WWVB remodulator for the spectracom 8170 the schematic is to large
Did take both lo-res and hi-res at 2 MB each. The low res are not that
useful 3-4 of the hi-res will tell you a lot. However please resist the
critiques on the dead bugs. :-)
Regards
Paul.
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 9:08 PM, paul swed paulswedb@gmail.com wrote:
Majdi
Thanks I will take some pix tomorrow work permitting and forward. Its dead
bug style so not pretty. But it sure does work.
Regards and thanks again
Paul
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Bob Camp lists@rtty.us wrote:
Hi
You could get rid of the inverter and nand gate by using an XOR (74HC86)
gate. You'd save at least 5 cents ….
Bob
On Jun 16, 2013, at 8:24 PM, "Majdi S. Abbas" msa@latt.net wrote:
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 05:43:18PM -0400, paul swed wrote:
OK no schematic. It was 2MB. But it was a scan of my notes. Happy to
post
to a sight or two. Can include some pictures also.
There's a copy here for those that are interested:
https://latt.net/wwvb%20remodulator%20spectracom%208170.jpg
Majdi
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
On 6/16/2013 2:43 PM, paul swed wrote:
OK no schematic. It was 2MB. But it was a scan of my notes. Happy to post
to a sight or two. Can include some pictures also.
I shrunk the schematic down to <100k and I think still quite readable.
Attempting to attach it to this posting.
By golly it is readable thanks. What did you use to shrink it?
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Rex rexa@sonic.net wrote:
On 6/16/2013 2:43 PM, paul swed wrote:
OK no schematic. It was 2MB. But it was a scan of my notes. Happy to post
to a sight or two. Can include some pictures also.
I shrunk the schematic down to <100k and I think still quite readable.
Attempting to attach it to this posting.
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Here is an even smaller version, at the same resolution. The trick is to
remove the background. Then all you have is mostly a plank sheet and a
small amount of ink that compresses very well.
What you do is adjust the contrast until you have only pure white and pure
black. That alone does 90% of the work. Save it as a monochrome file to
kill the color channels then set the JPG compression as strong as you can.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 5:21 AM, paul swed paulswedb@gmail.com wrote:
By golly it is readable thanks. What did you use to shrink it?
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Rex rexa@sonic.net wrote:
On 6/16/2013 2:43 PM, paul swed wrote:
OK no schematic. It was 2MB. But it was a scan of my notes. Happy to
post
to a sight or two. Can include some pictures also.
I shrunk the schematic down to <100k and I think still quite readable.
Attempting to attach it to this posting.
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@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@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
--
Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California
I'm looking at the schematic. I thought the goal was to get the 60KHz
signal from WWVB to the HP unit. This schematic sends an approximatly
60KHz signal from the tuning fork to the HP. but copies the AM modulation
from WWVB. So the 8170 does not look at the 60KHz carrier? and only cars
about the time code?
Maybe another way then is to bypasss the radio inside the 8170 and just
send the demodulated logic bit
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:08 PM, ken johnson bats059@gmail.com wrote:
Also now on my web site,
http://www.vk7krj.com/ham_stuff.htm
at the bottom of the page, along with some other time-nut type files.
And, once again, if anyone has any other time-nut files they would like to
see hosted on a web page, I am happy to oblige. Just email me.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Majdi S. Abbas msa@latt.net wrote:
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 05:43:18PM -0400, paul swed wrote:
OK no schematic. It was 2MB. But it was a scan of my notes. Happy to
post
to a sight or two. Can include some pictures also.
There's a copy here for those that are interested:
https://latt.net/wwvb%20remodulator%20spectracom%208170.jpg
Majdi
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@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@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
--
Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California
Thanks for the pix and to the comments.
Chris you can indeed hack the 8170 insides. On the 8170 its intended to be
a time receiver. So Spectracom simply re-used what they had already
developed for the other phase tracking receivers. Good business. But it
does not at all work as suggested. You have to introduce the carrier and
such so that both agc will work correctly. (Even though its fixed) and lock
comes on. Absolutely what I would do for a one off. However some folks
would prefer not to go into the operating room. Sounds like you are on your
way to a private hack. Let us all know how it turns out. It will work.
Regards
Paul.
WB8TSL
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Chris Albertson <albertson.chris@gmail.com
wrote:
Here is an even smaller version, at the same resolution. The trick is to
remove the background. Then all you have is mostly a plank sheet and a
small amount of ink that compresses very well.
What you do is adjust the contrast until you have only pure white and pure
black. That alone does 90% of the work. Save it as a monochrome file to
kill the color channels then set the JPG compression as strong as you can.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 5:21 AM, paul swed paulswedb@gmail.com wrote:
By golly it is readable thanks. What did you use to shrink it?
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Rex rexa@sonic.net wrote:
On 6/16/2013 2:43 PM, paul swed wrote:
OK no schematic. It was 2MB. But it was a scan of my notes. Happy to
post
to a sight or two. Can include some pictures also.
I shrunk the schematic down to <100k and I think still quite readable.
Attempting to attach it to this posting.
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@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@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
--
Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
On 6/17/2013 9:52 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
Here is an even smaller version, at the same resolution. The trick is to
remove the background. Then all you have is mostly a plank sheet and a
small amount of ink that compresses very well.
What you do is adjust the contrast until you have only pure white and pure
black. That alone does 90% of the work. Save it as a monochrome file to
kill the color channels then set the JPG compression as strong as you can.
That is basically the steps I used to make my version, except the jpg
encoding. Jpg is great for photos but not ideal for line art. If you
zoom into the jpg version you will see clouds of noise around the line
features. Gif doesn't do that.
When I made my gif version last night I used 64-level grayscale. That's
more than necessary. I just tried a version with 8-level grayscale and
the file size went from 95k to 43k.
Of course the other key compression was reducing resolution. The
original was 6600 x 5100 pixels. I cut down to 1400 x 1082 which still
may be a bit more than needed.
This is a bit off-topic for the group, though.