[Milsurplus] The BC-221N Freq Meter calibration.

Sat Feb 3 12:34:27 EST 2024

An LM (Navy freq meter similar to BC 221) caught my eye at a swap meet a
few years ago. $10 with USN AC power supply and cables and correct SN
calibration book. What really interested me was a Douglas Aircraft adhesive
label on it showing regular lab calibrations into the early 1970s. I bought
it. It worked perfectly and calibration was spot on. Really surprised it
was being used into the 1970s when digital frequency counters were widely
available.

In 1972 I inspected two DOD auction lots at Alameda NAS in CA. Up for bid
were two huge lots, one was over 100 overhauled ART 13 xmtrs and the other
was at least 200 overhauled LM freq meters all with ACPS. All were in boxes
and sealed in cloth/foil. Lookers had ripped open a few. They had all been
OHd and never returned to service. The ART 13s were a total mess
cosmetically. The OH contractor had spray painted right over dirt and
grime. You could see crude masking tape lines. Some panel meters had
overspray paint particles on the glass. The LMs were literally like new.
Beautifully restored.

 The lots were too big for hobbyists to bid on and scrappers bought them.
Two different contractors. One cared. The other didn’t.

On Sat, Feb 3, 2024 at 8:21 AM David Olean <k1whs at metrocast.net> wrote:

>
> Hello again,
>
> I had posted last week about my BC-221 Philco frequency meter and some
> inaccuracies noted. It looked like the inductance had varied slightly
> and all the crystal check points were now spread out a bit more than
> original. (I had to tune the oscillator farther to go from 2 to 4 MHz.)
> I was looking for a way to re cal those check points and get them close
> to the original settings.
>
> I did some more looking into my BC-221 and am very happy to report that
> the solution was looking right at me all the time. I should get a patent
> on this as it is so simple. My original problem was that my crystal
> markers do not agree with the original cal points in my calibration
> book. It now takes 12.5 divisions more of tuning knob travel to get to
> the highest marker at 4 MHz. So each crystal marker is a bit off. You
> can re set the corrector to the nearest cal point, but my idea was to
> come up with an entire new tuning book with cal points every 10 khz and
> then interpolate between those numbers. It would be nice if the crystal
> checkpoints stayed put across the range or stayed close across the
> original range.
>
> I found that the VFO coil aluminum cover over the bottom of the insides
> of the BC-221 can act as an inductance trimmer! I moved it about 1/4"
> farther away from the coil and saw that the range shrunk so that I am
> now short by about 14 divisions. It looks like maybe just a 0.050" shim
> under the shield will bring the coil back in spec to what it was in
> 1942. All I did was move the shield a bit farther away from the
> oscillator coil. I am talking about the 2-4 MHz coil. I did not look at
> the low freq coil as it is sideways compared to the other coil, but it
> is probably not too bad either. I'll try a 0.050" shim and see how close
> I came.  Woo Hoo! Depending on how anal I want to get, I can bring the
> crystal ckeckpoints back to where they originally were.
>
> 73
>
> Dave  K1WHS
>
> On 2/1/2024 4:58 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > The gotcah is that doing this or that with the coil (like adding a brass
> slug) is going to impact it’s Q and it’s tempco along with any change in
> inductance.
> >
> > One thing that could have changed is the input C of the oscillator tube.
> It’s right across the tank. Any change there *will* shift things a bit.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >> On Feb 1, 2024, at 4:22 PM, David Olean <k1whs at metrocast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Bob,
> >>
> >> A bit more information.....I got the BC-221 in 2016. One of the radio
> club members was going to throw it out. I could not bear to see that so I
> took it home instead.  I first noted that it had some residual drift over
> time. I hoped that the drift was just getting the thing heated up and
> running, to drive out moisture etc. so I left it on. Then I noticed the
> oil.  One of the bathtub caps was leaking. They all were somewhat lossy
> when tested on a good capacitor bridge.  I ended up removing the old bath
> tub caps and re stuffing them with new polyester caps, so it still looks
> original. I took this Philco BC-221 to the Gilbert PA  Red Ball Express
> fest a few years ago after the repairs, and took home 1st place in
> measuring frequencies on 80 and 40 meters. I am not too sure how accurate
> everything was there, but the BC-221 worked very well. I had calibrated the
> 1000 Kc crystal and used the calibration points. I could adjust every one
> of the check points with the corrector. I think I was within about 35 to
> 50 Hz for each crystal that was measured there at Gilbert.  I reset the
> corrector to the nearest cal point and then interpolated using the book.
> >>
> >> So, today, after noting how stable it is, I am trying to improve on the
> calibration chart with the simplest solution available. I figured that I
> would try out the calibration points and see how they fit the cal book. but
> that is when I noticed that the inductance had possibly increased and the
> tuning capacitor needs a bit more turning to cover the original range.  The
> proper thing to do, I guess, is to generate new crystal calibration points,
> but that is a lot of work. I could use the existing CAL points and adjust
> the corrector, but I worry that things could get mixed up doing that. Which
> checkpoint is the correct one? Is it the nearest above or below the unknown
> frequency?  Without re adjusting the capacitor travel, I see an awful lot
> of work ahead for me.  I took the BC-221 apart, and I will experiment with
> a small amount of brass slug in the coil and see what that does. It is very
> true, that I do not really know what is wrong. It could be the tuning cap
> that has changed value and has less C now only 81 years after it was built.
> The coil could have some deposit on it that is altering inductance
> slightly.  We are not talking about any huge drift, but I want the BC-221
> to be as accurate as possible. I just do not want to re invent the wheel,
> if someone has addressed this already.    I have repaired a number of R-390
> and R-392 PTOs but I am no expert. I have a feeling that I will make my own
> calibration chart from scratch! I will then calibrate everything based on
> the initial crystal cal point at 2.000 MHz and reference everything from
> that point.
> >>
> >> The bottom line is that it is fun and much better than watching TV.
> >>
> >> 73
> >>
> >> Dave K1WHS
> >>
> >> On 2/1/2024 11:26 AM, Bob Camp wrote:
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> There are a *lot* of different versions of the BC-221. Many folks made
> them. Even with the same suffix letter, you can see differences between
> them. Some outfits made more stable units than others. I also suspect that
> some batches of components resulted in less drift.
> >>>
> >>> If your crystal is still on the correct frequency, then the
> calibration points in the book still “work” ( = they do what they are
> supposed to do). Yes that *assumes* you can get to them.
> >>>
> >>> If you can’t hit the points is the inductor to blame? These gizmos are
> tuned very differently than a PTO. The same “gap change” issue does not
> apply here. It could be the coil, the fixed caps, or even the tuning cap.
> >>>
> >>> Drift is going to be dependent on a lot of things. One often
> overlooked one is humidity. Leave the unit out in that damp garage for a
> year. It will soak up a lot of moisture. Normally the “soak up” process is
> faster than the “dry out” process. Temperature is the one we all point to.
> It has a nice easy to observe first order effect that moves pretty fast.
> Does all that dust inside the unit matter? … hmmm ….  How about the oil
> slowly drying out on the tuning cap plates? … hmmm ….  Lots of weird little
> things going on.
> >>>
> >>> 25 Hz at 2.5 MHz is 10 ppm. TC caps are doing well at 30 ppm / C. A
> typical room struggles to hold 1 to 2C over an hour or two. 10 ppm per day
> is indeed good for a VFO. I wound not mess with any of the parts inside the
> box ….
> >>>
> >>> Bob
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 1, 2024, at 10:43 AM, David Olean <k1whs at metrocast.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello surplus friends,
> >>>>
> >>>> I have a pair of old BC-221s. One is in a wooden case, and my Philco
> BC-221N is in a metal case. I did make an AC supply for the units and I
> recall that I used a solid state regulator for the filament voltages for
> the metal cased BC-211N. I recall having serious drift issues on VFOs with
> varying filament voltages in the past, so figured 6 VDC regulated on the
> filaments was a good idea. Of course the bigger question is why even bother
> when there are freq counters today that can sense frequency shift when
> someone swats a mosquito in Sumatra!  I can't answer that question, but I
> am amazed at the level of accuracy available in the 1940's with these
> instruments and I want mine to be as stable and accurate as possible.
> >>>>
> >>>> So I decided to make my own abbreviated calibration sheet for my
> particular unit.  It seems that the BC-221 suffers from the same disease as
> old Collins PTOs. Over time, the inductance changes and it takes more than
> ten turns to negotiate the 1 MHz span. In the BC-221, it takes 12.5 more
> divisions on the scale to traverse between 2.000 and 4.000 MHz. The
> calibration drift is proportional across the range. Has there been any
> discussion about this? Is there a way to fix it?  I see the dial
> "expansion" on both the low and high settings.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am thinking that I should make all new crystal checkpoints rather
> than rely on the old check points.  I was hoping that maybe I could
> slightly adjust the inductance to bring  the original crystal check points
> back to where they were in 1942.  Am I wrong in suspecting the inductance?
> I hate to mess with the temp compensating capacitors.  I was thinking That
> maybe a brass slug near the coil might suffice, but implementing that is a
> tall order for sure.  I am looking for ideas.   Please do not tell me that
> I am wasting my time. I already know that.
> >>>>
> >>>> As it sits now, my BC-221 drifts about 25 Hz over a 24 hour period at
> 2.5 MHz. I rate that as very very good for a VFO. These units need to be
> preserved and their stories told.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 73
> >>>>
> >>>> Dave K1WHS
> >>>>
> >>>> ______________________________________________________________
> >>>> Milsurplus mailing list
> >>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> >>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >>>>
> >>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> >>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20240203/284a4b0b/attachment-0001.html>