Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Full Wave Synchronous Detector

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Full Wave Synchronous Detector

    If you want to use full wave synchrounous demodulation in an IB the most usual approach is to have differential receiver outputs, and then use a dual phase clock and two SPST switches for each channel - or use a single phase clock with one SPDT switch for each channel.

    Either how you do it means your PCB layout will be substantially more complex than if you were to use half wave detection.

    However, there is another way. It could fairly easily be applied to one channel of, say for instance, the all-metal channel of a Tesoro Lobo. Doing only one channel would minimize the additional work involved with routing the board because the modification could be localized to one relatively small area of the PCB.

    It is desirable to start with a MD that outputs a fairly clean transmit reference voltage. Not intending to slight the Tesoro Bandito, but its clock signal is perhaps too un-symmetrical for best results with this mod. 50/50 clock symmetry is ideal, of course.

    This circuit is based on an application taken from TI INA105 datasheet called "Digitally Controlled Gain of ±1 Amplifier". If you clock it at your received frequency it becomes a fullwave synchronous detector. I figure I'll add this to the All-Metal channel of my LOBO clone that's in work. Simple enough.

    Preferably you'll use an opamp with respectable slew rate; just how fast should depend on your frequency of interest. When the amplification factor changes from + to - the output signal is driven to the opposite polarity, and the quicker, the better. The LT6220 is rated at 20V/us and I'll use it at 20kc. It's none too fast, but only draws about ±1.2ma.
    Attached Files

  • #2
    did you do this to your tesoro?


    s

    Comment


    • #3
      I can finish some things but it seems like making a metal detector isn't one of them. (That will soon change).

      I'm running out of excuses not to finish a Royal Sabre (light). Have recently acquired some better tools, but can not use any etchant indoors and I'm waiting for warmer weather.

      Whites 6000 style of demodulator looks like better than what I started with. I think it puts less demand on the amplifier (?), and the demodulator / first filter is rolled into one. It's not like I know anything about designing the filter, but I'll throw something together and hammer out the bugs however I can.

      Is it even worth the trouble to work in a full wave demodulator? I dunno, but I've got a bunch of DG419's and SOT-23 package opamps. Full-wave demodulators can be scattered around the board, no problem, and I've had a PCB pattern ready for some time now. I probably go back and make some changes to the circuit but hopefully I won't be ripping everything up starting over (but knowing me, that will happen). A lot of areas to rework.

      But I really dread fabricating a PCB. My Lexmark printer often cruds up artwork. And then when I get good artwork I don't look forward to ironing on the double sided image keeping everything straight.

      edit: I've started many variations on this theme. So many, I have a problem with version control and organization.
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        I know what you mean about finishing things, I have trouble starting things now!

        "Is it even worth the trouble to work in a full wave demodulator? I dunno,"

        I think so, all of the cheapest units through time have had the 1/2 wave rectifier style demods - these put through the Rx signal only at 1/2 the rate.


        The differential input det (from op amp buffer and op amp invertor (cheap transformer) ) with something like a 4053 is more on the mid range machines _ and in my opinion is 'standard'.

        Single ended dets hark back to the AM radio with a diode det.. Bit pants.


        Ive heard eduardo mention it did freshen up his IDX - the result was eing able to sweep a little quicker. You get twice the signal throughput per unit time, for only a tiny bit of extra noise.
        This will help flush signal though the filters quicker in order for the comparator to make a descision on amplitude a little quicker.

        S

        Comment


        • #5
          You could, if you are keen to play with it, make an extension board that could be fitted to the existing DIL socket of a 4066 switch, and provide you with full wave switching. It can be done for practically all the existing half wave rigs. You could call this add on a "spa treatment" and I'm sure it would rid your trusty rig some falses. With enough interest we can make it here on Geotech. I'd do it for my IGSL anyway but only ikebana style. With enough interest I'd make a real PCB. It can be made fairly universal to fit all the xGSLs, IDX, Cobras etc.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Davor View Post
            You could, if you are keen to play with it, make an extension board that could be fitted to the existing DIL socket of a 4066 switch, and provide you with full wave switching. It can be done for practically all the existing half wave rigs. You could call this add on a "spa treatment" and I'm sure it would rid your trusty rig some falses. With enough interest we can make it here on Geotech. I'd do it for my IGSL anyway but only ikebana style. With enough interest I'd make a real PCB. It can be made fairly universal to fit all the xGSLs, IDX, Cobras etc.

            Sure, I was thinking the same.

            I started making a tatty prototype at lunch time using a 4053 - but I bought a small surface mount chip so its painfully slow under a uscope..

            Maybe get chance to try in a weeks time. Need to prep a test bed like Dons, to get a feel if it is any faster on the sweep.


            S

            Comment


            • #7
              Sweep time is related to a gain block filter action. Full wave switching effectively reduces the input resistance to a gain block by half, hence the time constant is affected to shift the maximum response upwards. Ergo faster sweeps. Nothing fabulous about it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Davor View Post
                Sweep time is related to a gain block filter action. Full wave switching effectively reduces the input resistance to a gain block by half, hence the time constant is affected to shift the maximum response upwards. Ergo faster sweeps. Nothing fabulous about it.
                If it wasnt worth having, half of the detectors on the planet wouldnt have it and all radios would be AM with a diode detector - Ergo my sweet aunties phanny


                If you were ever detecting alongside 200 other people - most of them running with deus fast - you wouldnt go home with many finds with an igsl, tgsl, or idx.


                S

                Comment


                • #9
                  True, that's why I will make a sort of daughter board to plug instead of 4066 in my IGSL that will make it full wave. My previous post went on the design point of view where you must account for effective impedance when designing a switched circuit of any kind.

                  BTW my IGSL is lightning fast. So far I did not compare it to Deus in the field (due to a bit complicated situation with detectors in Croatia), but from a few videos of Deus in action I can conclude that Deus is using the same approach in gain channels as I do in my mods.

                  Deus also has a bit better audio, but that's another story. I'm about to make an audio circuit better than Deus.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Single ended dets hark back to the AM radio with a diode det.. Bit pants.
                    I have no qualms about using diodes in a circuit for one thing or another. It just depends on what I am trying to accomplish. Sticking in a 4053 may not necessarily be any better than a diode switch. In fact, in more than one instance a diode switch will perform better than a 40xx switch (which really are just a couple of cmos fets inside a plastic case).

                    If I worked for a manufacturer, I'd absolutely would freaking love diodes. Because they're going to be cheaper than cmos switches (If you make 10,000 units and save $1 on parts per board, that's an extra $10,000 in your pocket!). I "get" that the switches are not the same and have different performance characteristics, but there simply may not be any meaningful payback with going with the more expensive part(s). Plus, if for some reason the diodes are not as good, many times that can usually be compensated for elsewhere in the circuit. It boils down to a bunch of math that I'm not going to delve into here.

                    But I just thought of an interesting challenge - come up with the best discriminating VLF detector circuit for $10. I betcha you'd be using diodes then! Maybe there could be prizes....

                    As a side note, AM/FM transmissions are modulated with "pre-emphasis" to help compensate for circuit noise, and a HiFi AM stereo scheme of the 80's used diode detectors.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      There are good reasons for using diodes. When working with designs, the board houses usually pay per component placed, and hand mounted through hole stuff is increasingly expensive. It's going to be as many integrated devices per package as possible.

                      Diodes were fast enough for the job as radio receiver rectifying detectors, but with comparably fresh devices and comparably low frequencies, full wave integrating has so many advantages over half wave averaging detection that it's kind of moot to discuss it further. Whether it's a sound design choice depends on how many dB it helps overall performance, and the question of manufacturing cost.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X