGB Handbook shows both single ended and balanced 7360 
mixer circuits. It also shows the Pullen mixer but does not identify it by 
that name. A receiver using a balanced 7360 mixer, 1682 kHz IF and no RF 
stage is also shown in the SSB chapter. This RX uses a double-tuned input 
circuit and a modified British first-IF transformer.

The Southgate Type 7 receiver section has a 1400 kHz IF, a single-ended 7360 
mixer and 6EH7 RF amp. Also a 5 pole highpass filter to help eliminate BC 
band signals. IF rejection problems were simply insurmountable without the RF 
stage. The 1400 kHz IF filters were hamfest specials and simply too good to 
not use.

73 de Jim, N2EY

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 13 16:46:39 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 11:46:39 -0400
Subject: [HBR] balanced 7360
In-Reply-To: <3b.25181c23.29e9a271@aol.com>
References: <3b.25181c23.29e9a271@aol.com>
Message-ID: <02041311463900.00211@darkstar>

I stand corrected.  Squire-Sanders did use a 7360 as a balanced mixer.

Regards,
Helm.  WB2ADT

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 13 17:48:06 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Mike Feher)
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 12:48:06 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HR-67 / balanced 7360
References: <3b.25181c23.29e9a271@aol.com>
Message-ID: <001201c1e30a$fdf42aa0$d2775243@n4fs>

Just a comment about what I used to do to eliminate strong local BC
stations. Agreed, a high pass filter is what is required but an elliptic is
the best choice as then you can by careful design place some of the zeros on
the offending BC stations and get more rejection than you would with a
simpler high pass design like a Butterworth or Tchebychev with all their
zeros at DC. 73 - Mike




Mike B. Feher, N4FS
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell NJ, 07731
(732) 901-9193


----- Original Message -----
From: <N2EY@aol.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [HBR] HR-67 / balanced 7360


> The Southgate Type 7 receiver section has a 1400 kHz IF, a single-ended
7360
> mixer and 6EH7 RF amp. Also a 5 pole highpass filter to help eliminate BC
> band signals. IF rejection problems were simply insurmountable without the
RF
> stage. The 1400 kHz IF filters were hamfest specials and simply too good
to
> not use.
>
> 73 de Jim, N2EY
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 17:56:59 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:56:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HBR] coil shields
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0204141248390.271-100000@darkstar.example.net>

 I did a little touring around the web last night looking for a source of
shields for plug in coils.  Didn't find anything.  The first thought I had
was was Campbell soup cans but they look pretty mickey mouse to me after
sitting one on a receiver chassis.  Anyone ever try making some that have
that professional zing to them.

Regards,
Helm.  WB2ADT


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 19:17:27 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 13:17:27 -0500
Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
Message-ID: <20020414.131730.-476761.7.windy10605@juno.com>

They used to have manufactured coil shields ...James Millen ? 
but would be impossible to find today. Can't think of really thin 
aluminum that size ....yes, I can.....soft drink cans (maybe too 
thin). Take the paint off with MEK ? flatten the base and cut a 
hole in it for the socket. Figure out some way to dull the edge 
a little ...maybe "glue on" split wire insulation or "roll" it. If you 
need a larger shield, "Foster's" makes a larger one.  Other 
than that, take thin aluminum sheet stock, bend it over a mandril, 
and pop rivit it into cylinders. Tabs on the bottom for mounting.

73s  Kees K5BCQ


--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:56:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HBR] coil shields
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0204141248390.271-100000@darkstar.example.net>


 I did a little touring around the web last night looking for a source of
shields for plug in coils.  Didn't find anything.  The first thought I
had
was was Campbell soup cans but they look pretty mickey mouse to me after
sitting one on a receiver chassis.  Anyone ever try making some that have
that professional zing to them.

Regards,
Helm.  WB2ADT


************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 

Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net


HBR mailing list
HBR@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 19:32:11 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Eddy Swynar)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 14:32:11 -0400
Subject: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
References: <20020414.131730.-476761.7.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <002901c1e3e2$b2132e00$aed549c6@greg>

Kees & Co. ...

Yes, and spray the outside of those cans a flat black paint finish, & you're
in business...sounds like a practical solution, AND one that can be made to
look fairly "period", too...

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ



----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy and Kees Talen" <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 2:17 PM
Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields


> They used to have manufactured coil shields ...James Millen ?
> but would be impossible to find today. Can't think of really thin
> aluminum that size ....yes, I can.....soft drink cans (maybe too
> thin). Take the paint off with MEK ? flatten the base and cut a
> hole in it for the socket. Figure out some way to dull the edge
> a little ...maybe "glue on" split wire insulation or "roll" it. If you
> need a larger shield, "Foster's" makes a larger one.  Other
> than that, take thin aluminum sheet stock, bend it over a mandril,
> and pop rivit it into cylinders. Tabs on the bottom for mounting.
>
> 73s  Kees K5BCQ
>
>
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
> To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:56:59 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: [HBR] coil shields
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0204141248390.271-100000@darkstar.example.net>
>
>
>  I did a little touring around the web last night looking for a source of
> shields for plug in coils.  Didn't find anything.  The first thought I
> had
> was was Campbell soup cans but they look pretty mickey mouse to me after
> sitting one on a receiver chassis.  Anyone ever try making some that have
> that professional zing to them.
>
> Regards,
> Helm.  WB2ADT
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 20:12:53 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (john)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 15:12:53 -0400
Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
In-Reply-To: <20020414.131730.-476761.7.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20020414151253.015526dc@pop-server.nc.rr.com>

Maybe some thin walled tubing... fence top rail tubing?
Might not look too bad if you could cut it square and shoot
it with aluminum paint. How far from the coil does the shield need
to be?
John 

PS: The "new" HBR11 works (albeit with some ferocious hum that's
modulating the CW...which brings me to a question:

What's an acceptable ripple on the B+ line? I am seeing about 10V PTP
AC on top of B+..... I did jumper in replacement caps, but made no difference.
I think there's a lot of grounds that "arent" . Off to go tighten up a lot
of screws!



At 01:17 PM 4/14/02 -0500, you wrote:
>They used to have manufactured coil shields ...James Millen ? 
>but would be impossible to find today. Can't think of really thin 
>aluminum that size ....yes, I can.....soft drink cans (maybe too 
>thin). Take the paint off with MEK ? flatten the base and cut a 
>hole in it for the socket. Figure out some way to dull the edge 
>a little ...maybe "glue on" split wire insulation or "roll" it. If you 
>need a larger shield, "Foster's" makes a larger one.  Other 
>than that, take thin aluminum sheet stock, bend it over a mandril, 
>and pop rivit it into cylinders. Tabs on the bottom for mounting.
>
>73s  Kees K5BCQ
>
>
>--------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
>To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
>Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:56:59 -0400 (EDT)
>Subject: [HBR] coil shields
>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0204141248390.271-100000@darkstar.example.net>
>
>
> I did a little touring around the web last night looking for a source of
>shields for plug in coils.  Didn't find anything.  The first thought I
>had
>was was Campbell soup cans but they look pretty mickey mouse to me after
>sitting one on a receiver chassis.  Anyone ever try making some that have
>that professional zing to them.
>
>Regards,
>Helm.  WB2ADT
>
>
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
>HBR mailing list
>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
>HBR mailing list
>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 20:15:58 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (john)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 15:15:58 -0400
Subject: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
In-Reply-To: <002901c1e3e2$b2132e00$aed549c6@greg>
References: <20020414.131730.-476761.7.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20020414151558.01574318@pop-server.nc.rr.com>

Aluminum flashing would do well for this. Several lifetimes supply
can be gotten at Lowes for about $19....
John


At 02:32 PM 4/14/02 -0400, Eddy Swynar wrote:
>Kees & Co. ...
>
>Yes, and spray the outside of those cans a flat black paint finish, & you're
>in business...sounds like a practical solution, AND one that can be made to
>look fairly "period", too...
>
>~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Sandy and Kees Talen" <windy10605@juno.com>
>To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 2:17 PM
>Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
<Snip>


>> than that, take thin aluminum sheet stock, bend it over a mandril,
>> and pop rivit it into cylinders. Tabs on the bottom for mounting.
>>
>> 73s  Kees K5BCQ
>>


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 20:16:15 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 14:16:15 -0500
Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
Message-ID: <20020414.141619.-476761.8.windy10605@juno.com>

Super about bring that HBR-11 back to life !!

A good ripple level to shoot for is 0.1%, your 10V P-P is 
outside that. Don't leave the potentially leaky electrolytics
in the circuit when trying some new ones.

Kees

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 21:32:15 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (john)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:32:15 -0400
Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
In-Reply-To: <20020414.141619.-476761.8.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20020414163215.01518200@pop-server.nc.rr.com>

Will swap in some new filters (will need to disassemble the can and
stuff it with new "innerds") and see how that goes. Apart from the ripple,
its seems to hear well and it's amazingly stable. There seems to be some
points of oscillation depending on where the gain controls are set, but I
suspect cinching things down so that grounds are as they should be will
help that. The thing is also full of black beauties which I'll replace as
well. 

Sure was neat to hear it come up for the first time. From the date codes
on the parts, it  was built in 1963, so it's coming up on its 40th B'day!

73
John


At 02:16 PM 4/14/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Super about bring that HBR-11 back to life !!
>
>A good ripple level to shoot for is 0.1%, your 10V P-P is 
>outside that. Don't leave the potentially leaky electrolytics
>in the circuit when trying some new ones.
>
>Kees
>
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
>HBR mailing list
>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 21:42:12 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Bob Duckworth, WB4MNF)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:42:12 -0400
Subject: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
References: <20020414.131730.-476761.7.windy10605@juno.com> <3.0.3.32.20020414151558.01574318@pop-server.nc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <3CB9E9A4.3040205@atl.org>

beer cans!

john wrote:

> Aluminum flashing would do well for this. Several lifetimes supply
> can be gotten at Lowes for about $19....
> John
> 
> 
> At 02:32 PM 4/14/02 -0400, Eddy Swynar wrote:
> 
>>Kees & Co. ...
>>
>>Yes, and spray the outside of those cans a flat black paint finish, & you're
>>in business...sounds like a practical solution, AND one that can be made to
>>look fairly "period", too...
>>
>>~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Sandy and Kees Talen" <windy10605@juno.com>
>>To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
>>Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 2:17 PM
>>Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
>>
> <Snip>
> 
> 
>>>than that, take thin aluminum sheet stock, bend it over a mandril,
>>>and pop rivit it into cylinders. Tabs on the bottom for mounting.
>>>
>>>73s  Kees K5BCQ
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
> 
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
> 
> 
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> 
> 
> 



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 22:00:49 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Norm)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:00:49 -0500
Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
References: <3.0.3.32.20020414151253.015526dc@pop-server.nc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <002201c1e3f7$754a10a0$5a6d96d8@normandeemer>

Get your wife's to buy you some Calumet baking powder ( 7 0z ) can.. They
are aluminum, and the prefect size..
Norm..


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 22:23:44 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:23:44 -0500
Subject: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
Message-ID: <20020414.162348.-476761.10.windy10605@juno.com>

The only thing to watch for on the thin soda and brewski cans
is that if it isn't relatively sturdy, it will move ......if it moves it
will
change the capacitance to the coil.  A loose 1st oscillator socket 
in it's mounting (non current carrying) will demonstrate this effect 
if you "tap" the enclosure. Especially since the first osc frequency 
is pretty high for the higher bands on this design. I would also like 
to know the effect of very thin aluminum shielding. I've got my eye 
on the tall thick aluminum salt and pepper shakers. Grocery store
should be full of good coil shields.

Same desire to minimize movement of the coil itself on the coil 
form ....both individual windings and the form itself.

73s  Kees K5BCQ 

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sun Apr 14 23:42:11 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (R.J. Mattson)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 18:42:11 -0400
Subject: [HBR] Coil Shields
Message-ID: <002d01c1e405$9ea271a0$f66ddbd0@rjmattson>

I have used V8 juice cans. They come in a small single serving size, =
have a nice finish and are cheap.
Bob Mattson...W2AMI=20



--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 15 02:39:54 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 20:39:54 -0500
Subject: [HBR] Coil "Q"
Message-ID: <20020414.204000.-476761.12.windy10605@juno.com>

>From coils shields to the coils themselves........

Tried a few different coil forms and got the attached data.

The 1-1/4" amber plastic pill bottle looks good, is cheap, is 
available, but it's not sturdy and needs a connector attached. 
The PVC looks surprisingly good, is cheap, is readily available, 
is sturdy and needs a connector attached.

I wouldn't use paper/cardboard as a coil form and definitely
don't use fingernail polish to hold the turns in place. The 
silicone adhesive affects it some but it won't crack like
super glue. Haven't tried Duco cement.
 
All coils wound with #28 AWG magnet wire.

"Q" at 6 Mhz with all coils measuring 20.5uH (cap 35pf):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note #                               1       2      3      4      

1-1/4" Amphenol 5-pin    175    --    175    --
1-1/4" amber pill bottle    180    --    177  172
1-1/2" amber pill bottle    161  145     --     --
1-1/4" untreated paper/   152  130     --     --
          cardboard
1-1/8" PVC                      173    --    175    --

"Q" at 9.5Mhz with all coils measuring 8.4uH (cap 35pf):
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


1-1/4" amber pill bottle      --     --     187    --
1-1/8" PVC                        --     --     180    --

Notes:
1 - plain wiring, no adhesives to hold windings
2 - use clear fingernail polish to hold windings
     (strips didn't work, light coat across coil)
3 - use Elmer's Stix-All silicone to hold windings
     (4 strips across coil)     
4 - use Scotch black electrical tape to hold coil
     windings (1-1/2 turn)



73s  Kees K5BCQ


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 15 15:52:05 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Diane Swynar)
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:52:05 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HBR] Coil 'Q'
In-Reply-To: <20020414.204000.-476761.12.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20020414.204000.-476761.12.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <30022.198.208.223.35.1018882325.squirrel@webmail.durham.net>

Hi Kees...

I always use clear nail polish to seal the turns of my coils---in fact, I
apply no less than two coats before I'm satisfied that the darn things
won't unravel on me.

The loss in Q is, to my mind anyway, a small price to pay for consistency
in inductance value. I never would have used it at all, really, were it not
for the fact that the stuff smells just like the old "G-C Q-DOPE" of bygone
days...

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ






>>From coils shields to the coils themselves........
>
> Tried a few different coil forms and got the attached data.
>
> The 1-1/4" amber plastic pill bottle looks good, is cheap, is
> available, but it's not sturdy and needs a connector attached.
> The PVC looks surprisingly good, is cheap, is readily available,
> is sturdy and needs a connector attached.
>
> I wouldn't use paper/cardboard as a coil form and definitely
> don't use fingernail polish to hold the turns in place. The
> silicone adhesive affects it some but it won't crack like
> super glue. Haven't tried Duco cement.
>
> All coils wound with #28 AWG magnet wire.
>
> "Q" at 6 Mhz with all coils measuring 20.5uH (cap 35pf):
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Note #                               1       2      3      4
>
> 1-1/4" Amphenol 5-pin    175    --    175    --
> 1-1/4" amber pill bottle    180    --    177  172
> 1-1/2" amber pill bottle    161  145     --     --
> 1-1/4" untreated paper/   152  130     --     --
>          cardboard
> 1-1/8" PVC                      173    --    175    --
>
> "Q" at 9.5Mhz with all coils measuring 8.4uH (cap 35pf):
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> 1-1/4" amber pill bottle      --     --     187    --
> 1-1/8" PVC                        --     --     180    --
>
> Notes:
> 1 - plain wiring, no adhesives to hold windings
> 2 - use clear fingernail polish to hold windings
>     (strips didn't work, light coat across coil)
> 3 - use Elmer's Stix-All silicone to hold windings
>     (4 strips across coil)
> 4 - use Scotch black electrical tape to hold coil
>     windings (1-1/2 turn)
>
>
>
> 73s  Kees K5BCQ
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>  construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr




From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 15 17:34:10 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 12:34:10 -0400
Subject: Fw: Fw: [HBR] coil shields
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.20020414151253.015526dc@pop-server.nc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20020415163456.KKVC5495.out020.verizon.net@gemini>

>Maybe some thin walled tubing... fence top rail tubing?
>Might not look too bad if you could cut it square and shoot
>it with aluminum paint. How far from the coil does the shield=
 need
>to be?
>John

Did some thinking about the shields at work yesterday.  Soda cans=
 are 
way too thin, took one apart.  I went into tools and parts and 
started looking around at electrical conduit but it's too thick. =
 I 
ran the situation past my friend Paul.  This guys really good for=
 
ideas.  You can give him a pile of crap and a couple of paper=
 clips 
and he'll make something useful out of it.  So he thinks for=
 about 5 
minutes and and says why don't you cut the bottom off of some=
 large 
caps, like the ones you replaced in one of the machines last=
 week.  I 
tossed them out I replied.  No problem, Paul says, I pulled them=
 out 
of the garbage can and saved them.  These caps are about 10=
 inches 
tall and 3 inches in dia.  We cut 4 inches off the bottom and=
 viola!  
All I have to do now is punch a hole in the bottom to clear the=
 coil 
socket, a little polish and I think I'm in business.

>PS: The "new" HBR11 works (albeit with some ferocious hum=
 that's
>modulating the CW...which brings me to a question:

>What's an acceptable ripple on the B+ line? I am seeing about=
 10V 
PTP
>AC on top of B+

10 volts is way too much.  If your using a choke and cap type=
 filter 
the ripple should be in the millivolt range.

Does the hum start when the BFO is turned on?   If so the BFO 
oscillator signal is getting back into the B+ supply.  Or=
 sometimes 
the AC on the filament needs to be bypassed with a .01 mfd cap. =
 A 
good idea to do to on any oscillator.  Or like you said a bad=
 ground. 
   
.... I did jumper in replacement caps, but made no
>difference.
>I think there's a lot of grounds that "arent" . Off to go=
 tighten up
>a lot
>of screws!
>
>
>
>At 01:17 PM 4/14/02 -0500, you wrote:
>>They used to have manufactured coil shields ...James Millen ?
>>but would be impossible to find today. Can't think of really=
 thin
>>aluminum that size ....yes, I can.....soft drink cans (maybe=
 too
>>thin). Take the paint off with MEK ? flatten the base and cut=
 a
>>hole in it for the socket. Figure out some way to dull the=
 edge
>>a little ...maybe "glue on" split wire insulation or "roll" it.=
 If
>>you
>>need a larger shield, "Foster's" makes a larger one.  Other
>>than that, take thin aluminum sheet stock, bend it over a=
 mandril,
>>and pop rivit it into cylinders. Tabs on the bottom for=
 mounting.
>>
>>73s  Kees K5BCQ
>>
>>
>>--------- Forwarded message ----------
>>From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
>>To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
>>Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:56:59 -0400 (EDT)
>>Subject: [HBR] coil shields
>>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0204141248390.271-
>>100000@darkstar.example.net>
>>
>>
>>I did a little touring around the web last night looking for a
>>source of
>>shields for plug in coils.  Didn't find anything.  The first
>>thought I
>>had
>>was was Campbell soup cans but they look pretty mickey mouse to=
 me
>>after
>>sitting one on a receiver chassis.  Anyone ever try making=
 some
>>that have
>>that professional zing to them.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Helm.  WB2ADT
>>
>>
>>************************************
>>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of=
 receivers
>>and
>>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>>
>>Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>>
>>
>>HBR mailing list
>>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>>
>>
>>************************************
>>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of=
 receivers
>>and
>>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>>
>>Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>>
>>
>>HBR mailing list
>>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>>
>
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of=
 receivers
>and
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
>HBR mailing list
>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


-- 
Helmut Usbeck, vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/15/2002



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 15 21:07:59 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (William L. Hopkins)
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 16:07:59 -0400
Subject: [HBR] Shields & 15K 25W resistors
References: <20020415163456.KKVC5495.out020.verizon.net@gemini>
Message-ID: <02Apr15.161440edt.119100@gateway.naz.edu>

So, everyone,  these are interesting ideas.

1.    My question first:  I am rebuilding a Heathkit HP20 PS and need
either 2 resistors at 15 kilo-ohms apiece, each with a 25 watt rating.  The
original was a 30Kohm 25 watt center tap.  ANYBODY HAVE THIS KIND OF THING
OR TWO SEPARATE ONES?  I WOULD BE GRATEFUL TO BUY IT FROM YOU.

2.    The SHIELDS.: I picked up an old GE taxi base transciever at a
hamfest fleamarket; found it in the trash.  It has served me well for all
kinds of parts!  Could the aluminum shields be used from the IF's in this
rig?  Or, could I take two and solder them together to achieve a suitable
height?  Both shields have the screws on the bottom for attaching to a
chassis.  So, what do you think?

ciao
bill hopkins AA2YV




--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/mixed
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/x-vcard
---

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Wed Apr 17 20:43:39 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Freeberg, Scott (STP))
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:43:39 -0500
Subject: [HBR] Greetings
Message-ID: <1D1B8647FA5CD411A02800508BDFD0A002F6935A@stpmsx03.stp.guidant.com>

Hi, I just signed up to the HBR list.  I'm WA9WFA Scott in Saint Paul Minn
and I've been a ham for 34 years now.  I've been heavy into boatanchors for
the past 5 years and  now I'm interested in building up a homebrew cw and AM
station.   The HBR receiver seems to have a large popularity so I look
forward to talking with you about HBR performance and deciding which of
various models is the best one for me to consider.    73,  Scott WA9WFA in
Saint Paul Minn

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Wed Apr 17 21:04:56 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Jeff Noel)
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 16:04:56 -0400
Subject: [HBR] Greetings
References: <1D1B8647FA5CD411A02800508BDFD0A002F6935A@stpmsx03.stp.guidant.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c1e64b$2660d360$756b2c42@hppav>

Scott,

Welcome, there is a lot of good information here.

Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Freeberg, Scott (STP)" <Scott.Freeberg@guidant.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 15:43 PM
Subject: [HBR] Greetings


> Hi, I just signed up to the HBR list.  I'm WA9WFA Scott in Saint Paul Minn
> and I've been a ham for 34 years now.  I've been heavy into boatanchors
for
> the past 5 years and  now I'm interested in building up a homebrew cw and
AM
> station.   The HBR receiver seems to have a large popularity so I look
> forward to talking with you about HBR performance and deciding which of
> various models is the best one for me to consider.    73,  Scott WA9WFA in
> Saint Paul Minn
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 18 15:52:10 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Freeberg, Scott (STP))
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:52:10 -0500
Subject: [HBR] Which HBR is 'Better' or 'Best'?
Message-ID: <1D1B8647FA5CD411A02800508BDFD0A002F6935F@stpmsx03.stp.guidant.com>

I suppose I'm stirring up a hornets nest with this question, but of all =
the
variations of HBR's that Ted Crosley generated,  is there one model =
that
folks consider the cr=E8me-de-la- cr=E8me (sp?) of the HBR designs or =
does each
one simply have pluses and minuses?  I've been browing the HBR website.
Man, there are some beautiful radio's on there!

73,  Scott WA9WFA in Saint Paul Minn

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 18 16:48:10 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 10:48:10 -0500
Subject: Fw: [HBR] Which HBR is 'Better' or 'Best'?
Message-ID: <20020418.104821.-328179.0.windy10605@juno.com>

I think it's just a progression of designs with the HBR-16 and it's
modifications (Eddystone 898, etc) as the most widely built. The
later HBR-12 was probably as good, but unless you put it in a 
larger enclosure (or fabricate your own slide rule dial), you can't
use the Eddystone 898. My opinion, the best of the series was the 
last HBR-13C with the 7360 product detector, series IF tansformers
and a stage of 1st IF amplification. The receivers are all very sensitive
but selectivity could be improved (higher "Q" circuits, steeper sides
on the passband ....like with a mechanical/crystal filter, etc).

ALL of them are fun to build/restore/use and a lot depends on what
memories you have. Several people have indicated an interest in 
building the HB-67 from the ARRL Handbook and others. 

Attached is a note from Jim, N2EY

73s  Kees K5BCQ

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
Just a quick note....
Besides the "Miser's Dream", Squires and Goodman articles, there is one
more
"must read". QST for February, 1972 has an article titled "An
Experimental
Receiver For 75 Meter DX Work" by Doug Blakeslee, W1KLK (SK). 
This receiver is very similar to what Cliff wants to build. It uses four
tuned circuits before the mixer, and a low-gain grounded-grid RF stage.
Mixer is a single-ended 7360. The IF is 455 kHz, based on a Collins
mechanical filter. Lots of good circuits, as well as design philosophy
and
layout ideas. 
More to follow but I'm out of time
73 de Jim, N2EY


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 20 18:56:41 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Jerry Rego)
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 18:56:41 +0100
Subject: [HBR] Greetings
References: <1D1B8647FA5CD411A02800508BDFD0A002F6935A@stpmsx03.stp.guidant.com>
Message-ID: <002101c1e894$bad96de0$b193c843@amd450>

I built the HBR 16, it performs great.  It was assembled using spare parts
from a LORAN Station.  CWO Rego (ret)
----- Original Message -----
From: Freeberg, Scott (STP) <Scott.Freeberg@guidant.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 8:43 PM
Subject: [HBR] Greetings


> Hi, I just signed up to the HBR list.  I'm WA9WFA Scott in Saint Paul Minn
> and I've been a ham for 34 years now.  I've been heavy into boatanchors
for
> the past 5 years and  now I'm interested in building up a homebrew cw and
AM
> station.   The HBR receiver seems to have a large popularity so I look
> forward to talking with you about HBR performance and deciding which of
> various models is the best one for me to consider.    73,  Scott WA9WFA in
> Saint Paul Minn
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 14:01:57 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Glenn Finerman)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 09:01:57 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
Message-ID: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C07EE@NTSERVER>

Howdy folks;

This is my first post to the HBR list. I've been a ham for 30 years now and
I'm finally getting around to homebrewing some receivers. I'd like to start
with the simple HBR-8 but was wondering if it would be possible to just add
an AM detector without the other changes via the HBR-11. I'd like to also
use the receiver to listen to AM SW broadcasts in the 40 mtr band. Please
forgive this next stupid question but I noticed there is a BFO switch on the
HBR-8 yet the article mentions "treating the AM signal exactly as though it
were SSB".

I guess what I'm asking is, why is there a BFO switch if carrier injection
is always required to receive CW and SSB with the product detector? Doesn't
turning off the BFO disable you from receiving SSB and CW? I would think
just shutting off the BFO would allow you to receive AM. (with a diode
detector?)


Thanks for the help gang! I'm looking forward to some building fun in the
future!



Glenn K2KL



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 14:28:38 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 08:28:38 -0500
Subject: [HBR] Fw: Re: 1348464684 Large Multi Section Variable Capacitor (4)
Message-ID: <20020425.082842.-148639.5.windy10605@juno.com>

Here is a possible substitute for the BG Micro variable capacitor
(on e-Bay). All you would be interested in are the 2-39pf sections 
(just like with the BG Micro capacitor) and it looks like the third 
one can be modified to 2-39pf. I've got some on order to see what 
can be done (wants $16 for 4 of them). If they look like they will
work out and I can get more, I'll make them available for $4 each.
He has more.

73s  Kees K5BCQ


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 02:46:30 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 21:46:30 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
In-Reply-To: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C07EE@NTSERVER>
Message-ID: <20020425134720.NURV8115.out016.verizon.net@gemini>

>Howdy folks;
>
>This is my first post to the HBR list. I've been a ham for 30=
 years
>now and
>I'm finally getting around to homebrewing some receivers. I'd=
 like
>to start
>with the simple HBR-8 but was wondering if it would be possible=
 to
>just add
>an AM detector without the other changes via the HBR-11. I'd=
 like to
>also
>use the receiver to listen to AM SW broadcasts in the 40 mtr=
 band.
>Please
>forgive this next stupid question but I noticed there is a BFO
>switch on the
>HBR-8 yet the article mentions "treating the AM signal exactly=
 as
>though it
>were SSB".
>
>I guess what I'm asking is, why is there a BFO switch if=
 carrier
>injection
>is always required to receive CW and SSB with the product=
 detector?
>Doesn't
>turning off the BFO disable you from receiving SSB and CW? I=
 would
>think
>just shutting off the BFO would allow you to receive AM. (with=
 a
>diode
>detector?)
>
>
>Thanks for the help gang! I'm looking forward to some building=
 fun
>in the
>future!
>
>
>
>Glenn K2KL

There's no reason why you can't include a diode detector for AM 
detection.  The HBR-11 doesn't have an AM detector either  You=
 should 
be able to receive SW stations with the 40 meter coils.  Coils=
 for 
other SW bands can be wound.  To receive AM with a product=
 detector 
one must zero beat the station.  This sometimes referred to as 
exalted carried detection of AM signals.  I prefer using some=
 type of 
an AM detector though.  If one turns off the BFO on a well=
 designed 
product detector you shouldn't hear much of the AM signal.  The 
product detector tube is really a mixer, not a rectifier.  A=
 study of 
the receiver section in the ARRL handbook would clarify this for=
 you.
-- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/24/2002



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 15:03:38 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 09:03:38 -0500
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
Message-ID: <20020425.090345.-148639.6.windy10605@juno.com>

Yep, and that's why the April 63 issue includes the first modification
for the HBR-11 ....adding an AM detector. The schematic is on the 
HBR web site. Good luck on your project.

73s  Kees K5BCQ

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>, <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 21:46:30 -0400
Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
Message-ID: <20020425134720.NURV8115.out016.verizon.net@gemini>

>Howdy folks;
>
>This is my first post to the HBR list. I've been a ham for 30 years
>now and
>I'm finally getting around to homebrewing some receivers. I'd like
>to start
>with the simple HBR-8 but was wondering if it would be possible to
>just add
>an AM detector without the other changes via the HBR-11. I'd like to
>also
>use the receiver to listen to AM SW broadcasts in the 40 mtr band.
>Please
>forgive this next stupid question but I noticed there is a BFO
>switch on the
>HBR-8 yet the article mentions "treating the AM signal exactly as
>though it
>were SSB".
>
>I guess what I'm asking is, why is there a BFO switch if carrier
>injection
>is always required to receive CW and SSB with the product detector?
>Doesn't
>turning off the BFO disable you from receiving SSB and CW? I would
>think
>just shutting off the BFO would allow you to receive AM. (with a
>diode
>detector?)
>
>
>Thanks for the help gang! I'm looking forward to some building fun
>in the
>future!
>
>
>
>Glenn K2KL

There's no reason why you can't include a diode detector for AM 
detection.  The HBR-11 doesn't have an AM detector either  You should 
be able to receive SW stations with the 40 meter coils.  Coils for 
other SW bands can be wound.  To receive AM with a product detector 
one must zero beat the station.  This sometimes referred to as 
exalted carried detection of AM signals.  I prefer using some type of 
an AM detector though.  If one turns off the BFO on a well designed 
product detector you shouldn't hear much of the AM signal.  The 
product detector tube is really a mixer, not a rectifier.  A study of 
the receiver section in the ARRL handbook would clarify this for you.
-- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/24/2002



************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 

Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net


HBR mailing list
HBR@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 15:42:07 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 09:42:07 -0500
Subject: [HBR] transformers or capacitors
Message-ID: <20020425.094212.-148639.7.windy10605@juno.com>

Some questions. What are the pros and cons of IF
transformer coupling vs capacitor coupling (2-3pf) 
of tuned circuits ? Ray N3XZV pointed me towards
an article in a mid 50s ARRL Handbook which touts 
some pretty sharp passbands using the latter (several
stages).

I think it's great to read an article which discusses 
"L1" .... with inductance, number of turns, and coil "Q".
That's doing it right.

73s  Kees K5BCQ

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 15:53:35 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Glenn Finerman)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 10:53:35 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
Message-ID: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C07F8@NTSERVER>

Thanks for the replies and info Kees and Helmut;

Ok, I understand you need rectification to receive AM, guess I was just
confused about the BFO since I thought BFO carrier injection was required to
receive CW and SSB regardless of the product detector? then why shut it off?

Glenn K2KL



-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy and Kees Talen [mailto:windy10605@juno.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 10:04 AM
To: hbr@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions


Yep, and that's why the April 63 issue includes the first modification
for the HBR-11 ....adding an AM detector. The schematic is on the 
HBR web site. Good luck on your project.

73s  Kees K5BCQ

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>, <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 21:46:30 -0400
Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
Message-ID: <20020425134720.NURV8115.out016.verizon.net@gemini>

>Howdy folks;
>
>This is my first post to the HBR list. I've been a ham for 30 years
>now and
>I'm finally getting around to homebrewing some receivers. I'd like
>to start
>with the simple HBR-8 but was wondering if it would be possible to
>just add
>an AM detector without the other changes via the HBR-11. I'd like to
>also
>use the receiver to listen to AM SW broadcasts in the 40 mtr band.
>Please
>forgive this next stupid question but I noticed there is a BFO
>switch on the
>HBR-8 yet the article mentions "treating the AM signal exactly as
>though it
>were SSB".
>
>I guess what I'm asking is, why is there a BFO switch if carrier
>injection
>is always required to receive CW and SSB with the product detector?
>Doesn't
>turning off the BFO disable you from receiving SSB and CW? I would
>think
>just shutting off the BFO would allow you to receive AM. (with a
>diode
>detector?)
>
>
>Thanks for the help gang! I'm looking forward to some building fun
>in the
>future!
>
>
>
>Glenn K2KL

There's no reason why you can't include a diode detector for AM 
detection.  The HBR-11 doesn't have an AM detector either  You should 
be able to receive SW stations with the 40 meter coils.  Coils for 
other SW bands can be wound.  To receive AM with a product detector 
one must zero beat the station.  This sometimes referred to as 
exalted carried detection of AM signals.  I prefer using some type of 
an AM detector though.  If one turns off the BFO on a well designed 
product detector you shouldn't hear much of the AM signal.  The 
product detector tube is really a mixer, not a rectifier.  A study of 
the receiver section in the ARRL handbook would clarify this for you.
-- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/24/2002



************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 

Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net


HBR mailing list
HBR@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 

Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net


HBR mailing list
HBR@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 16:29:24 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Mike Feher)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:29:24 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
References: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C07F8@NTSERVER>
Message-ID: <006601c1ec6d$fc0ebfe0$d2775243@n4fs>

The product multiplier does exactly what it say's it does. It multiplies the
input signal with the injection of the BFO to create a difference which is
at audio. Remember, sin(f1)*sin(f(2) = Sin (f1- f2) + Sin (f1 + f2). The
difference frequency is the one at audio and then is amplified by the AF
stage. With AM, not counting synchronous AM demodulation, as you point out
all you need is a rectifier, that is why you do not need the product
detector. If you were to still have the BFO injection on then you would
continue to hear the heterodyne beat note. If you turned it off, well than
the product detector should have no output as it only has one input and it
depends on both to generate it's output. 73 - Mike




Mike B. Feher, N4FS
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell NJ, 07731
(732) 901-9193


----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn Finerman" <GFinerman@opticonUSA.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 10:53 AM
Subject: RE: Re: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions


> Thanks for the replies and info Kees and Helmut;
>
> Ok, I understand you need rectification to receive AM, guess I was just
> confused about the BFO since I thought BFO carrier injection was required
to
> receive CW and SSB regardless of the product detector? then why shut it
off?
>
> Glenn K2KL
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy and Kees Talen [mailto:windy10605@juno.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 10:04 AM
> To: hbr@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
>
>
> Yep, and that's why the April 63 issue includes the first modification
> for the HBR-11 ....adding an AM detector. The schematic is on the
> HBR web site. Good luck on your project.
>
> 73s  Kees K5BCQ
>
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
> To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>, <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 21:46:30 -0400
> Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
> Message-ID: <20020425134720.NURV8115.out016.verizon.net@gemini>
>
> >Howdy folks;
> >
> >This is my first post to the HBR list. I've been a ham for 30 years
> >now and
> >I'm finally getting around to homebrewing some receivers. I'd like
> >to start
> >with the simple HBR-8 but was wondering if it would be possible to
> >just add
> >an AM detector without the other changes via the HBR-11. I'd like to
> >also
> >use the receiver to listen to AM SW broadcasts in the 40 mtr band.
> >Please
> >forgive this next stupid question but I noticed there is a BFO
> >switch on the
> >HBR-8 yet the article mentions "treating the AM signal exactly as
> >though it
> >were SSB".
> >
> >I guess what I'm asking is, why is there a BFO switch if carrier
> >injection
> >is always required to receive CW and SSB with the product detector?
> >Doesn't
> >turning off the BFO disable you from receiving SSB and CW? I would
> >think
> >just shutting off the BFO would allow you to receive AM. (with a
> >diode
> >detector?)
> >
> >
> >Thanks for the help gang! I'm looking forward to some building fun
> >in the
> >future!
> >
> >
> >
> >Glenn K2KL
>
> There's no reason why you can't include a diode detector for AM
> detection.  The HBR-11 doesn't have an AM detector either  You should
> be able to receive SW stations with the 40 meter coils.  Coils for
> other SW bands can be wound.  To receive AM with a product detector
> one must zero beat the station.  This sometimes referred to as
> exalted carried detection of AM signals.  I prefer using some type of
> an AM detector though.  If one turns off the BFO on a well designed
> product detector you shouldn't hear much of the AM signal.  The
> product detector tube is really a mixer, not a rectifier.  A study of
> the receiver section in the ARRL handbook would clarify this for you.
> --
> Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/24/2002
>
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
> HBR mailing list
> HBR@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 04:45:34 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 23:45:34 -0400
Subject: [HBR] transformers or capacitors
In-Reply-To: <20020425.094212.-148639.7.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <20020425154640.FTAA25781.out004.verizon.net@gemini>

>Some questions. What are the pros and cons of IF
>transformer coupling vs capacitor coupling (2-3pf)
>of tuned circuits ? Ray N3XZV pointed me towards
>an article in a mid 50s ARRL Handbook which touts
>some pretty sharp passbands using the latter (several
>stages).
>
>I think it's great to read an article which discusses
>"L1" .... with inductance, number of turns, and coil "Q".
>That's doing it right.
>
>73s  Kees K5BCQ
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of=
 receivers
>and
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>HBR mailing list
>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr

To me, the first thing about using shunt inductors with coupling=
 caps 
was always, seems to be easier to build one own's coils and IF 
strips.  Also changing the coupling cap value is one way of=
 varying 
the selectivity.  I don't think there's a selectivity advantage=
 of 
one over the other.  I built a 50 khz IF strip once using 3=
 inductors 
which then fed an LM-1350 ic.  It worked on the bench and had a 
bandwidth about 2 khz.  The coupling capacitor between the coils=
 was 
a 3 gang variable capacitor.  Increasing the capacitance (and 
coupling) between the coils brought the selectivity out to 12 khz=
 or 
so.  Never used this thing in a receiver.  The inductors were 300=
 
turns of #28 on 1 inch toroids I pulled out of a switching power=
 
supply.  It took about a week and a half to wind the coils.  I=
 hate 
winding toroids now.
Chapter 26 in the Radiotron book has a lot about if transformers=
 
along with the math, Q, selectivity and such.  Only thing it =
 about 
shunt inductors is that they're not used too much.
-- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/24/2002
"You mean you can build something like that!?"


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 04:59:10 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 23:59:10 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
In-Reply-To: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C07F8@NTSERVER>
Message-ID: <20020425160033.GDCM1987.out007.verizon.net@gemini>

>Thanks for the replies and info Kees and Helmut;
>
>Ok, I understand you need rectification to receive AM, guess I=
 was
>just
>confused about the BFO since I thought BFO carrier injection=
 was
>required to
>receive CW and SSB regardless of the product detector? then why=
 shut
>it off?
>
>Glenn K2KL

I just went over the schematic of the HBR-8/11.  You're 
right...there's an on/off switch for the BFO.  Also just the=
 output 
of the BFO is switched on or off.  The plate voltage is still on.=
  
Which means it's still oscillating.  Very interesting!  Perhaps=
 this 
was, as Microsoft sez nowadays, a feature?
-- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/24/2002



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 17:11:45 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Freeberg, Scott (STP))
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:11:45 -0500
Subject: [HBR] HBR-16 Parts or Restoration
Message-ID: <1D1B8647FA5CD411A02800508BDFD0A002F69385@stpmsx03.stp.guidant.com>

In the course of pinging the BA lists about homebrew receivers, what appears
to be an HBR-16 was offered up for sale to me.  I bought it and expect to
see it in a couple of weeks.  From the picture it appeared to be in fair
condition.  Operating condition or circuitry is really unknown.   Its often
hard to judge from photo's.  Anyway, my thoughts are to either restore it if
its in good restorable condition, or part it out and use those hard to find
parts to build a new one.   

73, Scott WA9WFA in Saint Paul Minn

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 17:35:51 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:35:51 -0500
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] transformers or capacitors
Message-ID: <20020425.113555.-371615.0.windy10605@juno.com>

I can imagine 300 turns each on several toroids would burn you 
out. I think I'll stick to the slug tuned cores ... I think the mid 50s 
article uses TV horizontal osc coils. 

Anyone ever suceeded in making a homebrew toroid winder ?

73s  Kees K5BCQ 

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Helmut Usbeck <vze2gmp4@verizon.net>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>, <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 23:45:34 -0400
Subject: Re: [HBR] transformers or capacitors
Message-ID: <20020425154640.FTAA25781.out004.verizon.net@gemini>

>Some questions. What are the pros and cons of IF
>transformer coupling vs capacitor coupling (2-3pf)
>of tuned circuits ? Ray N3XZV pointed me towards
>an article in a mid 50s ARRL Handbook which touts
>some pretty sharp passbands using the latter (several
>stages).
>
>I think it's great to read an article which discusses
>"L1" .... with inductance, number of turns, and coil "Q".
>That's doing it right.
>
>73s  Kees K5BCQ
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers
>and
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>HBR mailing list
>HBR@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr

To me, the first thing about using shunt inductors with coupling caps 
was always, seems to be easier to build one own's coils and IF 
strips.  Also changing the coupling cap value is one way of varying 
the selectivity.  I don't think there's a selectivity advantage of 
one over the other.  I built a 50 khz IF strip once using 3 inductors 
which then fed an LM-1350 ic.  It worked on the bench and had a 
bandwidth about 2 khz.  The coupling capacitor between the coils was 
a 3 gang variable capacitor.  Increasing the capacitance (and 
coupling) between the coils brought the selectivity out to 12 khz or 
so.  Never used this thing in a receiver.  The inductors were 300 
turns of #28 on 1 inch toroids I pulled out of a switching power 
supply.  It took about a week and a half to wind the coils.  I hate 
winding toroids now.
Chapter 26 in the Radiotron book has a lot about if transformers 
along with the math, Q, selectivity and such.  Only thing it  about 
shunt inductors is that they're not used too much.
-- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/24/2002
"You mean you can build something like that!?"

************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 

Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


HBR mailing list
HBR@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Thu Apr 25 20:45:50 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:45:50 EDT
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] transformers or capacitors
Message-ID: <46.267219f2.29f9b6ee@aol.com>

HI TO ALL.

IT MUST BE MY TURN NOW TO MORE FULLY EXPLAIN THIS I F AMP.THE SHARP CHANNEL 
USES 11 HALLICRAFTERS # 50B489 I F TRANS. TUNED TO 50 KC THEY GIVE A 
SELECTIVITY CHARACTERISTIC THAT IS ABOUT 350 CYCLES WIDE AT 6 DB DOWN AND 
1300 CYCLES AT 60 DB DOWN.
THE WIDE CHANNEL USES 9 RCA 205R1 HORZ. OSC. TRANS. WHICH ARE MODIFIED. THEY 
ARE STAGER TUNED GIVING A BANDWIDTH OF ABOUT 2300 CYCLES AT 6 DB DOWN AND 5KC 
WIDE AT 60 DB DOWN.
THE TUNING IS ADJUSTED SO IT IS CENTERED ABOUT 1700 CYCLES HIGHER IN FREQ. 
THEN THE SHARP ONE THAN WHEN A PHONE CARRIER IS TUNED TO FALL IN THE CENTER 
OF THE SHARP AMP. ONE SIDEBAND FALLS IN THE BROADER AMP. 

THIS IS FROM 1955, HOW MANY HALLICRAFTERS,OR RCA DEALERS HAVE THOSE COILS? 
LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF COILS TO MAKE AT HOME.
 73s RAY N3XZV

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 26 16:35:42 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Glenn Finerman)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 11:35:42 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-8 Questions
Message-ID: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C0845@NTSERVER>

Mike wrote;

<snip>
With AM, not counting synchronous AM demodulation, as you point out all you
need is a rectifier,
that is why you do not need the product detector. If you were to still have
the BFO injection on then you would
continue to hear the heterodyne beat note. If you turned it off, well than
the product detector should have no output as it only has one input and it
depends on both to generate it's output. 73 - Mike
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Thanks for the post Mike. I guess I should have been more specific regarding
the HBR-8..... Since the HBR-8 has no AM detector, and you need the BFO with
the product detector to receive CW/SSB, then why does the schematic show a
switch to shut it off??? This was apparently a mistake. (unless the AM
modification for the HBR-11 was already planned when the HBR-8 article was
written?)

I imagine if the HBR-8 did have an AM detector, you would include the BFO
on/off as part of the AM/SSB switch

Glenn K2KL


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 26 18:00:15 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Glenn Finerman)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 13:00:15 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-9??
Message-ID: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C0850@NTSERVER>

Hello HBR-ites,

I've taken the HBR-8 schematic and created a paste-up schematic on an 11x17"
paper that added the AM detector / 1N54 AGC circuit Mod intended for the
HBR-11 as well as the 12AT7 S-meter circuit. Why not just build the modified
HBR-11 you say? I have Several reasons for this...

I wanted to keep the less complex design of the HBR-8 while adding AM
capability. I'm also trying to maintain the small size of the HBR-8 since
I'm building the receiver into a gutted surplus Freq meter. I'm using the
dial and cap from the freq meter which is only a two section job which is
all that's required by the HBR-8.

A question for the group......I'm using the 1N54 agc circuit (part of the AM
detector mod intended for the HBR-11)
In the HBR-11, the AGC is applied to the two 6BJ6 IF amp stages and the RF
amp. Since the HBR-8 only has one IF amp and no RF amp, I have the AGC only
connected to the single IF amp in the same way as it's connected in the
HBR-11 (through secondary of the IF transformer to the grid of the 6BJ6)
Would AGC action be improved by also connecting it to one or both of the 6U8
mixer sections? also at the grid connection? or would that create other
problems...

Glenn K2KL

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 26 23:44:00 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 18:44:00 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-9??
In-Reply-To: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C0850@NTSERVER>
Message-ID: <3CC99FF0.26900.C8161C@localhost>

Glenn asked:
> Would AGC action be improved by
> also connecting it to one or both of the 6U8 mixer sections? also at the
> grid connection? or would that create other problems...

Can't be sure of the details without looking at the diagram (too lazy 
right now ...) but in general putting AGC on a mixer causes the 
load reflected to the local oscillator to vary with signal strength and 
since the HBR-series does not use a L.O. buffer (right?) you'd wind 
up with a receiver that changed tuning appreciably with SS.  

Walt Hutchens
KJ4KV
All talk, no action in the HBR department for the last year.



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Fri Apr 26 23:50:55 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Sandy and Kees Talen)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 17:50:55 -0500
Subject: [HBR] HBR-9??
Message-ID: <20020426.183707.-286579.3.windy10605@juno.com>

We appreciate HBR talkers too....

73s  Kees k5BCQ

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 27 01:26:59 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Jeff Noel)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 20:26:59 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-9??
References: <20020426.183707.-286579.3.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <000701c1ed82$3fae3f40$8e2c2c42@hppav>

I built a 61 last August.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy and Kees Talen" <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 18:50 PM
Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-9??


> We appreciate HBR talkers too....
>
> 73s  Kees k5BCQ
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 27 01:48:44 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Jeff Noel)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 20:48:44 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-9??
References: <20020426.183707.-286579.3.windy10605@juno.com> <000701c1ed82$3fae3f40$8e2c2c42@hppav>
Message-ID: <000501c1ed85$492e7820$3e282c42@hppav>

Opps! that was  HBR16 last August.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Noel" <k4zku@erols.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 20:26 PM
Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-9??


> I built a 61 last August.
> Jeff
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sandy and Kees Talen" <windy10605@juno.com>
> To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 18:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-9??
>
>
> > We appreciate HBR talkers too....
> >
> > 73s  Kees k5BCQ
> > ************************************
> > Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> > construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> >
> > Retrieve reflector archived data via
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> >
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Sat Apr 27 03:46:22 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:46:22 -0400
Subject: [HBR] AGC
Message-ID: <20020427144710.NQQI8069.out009.verizon.net@gemini>

The HBR-8 doesn't have an AGC.  It also wouldn't be able to use=
 one 
properly because compared to it's brothers it has a lot less=
 overall 
gain.  One must have more overall gain than required to have a=
 good 
functioning AGC.  The general idea of AGC is to keep the various=
 
stages from being overloaded, most important being the detector. =
 
Therefore you will have little or no distortion of the signal and=
 
also a means of compensating for any signal fading.  It's=
 basically a 
type of feedback circuit.
I have one receiver here that has AGC on every stage, including=
 the 
mixers(all three of them).  There's no oscillator pulling nor do=
 the 
oscillators have a buffer stage.  The mixer's are simple=
 triodes.
-- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/26/2002
"Simplicity can be very complicated."



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 29 13:04:52 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Glenn Finerman)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 08:04:52 -0400
Subject: [HBR] AGC
Message-ID: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C0866@NTSERVER>

>The HBR-8 doesn't have an AGC.

Ah, yes, that's why I'll be adding one (see my post) Even though the HBR-8
has two less stages of gain I'm going to add the 1N54 circuit and see what
happens, after all it's only 2 diodes and some caps, no big deal. I may add
an RF amp/preselector later so I can apply it there as well. 

>It also wouldn't be able to use one properly because compared to it's
brothers it has a lot less overall 
>gain.

<snip>

Glenn K2KL


From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 29 13:11:22 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Glenn Finerman)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 08:11:22 -0400
Subject: [HBR] HBR-9??
Message-ID: <9F080245D04FD211816900104B79C7341C0868@NTSERVER>

Thanks for the reply Walt; (I was a big fan of your Electric Radio articles
some years back...)


That's exactly the info I was looking for regarding effect on the mixers if
I applied AGC there..
I'll try it anyway to see what happens, maybe the mixer with the xtal osc...



Glenn asked:
> Would AGC action be improved by
> also connecting it to one or both of the 6U8 mixer sections? also at the
> grid connection? or would that create other problems...

Can't be sure of the details without looking at the diagram (too lazy 
right now ...) but in general putting AGC on a mixer causes the 
load reflected to the local oscillator to vary with signal strength and 
since the HBR-series does not use a L.O. buffer (right?) you'd wind 
up with a receiver that changed tuning appreciably with SS.  

Walt Hutchens
KJ4KV
All talk, no action in the HBR department for the last year.


************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 

Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 29 16:44:03 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Joe LeKostaj)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 10:44:03 -0500
Subject: [HBR] another take on "all talk..."
In-Reply-To: <3CC99FF0.26900.C8161C@localhost>
References: <3CC99FF0.26900.C8161C@localhost>
Message-ID: <p04320406b8f311376cb7@[32.101.120.201]>

At 6:44 PM -0400 4/26/02, waltah@cfw.com wrote:
>
>All talk, no action in the HBR department for the last year.

--

Walt's tag line reminds me of a humorous sign I used to see at the 
Tokyo office of a company I used to work for. In the kind of broken 
syntax that I have to admire from anyone who has struggled to learn 
English as a second language, the sign exhorted us "NOT TO BE NATO". 
It was explained to me that NATO meant "No Action, Talk Only"!

Furthermore, that acronym wasn't pronounced NAY-toh (as in the 
military alliance), but nah-toh. Same pronunciation as the Japanese 
word for fermented soy bean paste which (to me) is a rather 
foul-smelling substance. It's a worthy goal not to be considered NATO 
in either context!  ;-)

73,
Joe K9LY (still scrounging parts; consider me NATO for now!)

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 29 05:36:30 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (Helmut Usbeck)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 00:36:30 -0400
Subject: [HBR] another take on "all talk..."
In-Reply-To: <p04320406b8f311376cb7@[32.101.120.201]>
Message-ID: <20020429163929.LTHK29542.out013.verizon.net@gemini>

>At 6:44 PM -0400 4/26/02, waltah@cfw.com wrote:
>>
>>All talk, no action in the HBR department for the last year.
>
>--
>
>Walt's tag line reminds me of a humorous sign I used to see at=
 the
>Tokyo office of a company I used to work for. In the kind of=
 broken
>syntax that I have to admire from anyone who has struggled to=
 learn
>English as a second language, the sign exhorted us "NOT TO BE=
 NATO".
>It was explained to me that NATO meant "No Action, Talk Only"!
>
 Same pronunciation as the Japanese
>word for fermented soy bean paste which (to me) is a rather
>foul-smelling substance.

               Something like the tag line?  Nuoc Mam sauce=
 anyone?!

>73,
>Joe K9LY (still scrounging parts; consider me NATO for now!)
 -- 
Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/29/2002



From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 29 19:31:39 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (William L. Hopkins)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 14:31:39 -0400
Subject: [HBR] another take on "all talk..."
References: <20020429163929.LTHK29542.out013.verizon.net@gemini>
Message-ID: <02Apr29.143906edt.119124@gateway.naz.edu>

Helmut & Co.

Well, some of us are waiting for the summer, when the basement warms up and we can
spend some time building the HBR.  Mine will be the HBR 16.  So watch out boyz n'
girlz.  I will be asking you many questions, once I start.  I will even consider
putting my work up on the web, as I go.

ciao
bill hopkins
AA2YV


Helmut Usbeck wrote:

> >At 6:44 PM -0400 4/26/02, waltah@cfw.com wrote:
> >>
> >>All talk, no action in the HBR department for the last year.
> >
> >--
> >
> >Walt's tag line reminds me of a humorous sign I used to see at the
> >Tokyo office of a company I used to work for. In the kind of broken
> >syntax that I have to admire from anyone who has struggled to learn
> >English as a second language, the sign exhorted us "NOT TO BE NATO".
> >It was explained to me that NATO meant "No Action, Talk Only"!
> >
>  Same pronunciation as the Japanese
> >word for fermented soy bean paste which (to me) is a rather
> >foul-smelling substance.
>
>                Something like the tag line?  Nuoc Mam sauce anyone?!
>
> >73,
> >Joe K9LY (still scrounging parts; consider me NATO for now!)
>  --
> Helmut Usbeck, WB2ADT vze2gmp4@verizon.net on 04/29/2002
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr

--
For Study-Abroad Website in Berlin, click on:
   http://www.studienforum-berlin.de



--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/mixed
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/x-vcard
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed.
Please post in Plain-Text only.---

From hbr@mailman.qth.net  Mon Apr 29 22:09:58 2002
From: hbr@mailman.qth.net (hbr@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 17:09:58 -0400
Subject: [HBR] another take on "all talk..."
In-Reply-To: <p04320406b8f311376cb7@[32.101.120.201]>
References: <3CC99FF0.26900.C8161C@localhost>
Message-ID: <3CCD7E66.4568.119C7C@localhost>

Joe noted:
> Tokyo office of a company I used to work for. In the kind of broken 
> syntax that I have to admire from anyone who has struggled to learn 
> English as a second language, the sign exhorted us "NOT TO BE NATO". It
> was explained to me that NATO meant "No Action, Talk Only"!

My favorite commercial slogan of all time traces to the early 1960's 
when I wandered Akibahara as a Lt(jg) with far, far too few bucks.  
But one of the things I did bring back was a pair of beautiful 
multimeters, a product of the Sanwa Electric Instrument Co., 
"What bring comfort and convenience on your life."   They were the 
most accurate such meters I ever owned, very compact, and 
overall, far ahead of anything one could get in the states at the time 
and I wondered what would happen if the Japanese ever began to 
export significant amounts of electronics to the U.S...

Walt 
KJ4KV


