开云体育

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 开云体育

Replacement for OPA2228UA


Oliver Goldenstein
 

Hello Softrock Fans !

Unfortunately the Kits are sold out. I will give it a try to build
mine from scratch.

I have all the parts, but not the TI OPA2228 UA. Not that easy to
access here in Europe.

1) Has anyone experiences with the performance of NE5532(A) or LT1037
? That are the replaced chips i found in the OPA2228UA-Datasheet.

2) Maybe you know more to replace with ?!

Thanks for your help !

73 de Oliver, DL6KBG DRESDEN SAXONY


KY1K
 

Good Luck to you Oliver.

Breadboarding in SOIC is possible, but much more difficult than DIP would be. Either way, I don't envy the task you're about to undertake!

If there aren't going to be any more softrock-40 kits, maybe Tony would publish the board layout so that someone could have them fabricated and make them available for those who want to roll their own without the benefit of the kit. Or maybe Far Circuits would make the board available?

If you are going to build your own, you might look at the Fairchild FSAV331, which is an analog switch that has the gating built in. I think it's possible to eliminate the 74HC08 if this multiplexed switch is used.

Some have suggested that a synchronous counter (based on a J_K flip flop) might improve the performance some, especially at higher frequencies. I don't have a suggestion regarding an appropriate counter, maybe someone else can comment on this. I don't know if the SDr-1000 uses a 74AC74 or a synchronous counter.

Regarding the op amp substitution, you might look at the LT1115 op amp, which is shown in the QEX series on the SDR-1000 written by AC5OG. In part 1 of the article, a schematic is shown using the LT1115 op amp, although it might not be the most appropriate op amp and I don't know what the SDR-1000 production units actually use. Maybe someone else could comment on this as well. The QEX articles are available on the flex-radio website.

Hope this helps.

GL to all and happy softrocking.

Art

At 03:17 PM 10/11/2005, you wrote:

Hello Softrock Fans !

Unfortunately the Kits are sold out. I will give it a try to build
mine from scratch.

I have all the parts, but not the TI OPA2228 UA. Not that easy to
access here in Europe.

1) Has anyone experiences with the performance of NE5532(A) or LT1037
? That are the replaced chips i found in the OPA2228UA-Datasheet.

2) Maybe you know more to replace with ?!

Thanks for your help !

73 de Oliver, DL6KBG DRESDEN SAXONY








Yahoo! Groups Links




Leon Heller
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Oliver Goldenstein" <oliver.goldenstein@...>
To: <softrock40@...>
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 8:17 PM
Subject: [softrock40] Replacement for OPA2228UA


Hello Softrock Fans !
Unfortunately the Kits are sold out. I will give it a try to build
mine from scratch.
I have all the parts, but not the TI OPA2228 UA. Not that easy to
access here in Europe.
Farnell has them in stock.

73, Leon
---
[This E-mail has been scanned for viruses but it is your responsibility to maintain up to date anti virus software on the device that you are
currently using to read this email. ]


Oliver Goldenstein
 

--- In softrock40@..., KY1K <ky1k@p...> wrote:

[...]

Regarding the op amp substitution, you might look at the LT1115 op
amp, which is shown in the QEX series on the SDR-1000 written by
AC5OG.
[...]

Thanks for your Tips Art. I spend the rest of the weak with reading
Datasheets and rereading the 1. and 4. QEX Articles from Gerald. So i
learned a lot.

Now, just able do compare und locate other Chips, my Package from TI
arrived :-)

So, thanks a lot and best 73

Oliver DL6KBG Dresden Saxony


Oliver Goldenstein
 

--- In softrock40@..., "Leon Heller" <leon.heller@b...> wrote:

Hello Leon !

Farnell has them in stock.
In the german dse-electronic FAQ they say that Farnell will only Ship
to buisiness customers. Minimun order is about 50 Euros. So i checked
this before and noticed that they have the FST3126 and the OPA2228UA.

Just saw your website. Interesting info about the 9850 DDS. I have to
of them. So i will try out the idea later on.

73 for your help.

73 de Oliver DL6KBG Dresden Saxony


KY1K
 

Hi Oliver,

Did some more digging in the archives here. I found a message from KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>, who suggested the timing could be improved with the use of a 74AC109 JK flip flop because it's synchronously clocked, rather than a ripple counter.

I can't say whether the information is correct or not, but the timing becomes very critical as one moves higher in frequency, so anyone trying to push a softrock past 40 meters should consider using the JK flip flop.

Here's the excerpt from his post to the QRP-L mailing list. Drop me a line if you want the entire message.

---------------------------------------

KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>

On item 4, looking at the schematic the 74ac74 dual flip flop is implementing a asynchronous ripple counter,as such there is a built in delay between the outputs. The second stage does get a clock signal until the first stage output has changed. Also because they sequenced then the variations in propagation delay adds to the second stage delay and gives you a larger variation in timing. The way to minimize the timing is to make a synchronous counter using a 74ac109 JK flip flop instead of a D flip flop, in that case both flip flops are clocked simultaneously and the output also change simultaneously. The variation in the timing is the worst variation of the two instead of the sum of the two.
----------------------------------------

Also, if you can wait for awhile before getting the DDS, you might be interested in the 9958 instead of the 9950. It has much better performance, much lower spur output, can work at higher frequencies and uses much less power. It produces 2 outputs, which can be fine tuned provide 90 degrees phase variance, which enables higher receive frequencies and simplifies the receiver even more.

It's big brother, the AD9999 can produce 4 outputs, each output is tweakable...which might interest some.

I know KK7P is going to release a dual 9854 DDS sometime soon, but I know of no one who is working on the improved 9958 design.

I'd sure like to have a 9958 based DDS!

Regards,

Art


KD5NWA
 

The 74hc74 is made to divide by two by connecting it's /Q output to the data pin. in turn the Q output becomes the clock for the next stage. This has the inherent problem that the second counter doesn't get a clock until the first stage has changed it's output, hence the name "ripple". It has the following sequence

Clock arrives at FF 1
delay1
Q1 flips which clocks flip flop 2 if in the right direction
delay2
Q2 changes if flip flop 1 changed in the right direction

There is a skew built into the whole arrangement, that delay2 between Q1 flipping and Q2 flipping

A 74HC109 JK flip flop works different, it has two inputs, J and K, the clock that clocks flip flop 1 also clocks flip flop 2 and 3 .... N, there is no delay 2

Clock arrive
delay
Q1 Flips, Q2 Flips if needed, Q3 Flips if needed....Qn flip if needed.

In a "synchronous" counter all the Q output that need to change, change simultaneously minimizing the delay between outputs, ergo you can go to a higher frequency and the clocks will stay in phase.

You should use JK flip flops instead of synchronous binary counters (a bunch of JK's inside one package) you get the same result, but synchronous counters chips tend to be slower parts.

Here is a couple of links about it.

< >
< >
< >
< >


At 03:13 PM 10/13/2005, KY1K wrote:
Hi Oliver,

Did some more digging in the archives here. I found a message from
KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>, who suggested the timing could be improved
with the use of a 74AC109 JK flip flop because it's synchronously
clocked, rather than a ripple counter.

I can't say whether the information is correct or not, but the timing
becomes very critical as one moves higher in frequency, so anyone
trying to push a softrock past 40 meters should consider using the JK
flip flop.

Here's the excerpt from his post to the QRP-L mailing list. Drop me a
line if you want the entire message.

---------------------------------------

KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>

On item 4, looking at the schematic the 74ac74 dual flip flop is
implementing a asynchronous ripple counter,as such there is a built
in delay between the outputs. The second stage does get a clock
signal until the first stage output has changed. Also because they
sequenced then the variations in propagation delay adds to the
second stage delay and gives you a larger variation in timing. The
way to minimize the timing is to make a synchronous counter using a
74ac109 JK flip flop instead of a D flip flop, in that case both
flip flops are clocked simultaneously and the output also change
simultaneously. The variation in the timing is the worst variation
of the two instead of the sum of the two.
----------------------------------------

Also, if you can wait for awhile before getting the DDS, you might be
interested in the 9958 instead of the 9950. It has much better
performance, much lower spur output, can work at higher frequencies
and uses much less power. It produces 2 outputs, which can be fine
tuned provide 90 degrees phase variance, which enables higher receive
frequencies and simplifies the receiver even more.

It's big brother, the AD9999 can produce 4 outputs, each output is
tweakable...which might interest some.

I know KK7P is going to release a dual 9854 DDS sometime soon, but I
know of no one who is working on the improved 9958 design.

I'd sure like to have a 9958 based DDS!

Regards,

Art







Yahoo! Groups Links



Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't; only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...


 

The 74HC74 is a synchronous dividor, NOT a ripple counter. If the /Q was connected to the clock of the next
stage, it would be a ripple counter. Changing the D input does not change the output until the next clock
pulse(assuming the delay in the 1st stage is less than the clock time). The max frequency is limited by this
delay, but it does not cause skew.

Dave - WB6DHW

The 74hc74 is made to divide by two by connecting it's /Q output to
the data pin. in turn the Q output becomes the clock for the next
stage. This has the inherent problem that the second counter doesn't
get a clock until the first stage has changed it's output, hence the
name "ripple". It has the following sequence

Clock arrives at FF 1
delay1
Q1 flips which clocks flip flop 2 if in the right direction
delay2
Q2 changes if flip flop 1 changed in the right direction

There is a skew built into the whole arrangement, that delay2 between
Q1 flipping and Q2 flipping

A 74HC109 JK flip flop works different, it has two inputs, J and K,
the clock that clocks flip flop 1 also clocks flip flop 2 and 3 ....
N, there is no delay 2

Clock arrive
delay
Q1 Flips, Q2 Flips if needed, Q3 Flips if needed....Qn flip if needed.

In a "synchronous" counter all the Q output that need to change,
change simultaneously minimizing the delay between outputs, ergo you
can go to a higher frequency and the clocks will stay in phase.

You should use JK flip flops instead of synchronous binary counters
(a bunch of JK's inside one package) you get the same result, but
synchronous counters chips tend to be slower parts.

Here is a couple of links about it.

< >
< >
< >
< >


At 03:13 PM 10/13/2005, KY1K wrote:
Hi Oliver,

Did some more digging in the archives here. I found a message from
KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>, who suggested the timing could be improved
with the use of a 74AC109 JK flip flop because it's synchronously
clocked, rather than a ripple counter.

I can't say whether the information is correct or not, but the timing
becomes very critical as one moves higher in frequency, so anyone
trying to push a softrock past 40 meters should consider using the JK
flip flop.

Here's the excerpt from his post to the QRP-L mailing list. Drop me a
line if you want the entire message.

---------------------------------------

KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>

On item 4, looking at the schematic the 74ac74 dual flip flop is
implementing a asynchronous ripple counter,as such there is a built
in delay between the outputs. The second stage does get a clock
signal until the first stage output has changed. Also because they
sequenced then the variations in propagation delay adds to the
second stage delay and gives you a larger variation in timing. The
way to minimize the timing is to make a synchronous counter using a
74ac109 JK flip flop instead of a D flip flop, in that case both
flip flops are clocked simultaneously and the output also change
simultaneously. The variation in the timing is the worst variation
of the two instead of the sum of the two.
----------------------------------------

Also, if you can wait for awhile before getting the DDS, you might be
interested in the 9958 instead of the 9950. It has much better
performance, much lower spur output, can work at higher frequencies
and uses much less power. It produces 2 outputs, which can be fine
tuned provide 90 degrees phase variance, which enables higher receive
frequencies and simplifies the receiver even more.

It's big brother, the AD9999 can produce 4 outputs, each output is
tweakable...which might interest some.

I know KK7P is going to release a dual 9854 DDS sometime soon, but I
know of no one who is working on the improved 9958 design.

I'd sure like to have a 9958 based DDS!

Regards,

Art







Yahoo! Groups Links



Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...






Yahoo! Groups Links








KD5NWA
 

Are you sure you know what a ripple counter is? A ripple counter is made up of multiple D Flip Flops coupled one to the next. Both ripple and synchronous counters use edge triggered flip flops but of different kind.

The 74hc74 is two D Flip Flop, a very useful device but very difficult to implement anything but ripple counters with it when you need anything but divide by two. Take a look at the specification sheet and internal diagram of a ripple counter chip, there is nothing in there but D Flip Flops. Take a look the specs of a synchronous counter, what do you have inside, multiple JK flip flops and "and gates" if you have more than two stages.

I put several references some explain why D Flip Flops are not useful for high speed counters that have outputs that need to be synchronized.

The Q or /Q has to be connected to the next stage to implement a binary divide by 4 counter which is the subject of the discussion so we can generate Quadrature signals. It is synchronous only when all you want is divide by 2 once you try to past that then you have a ripple counter.

To create a Digital Quadrature clock requires 2 clocks one 1/2 the frequency of the other each with exactly 50% duty cycle and synchronized to one another. That rules out a oscillator with a divide by two stage, the built in clock skew will make high frequency use difficult, specially if the oscillator operates over a wide range of frequencies.

Since crystal oscillators generally don't put out a signal with a perfect 50% duty cycle and another divide by two would cause clock skew, the way that is the easiest is to have a clock at 4X and by using a synchronous divide by 4 counter you can have signals that keep their phase relationship to very high frequencies, much higher than what two 74HC74 flip flops are capable off.

You can create a beautiful Quadrature clock with D flip flops and 2X clocks if you have a commercial oscillator module that has perfect 50%(they do it by having a divide by two circuit inside) duty cycle with three D flip flops and several 74HC86 xor gates to act as a clock doubler and delay to clock two of the flip flops to re-synchronize the clock signals. You can do the same thing with JK flip flops but you only need 2 flip flops.

At 10:00 PM 10/13/2005, brainerd@... wrote:
The 74HC74 is a synchronous dividor, NOT a ripple counter. If the /Q was connected to the clock of the next
stage, it would be a ripple counter. Changing the D input does not change the output until the next clock
pulse(assuming the delay in the 1st stage is less than the clock time). The max frequency is limited by this
delay, but it does not cause skew.

Dave - WB6DHW


The 74hc74 is made to divide by two by connecting it's /Q output to
the data pin. in turn the Q output becomes the clock for the next
stage. This has the inherent problem that the second counter doesn't
get a clock until the first stage has changed it's output, hence the
name "ripple". It has the following sequence

Clock arrives at FF 1
delay1
Q1 flips which clocks flip flop 2 if in the right direction
delay2
Q2 changes if flip flop 1 changed in the right direction

There is a skew built into the whole arrangement, that delay2 between
Q1 flipping and Q2 flipping

A 74HC109 JK flip flop works different, it has two inputs, J and K,
the clock that clocks flip flop 1 also clocks flip flop 2 and 3 ....
N, there is no delay 2

Clock arrive
delay
Q1 Flips, Q2 Flips if needed, Q3 Flips if needed....Qn flip if needed.

In a "synchronous" counter all the Q output that need to change,
change simultaneously minimizing the delay between outputs, ergo you
can go to a higher frequency and the clocks will stay in phase.

You should use JK flip flops instead of synchronous binary counters
(a bunch of JK's inside one package) you get the same result, but
synchronous counters chips tend to be slower parts.

Here is a couple of links about it.

< >
< >
<
>
< >


At 03:13 PM 10/13/2005, KY1K wrote:
Hi Oliver,

Did some more digging in the archives here. I found a message from
KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>, who suggested the timing could be improved
with the use of a 74AC109 JK flip flop because it's synchronously
clocked, rather than a ripple counter.

I can't say whether the information is correct or not, but the timing
becomes very critical as one moves higher in frequency, so anyone
trying to push a softrock past 40 meters should consider using the JK
flip flop.

Here's the excerpt from his post to the QRP-L mailing list. Drop me a
line if you want the entire message.

---------------------------------------

KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>

On item 4, looking at the schematic the 74ac74 dual flip flop is
implementing a asynchronous ripple counter,as such there is a built
in delay between the outputs. The second stage does get a clock
signal until the first stage output has changed. Also because they
sequenced then the variations in propagation delay adds to the
second stage delay and gives you a larger variation in timing. The
way to minimize the timing is to make a synchronous counter using a
74ac109 JK flip flop instead of a D flip flop, in that case both
flip flops are clocked simultaneously and the output also change
simultaneously. The variation in the timing is the worst variation
of the two instead of the sum of the two.
----------------------------------------

Also, if you can wait for awhile before getting the DDS, you might be
interested in the 9958 instead of the 9950. It has much better
performance, much lower spur output, can work at higher frequencies
and uses much less power. It produces 2 outputs, which can be fine
tuned provide 90 degrees phase variance, which enables higher receive
frequencies and simplifies the receiver even more.

It's big brother, the AD9999 can produce 4 outputs, each output is
tweakable...which might interest some.

I know KK7P is going to release a dual 9854 DDS sometime soon, but I
know of no one who is working on the improved 9958 design.

I'd sure like to have a 9958 based DDS!

Regards,

Art







Yahoo! Groups Links



Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...






Yahoo! Groups Links












Yahoo! Groups Links










--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.0/132 - Release Date: 10/13/2005
Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't; only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...


S. Cash Olsen
 

-----Original Message-----
From: softrock40@... [mailto:softrock40@...] On
Behalf Of KD5NWA
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 9:29 PM
To: softrock40@...
Cc: softrock40@...
Subject: Re: [softrock40] Re: Replacement for OPA2228UA


Are you sure you know what a ripple counter is? A ripple counter is
made up of multiple D Flip Flops coupled one to the next. Both ripple
and synchronous counters use edge triggered flip flops but of different
kind.

Dave,
A synchronous counter and ripple counter can be made from exactly the
same flip-flop. The difference is that in a synchronous counter the
clocks of all flip-flops are tied together and driven by the same clock
source.

The 74hc74 is two D Flip Flop, a very useful device but very
difficult to implement anything but ripple counters with it when you
need anything but divide by two. Take a look at the specification
sheet and internal diagram of a ripple counter chip, there is nothing
in there but D Flip Flops.

Dave,
The above just simply is not true, the 74hc74 makes a fine synchronous
counter, you just have to connect it correctly.


Take a look the specs of a synchronous
counter, what do you have inside, multiple JK flip flops and "and
gates" if you have more than two stages.

Dave,
Again the above ain't necessarily so.


I put several references some explain why D Flip Flops are not
useful for high speed counters that have outputs that need to be
synchronized.

Dave,
Your references are amateurs (not professionals) and are full of wheats
(Barbara Strisand).


The Q or /Q has to be connected to the next stage to implement a
binary divide by 4 counter which is the subject of the discussion so
we can generate Quadrature signals. It is synchronous only when all
you want is divide by 2 once you try to past that then you have a
ripple counter.

To create a Digital Quadrature clock requires 2 clocks one 1/2 the
frequency of the other each with exactly 50% duty cycle and
synchronized to one another. That rules out a oscillator with a
divide by two stage, the built in clock skew will make high frequency
use difficult, specially if the oscillator operates over a wide range
of frequencies.

Dave,
Again the above just ain't so. In a synchronous counter a single clock
is required. It is exactly the clock skew that makes synchronous design
a highly desirable way to do it.


Since crystal oscillators generally don't put out a signal with a
perfect 50% duty cycle and another divide by two would cause clock
skew, the way that is the easiest is to have a clock at 4X and by
using a synchronous divide by 4 counter you can have signals that
keep their phase relationship to very high frequencies, much higher
than what two 74HC74 flip flops are capable off.

Dave,
It is exactly because the crystal oscillator is not necessarily
symmetrical that the synchronous counter is the preferred method. All
flip-flops clock on the same edge and the opposite edge is not used in
the circuit for any purpose.


You can create a beautiful Quadrature clock with D flip flops and 2X
clocks if you have a commercial oscillator module that has perfect
50%(they do it by having a divide by two circuit inside) duty cycle
with three D flip flops and several 74HC86 xor gates to act as a
clock doubler and delay to clock two of the flip flops to
re-synchronize the clock signals. You can do the same thing with JK
flip flops but you only need 2 flip flops.

Dave,
The way to make a perfectly symmetrical four (4) phase clock for this
purpose is a ring counter topology. The output of each flip-flop is
connected to one switch in the Tayloe modulator/demodulator. The ring
counter is made from two dual flip-flops, the 74hc74 would be a
perfectly good choice. The steering logic around the flip-flops is a
single gate. I think a 74hc20 would do the trick. A power on reset
circuit would be desirable but not necessary.

For the frequency range that most of you are interested in I think I
could build the clock source with an Atmel processor with four output
pins. Might even be more cost effective.

The design of synchronous logic is a whole design philosophy of it's own
but once you have used it a whole lot of problems go away. I have
designed some large synchronous clock designs and with more than 1500
flip-flips. The simulator for the chip used a similar number of 74hc00
flip-flops. This work was in the early 1970s. Not a J-K flip-flop in the
entire chip.

Cash KD5SSJ


At 10:00 PM 10/13/2005, brainerd@... wrote:
The 74HC74 is a synchronous dividor, NOT a ripple counter. If
the /Q was connected to the clock of the next
stage, it would be a ripple counter. Changing the D input does not
change the output until the next clock
pulse(assuming the delay in the 1st stage is less than the clock
time). The max frequency is limited by this
delay, but it does not cause skew.

Dave - WB6DHW


The 74hc74 is made to divide by two by connecting it's /Q output to
the data pin. in turn the Q output becomes the clock for the next
stage. This has the inherent problem that the second counter doesn't
get a clock until the first stage has changed it's output, hence the
name "ripple". It has the following sequence

Clock arrives at FF 1
delay1
Q1 flips which clocks flip flop 2 if in the right direction delay2
Q2 changes if flip flop 1 changed in the right direction

There is a skew built into the whole arrangement, that delay2
between Q1 flipping and Q2 flipping

A 74HC109 JK flip flop works different, it has two inputs, J and K,
the clock that clocks flip flop 1 also clocks flip flop 2 and 3 ....
N, there is no delay 2

Clock arrive
delay
Q1 Flips, Q2 Flips if needed, Q3 Flips if needed....Qn flip if
needed.

In a "synchronous" counter all the Q output that need to change,
change simultaneously minimizing the delay between outputs, ergo you
can go to a higher frequency and the clocks will stay in phase.

You should use JK flip flops instead of synchronous binary counters
(a bunch of JK's inside one package) you get the same result, but
synchronous counters chips tend to be slower parts.

Here is a couple of links about it.

< > <
>
<

tml >
< >


At 03:13 PM 10/13/2005, KY1K wrote:
Hi Oliver,

Did some more digging in the archives here. I found a message from
KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>, who suggested the timing could be improved
with the use of a 74AC109 JK flip flop because it's synchronously
clocked, rather than a ripple counter.

I can't say whether the information is correct or not, but the
timing becomes very critical as one moves higher in frequency, so
anyone trying to push a softrock past 40 meters should consider
using the JK flip flop.

Here's the excerpt from his post to the QRP-L mailing list. Drop me
a line if you want the entire message.

---------------------------------------

KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>

On item 4, looking at the schematic the 74ac74 dual flip flop is
implementing a asynchronous ripple counter,as such there is a
built in delay between the outputs. The second stage does get a
clock signal until the first stage output has changed. Also
because they sequenced then the variations in propagation delay
adds to the second stage delay and gives you a larger variation
in timing. The way to minimize the timing is to make a
synchronous counter using a 74ac109 JK flip flop instead of a D
flip flop, in that case both flip flops are clocked
simultaneously and the output also change simultaneously. The
variation in the timing is the worst variation of the two instead
of the sum of the two.
----------------------------------------

Also, if you can wait for awhile before getting the DDS, you might
be interested in the 9958 instead of the 9950. It has much better
performance, much lower spur output, can work at higher frequencies
and uses much less power. It produces 2 outputs, which can be fine
tuned provide 90 degrees phase variance, which enables higher
receive frequencies and simplifies the receiver even more.

It's big brother, the AD9999 can produce 4 outputs, each output is
tweakable...which might interest some.

I know KK7P is going to release a dual 9854 DDS sometime soon, but
I know of no one who is working on the improved 9958 design.

I'd sure like to have a 9958 based DDS!

Regards,

Art







Yahoo! Groups Links



Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time
...






Yahoo! Groups Links












Yahoo! Groups Links










--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.0/132 - Release Date:
10/13/2005
Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...






Yahoo! Groups Links


 

After making my comment yesterday, I took a closer look at the SoftRock40
schematic. It is indeed connected as a ripple counter (Q from stage 1 goes to the
clock of stage 2). It is possible, however, to produce I and Q signals using D flip
flops in synchronous configuration. Qa goes to Db, /Qb goes to Da and the 2 clocks
are connected together. This produces a sequences of 00, 10, 11, 01 . While this
would work with conventional mixers, for use with the FST3126, this would have to
be additionally decoded.

Dave - WB6DHW

On 14 Oct 2005 at 11:19, S. Cash Olsen wrote:



-----Original Message-----
From: softrock40@... [mailto:softrock40@...] On
Behalf Of KD5NWA
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 9:29 PM
To: softrock40@...
Cc: softrock40@...
Subject: Re: [softrock40] Re: Replacement for OPA2228UA


Are you sure you know what a ripple counter is? A ripple counter is
made up of multiple D Flip Flops coupled one to the next. Both ripple
and synchronous counters use edge triggered flip flops but of different
kind.

Dave,
A synchronous counter and ripple counter can be made from exactly the
same flip-flop. The difference is that in a synchronous counter the
clocks of all flip-flops are tied together and driven by the same clock
source.

The 74hc74 is two D Flip Flop, a very useful device but very
difficult to implement anything but ripple counters with it when you
need anything but divide by two. Take a look at the specification
sheet and internal diagram of a ripple counter chip, there is nothing
in there but D Flip Flops.

Dave,
The above just simply is not true, the 74hc74 makes a fine synchronous
counter, you just have to connect it correctly.


Take a look the specs of a synchronous
counter, what do you have inside, multiple JK flip flops and "and
gates" if you have more than two stages.

Dave,
Again the above ain't necessarily so.


I put several references some explain why D Flip Flops are not
useful for high speed counters that have outputs that need to be
synchronized.

Dave,
Your references are amateurs (not professionals) and are full of wheats
(Barbara Strisand).


The Q or /Q has to be connected to the next stage to implement a
binary divide by 4 counter which is the subject of the discussion so
we can generate Quadrature signals. It is synchronous only when all
you want is divide by 2 once you try to past that then you have a
ripple counter.

To create a Digital Quadrature clock requires 2 clocks one 1/2 the
frequency of the other each with exactly 50% duty cycle and
synchronized to one another. That rules out a oscillator with a
divide by two stage, the built in clock skew will make high frequency
use difficult, specially if the oscillator operates over a wide range
of frequencies.

Dave,
Again the above just ain't so. In a synchronous counter a single clock
is required. It is exactly the clock skew that makes synchronous design
a highly desirable way to do it.


Since crystal oscillators generally don't put out a signal with a
perfect 50% duty cycle and another divide by two would cause clock
skew, the way that is the easiest is to have a clock at 4X and by
using a synchronous divide by 4 counter you can have signals that
keep their phase relationship to very high frequencies, much higher
than what two 74HC74 flip flops are capable off.

Dave,
It is exactly because the crystal oscillator is not necessarily
symmetrical that the synchronous counter is the preferred method. All
flip-flops clock on the same edge and the opposite edge is not used in
the circuit for any purpose.


You can create a beautiful Quadrature clock with D flip flops and 2X
clocks if you have a commercial oscillator module that has perfect
50%(they do it by having a divide by two circuit inside) duty cycle
with three D flip flops and several 74HC86 xor gates to act as a
clock doubler and delay to clock two of the flip flops to
re-synchronize the clock signals. You can do the same thing with JK
flip flops but you only need 2 flip flops.

Dave,
The way to make a perfectly symmetrical four (4) phase clock for this
purpose is a ring counter topology. The output of each flip-flop is
connected to one switch in the Tayloe modulator/demodulator. The ring
counter is made from two dual flip-flops, the 74hc74 would be a
perfectly good choice. The steering logic around the flip-flops is a
single gate. I think a 74hc20 would do the trick. A power on reset
circuit would be desirable but not necessary.

For the frequency range that most of you are interested in I think I
could build the clock source with an Atmel processor with four output
pins. Might even be more cost effective.

The design of synchronous logic is a whole design philosophy of it's own
but once you have used it a whole lot of problems go away. I have
designed some large synchronous clock designs and with more than 1500
flip-flips. The simulator for the chip used a similar number of 74hc00
flip-flops. This work was in the early 1970s. Not a J-K flip-flop in the
entire chip.

Cash KD5SSJ


At 10:00 PM 10/13/2005, brainerd@... wrote:
The 74HC74 is a synchronous dividor, NOT a ripple counter. If
the /Q was connected to the clock of the next
stage, it would be a ripple counter. Changing the D input does not
change the output until the next clock
pulse(assuming the delay in the 1st stage is less than the clock
time). The max frequency is limited by this
delay, but it does not cause skew.

Dave - WB6DHW


The 74hc74 is made to divide by two by connecting it's /Q output to
the data pin. in turn the Q output becomes the clock for the next
stage. This has the inherent problem that the second counter doesn't
get a clock until the first stage has changed it's output, hence the
name "ripple". It has the following sequence

Clock arrives at FF 1
delay1
Q1 flips which clocks flip flop 2 if in the right direction delay2
Q2 changes if flip flop 1 changed in the right direction

There is a skew built into the whole arrangement, that delay2
between Q1 flipping and Q2 flipping

A 74HC109 JK flip flop works different, it has two inputs, J and K,
the clock that clocks flip flop 1 also clocks flip flop 2 and 3 ....
N, there is no delay 2

Clock arrive
delay
Q1 Flips, Q2 Flips if needed, Q3 Flips if needed....Qn flip if
needed.

In a "synchronous" counter all the Q output that need to change,
change simultaneously minimizing the delay between outputs, ergo you
can go to a higher frequency and the clocks will stay in phase.

You should use JK flip flops instead of synchronous binary counters
(a bunch of JK's inside one package) you get the same result, but
synchronous counters chips tend to be slower parts.

Here is a couple of links about it.

< > <
>
<

tml >
< >


At 03:13 PM 10/13/2005, KY1K wrote:
Hi Oliver,

Did some more digging in the archives here. I found a message from
KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>, who suggested the timing could be improved
with the use of a 74AC109 JK flip flop because it's synchronously
clocked, rather than a ripple counter.

I can't say whether the information is correct or not, but the
timing becomes very critical as one moves higher in frequency, so
anyone trying to push a softrock past 40 meters should consider
using the JK flip flop.

Here's the excerpt from his post to the QRP-L mailing list. Drop me
a line if you want the entire message.

---------------------------------------

KD5NWA <kd5nwa@...>

On item 4, looking at the schematic the 74ac74 dual flip flop is
implementing a asynchronous ripple counter,as such there is a
built in delay between the outputs. The second stage does get a
clock signal until the first stage output has changed. Also
because they sequenced then the variations in propagation delay
adds to the second stage delay and gives you a larger variation
in timing. The way to minimize the timing is to make a
synchronous counter using a 74ac109 JK flip flop instead of a D
flip flop, in that case both flip flops are clocked
simultaneously and the output also change simultaneously. The
variation in the timing is the worst variation of the two instead
of the sum of the two.
----------------------------------------

Also, if you can wait for awhile before getting the DDS, you might
be interested in the 9958 instead of the 9950. It has much better
performance, much lower spur output, can work at higher frequencies
and uses much less power. It produces 2 outputs, which can be fine
tuned provide 90 degrees phase variance, which enables higher
receive frequencies and simplifies the receiver even more.

It's big brother, the AD9999 can produce 4 outputs, each output is
tweakable...which might interest some.

I know KK7P is going to release a dual 9854 DDS sometime soon, but
I know of no one who is working on the improved 9958 design.

I'd sure like to have a 9958 based DDS!

Regards,

Art







Yahoo! Groups Links



Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time
...






Yahoo! Groups Links












Yahoo! Groups Links










--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.0/132 - Release Date:
10/13/2005
Cecil Bayona
KD5NWA
www.qrpradio.com

I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...






Yahoo! Groups Links













Yahoo! Groups Links