[time-nuts] DMTD was: high rev isolation amps

Bob Stewart bob at evoria.net
Wed May 11 22:37:46 EDT 2016


Hi Bob,

OK, I can see that.  I had been wondering about how to build it out, but it seems like each module should be on its own PCB for isolation.  That keeps the costs down, except for the numerous SMA jumpers - and the eventual big box.

Bob
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 5/11/16, Bob Camp <kb8tq at n1k.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [time-nuts] DMTD was: high rev isolation amps
 To: "Bob Stewart" <bob at evoria.net>, "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" <time-nuts at febo.com>
 Date: Wednesday, May 11, 2016, 8:44 PM
 
 Hi
 
 For extra added “Time Nut” grade fun:
 
 Clip the collector lead off of
 the SOT-223 packages (between emitter and base leads). You
 probably will gain a couple of db of isolation. (running
 common base).
 
 Bob
 
 > On May 11, 2016, at 8:24 PM, Bob Stewart
 <bob at evoria.net>
 wrote:
 > 
 > Hi Bob et
 al,
 > 
 > I'm
 finally drawing up a schematic for a DMTD and I thought
 I'd use the NBS circuits for a lot of it.  So, how
 about PZT3904 transistors in the isolation amps? 
 They're in SOT-223 with the heat sink tab.
 > 
 > I figure to use some
 version of the TUF-1 for the DBMs.  The first version will
 be a bit breadboardish.  I'll use the PRS-45A as the
 reference oscillator and the 8640B as the offset
 oscillator.  If it's workable, then I thought I'd
 put an Analog Devices DDS onboard with a small PIC to set it
 up.  I haven't gotten as far as the zero-crossing
 detectors yet, but I was thinking of using 125 gates.
 > 
 > Bob
 >
 --------------------------------------------
 > On Tue, 3/29/16, Bob Camp <kb8tq at n1k.org>
 wrote:
 > 
 > Subject:
 Re: [time-nuts] high rev isolation amps
 >
 To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency
 measurement" <time-nuts at febo.com>
 > Date: Tuesday, March 29, 2016, 6:08 PM
 > 
 > Hi
 > 
 > There were (and
 maybe still are) SOT-89 versions of the
 >
 2N3804 and 3906. They will handle more
 >
 power than most of the other versions. That gives you
 better
 > Vce on the string. They also
 have less
 > package inductance which
 helps tie the base to ground. If
 > you
 are building some of those circuits, they
 > are worth looking for.
 > 
 > Bob
 > 
 >> On Mar 29, 2016,
 at 6:47 AM, Charles Steinmetz <csteinmetz at yandex.com>
 > wrote:
 >> 
 >> See below for schematics of the NIST
 isolation
 > amplifiers from 1990 and
 1997.  NIST reported the
 > isolation as
 >120dB.
 >> 
 >> I built isolation amplifiers similar
 to these (with
 > lower-noise power
 supplies and biasing tinkered slightly for
 > better dynamic range), and with careful
 construction
 > achieved isolation
 substantially better than 120dB (see my
 >
 post of 11/25/14 for more details).
 >>
 
 >> Best regards,
 >> 
 >> Charles
 >> 
 >
 <NIST_120dB_isolation_amplifier_schematic_email.gif><Iso_amp_NIST_schematic_with_values_5MHz_1997_email.gif>_______________________________________________
 >> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
 >> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
 >> and follow the instructions there.
 > 
 >
 _______________________________________________
 > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
 > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
 > and follow the instructions there.
 >
 _______________________________________________
 > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
 > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
 > and follow the instructions there.


More information about the time-nuts mailing list