Author Topic: Phase Locked Loop (Read 15413 times)

angryScientist · « **on:** October 03, 2007, 10:19:13 AM »

To really close the loop you need to lock it in phase.

Quote

In the 1940s, the first widespread use of the phase-locked loop was in the synchronization of the horizontal and vertical sweep oscillators in television receivers to the transmitted sync pulses. Such circuits carried the names "Synchro-Lock" and "Synchro-Guide."

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/pll/pll.html

Last night I was working on another project with some friends of mine having to do with water. Looking at some schematics that my buddy had I was a bit confused because none of the functional block were labeled or gave any indication of there function.

In trying to get a more stable frequency generator for our project I started digging into phase locked loop technology because it has very good frequency stability, one of the best. That is when I recognized the functional blocks of a pll. It was used as a resonant frequency tracker to lock on to a varying resonance.

It finally dawned on me that the feed back could be used as the measuring stick of a ring and the oscillator could be tuned spot on to that harmonic. Or if preferred, the PLL could be made to tune to the side of the frequency.

I'm wondering if S. Mark made many suggestions toward the use of a simple Phase-Locked Loop as the circuit controller.

http://schematics.blogspot.com/2005/01/pll-using-4046.html

I did a search of the forum but I did not find one reference referring to phase-locked loops.

giantkiller · « **Reply #1 on:** October 03, 2007, 03:31:10 PM »

The PLL could be made to tune to the side of the frequency.

Nuff said, amigo.

--giantkiller.

BEP · « **Reply #2 on:** October 03, 2007, 04:47:05 PM »

Not even that complicated a blocking oscillator syncs to external signals and can be made to lead or lag

During wind-up it can push or aid and near the critical point it can switch to hold-back.

angryScientist · « **Reply #3 on:** October 03, 2007, 07:05:14 PM »

I was surprised to see the similarities of this circuit to what is needed.

(http://www.rexresearch.com/meyerhy/wo92-1.jpg)
http://www.rexresearch.com/meyerhy/wo92.htm

I think that Stanley Meyer might have discovered the secret of a toroidal power unit.

If you set up a standing wave in a toroidal core then you have something that is akin to a Tesla coil. Except it is quite a bit simpler when you don't have to worry about the matching the electrical resonance (ie. capacitance and inductance) to the physical resonance (ie. physical length of the wire).All you need to match is the physical resonance.

By using a feed back coil it will give you the right frequency you need to match that core without having to guess.

angryScientist · « **Reply #4 on:** October 04, 2007, 06:25:05 PM »

This is the chip that I am going to start out on. I just happen to have one that I picked up from Radio Shack. They seem to be very common and easy to obtain. Also there is a lot of documentation and examples of how to use this chip on the internet.

74HCT4046A Datasheet
http://www.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/pdf/184467/TI/CD74HCT4046A.html

I was looking for a simple circuit using triode vacuum tubes that would act as a Phase-locked loop.

http://mysite.du.edu/~etuttle/electron/elect36.htm
(http://mysite.du.edu/~etuttle/electron/circ310.gif)

Quote

It is possible to synchronize the oscillations with an external sine wave by applying the external sine wave at the grid of the left-hand triode, coupled through a capacitor. If you do this (not using the differentiating RC circuit), trigger the scope on the signal from the signal generator and observe both the synchronizing and output signals. The frequency can be varied over a considerable range around 2 kHz, and the multivibrator will be phase locked to the synchronizing signal. Synchronization can also be obtained at multiples of the multivibrator's natural frequency, as well as with a string of pulses instead of a sine wave. Note the phase relations as the frequency of the synchronizing signal is varied. It is like a phase-locked loop in effect, but the operation is quite different.

I will throw this is just for fun. I didn't go over this document with a fine toothed comb but maybe someone will find some goodies in it.

Three-Frequency Resonances in Coupled Phase-Locked Loops
http://lec.ugr.es/~julyan/papers/ieee.pdf

olympios · « **Reply #5 on:** October 08, 2007, 07:25:45 AM »

I have seen something similar designed by Bob Boyce. He did not disclose the construction of the toroid though due to dangers involved.

AhuraMazda · « **Reply #6 on:** October 08, 2007, 11:15:46 PM »

@olympios
Look at Patrick Kelly's D9, page 11.

angryScientist · « **Reply #7 on:** October 10, 2007, 08:52:56 AM »

Thanks AhuraMazda

It's still kind of funny to me how all these projects are related. Here's the link to it by the way.
http://pesn.com/2007/09/29/9500450_BobBoyce_Electrolizer_Plans/d9.pdf

I now know where my friend got his numbers from. We'll have to do some in depth sweeps to find out for sure.

Also I found some information that has to do with this type of project. This is much of what I had in mind for the simple fact of the tuning. The information about the Phase locked loop circuit is helpful as well.

4 interacting Tesla coils
http://members.aol.com/alansharp03/Quad.htm

Good info on connecting FETs to a tuned circuit

Quote

OK, I do know some things:Use transmission line construction techniques.

Keep ALL connections to FETs SHORT (like less than 1/8 inch) to FET body.

Use RC snubbers on each FET to protect from kickback and parasitics.We had zeners as well.

Cross your fingers.

You can run the FETs at their ratings. It just must be done right. You must stop all ringing and spurs. I have never experienced kickback from the secondary as I have in sparkgap TCs.

Quote

The circuit itself is quite involved and was not designed by me. The main problem was FETs blowing up like firecrackers. They require heavy output snubbing and transmission line construction techniques to keep parasitics under control. Not a project for the faint of heart (or budget). Mine was VERY expensive. I would not do it again.

The H-bridge made of 16 FETs fed the primary winding directly with no primary capacitor. This means the system had only one resonant frequency instead of two and made things much much friendlier. The coupling was tight (link type coupling) and the resonant nature of the secondary reflected back into the primary winding presenting a load that is purely resistive (mostly) at resonance. Power regulation was had by slight FMing of the carrier frequency (detuning).

Good luck Zap, Mark

http://members.aol.com/alansharp03/Bartons.htm

Correct me if I'm wrong, the toroid is wound around a core bundle of wire. So the core is like the secondary and we are trying to tune to it. Not to mention add another harmonic or two.

That is a bit simplistic but it hits most most of the main points I understand.

giantkiller · « **Reply #8 on:** October 17, 2007, 04:07:33 AM »

That is exactly what I did and the results are phenominal.
A totally configurable core to any shape. That is why I did it and it works.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1872.msg21437.html#msg21437
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1872.0;attach=4962;image)

--giantkiller.

bolt · « **Reply #9 on:** October 17, 2007, 06:05:53 AM »

No need to worry about PLL at this time as no one has yet seen anything that resembles extra power. Wait till you get a big bang then quickly write down the frequencies and then worry about PLL later

AhuraMazda · « **Reply #10 on:** October 17, 2007, 07:48:56 AM »

@bolt
I don't believe there are any exact frequencies. each and every coil is unique. If there were any exact frequencies, I would wait till you come up with it!

AM

giantkiller · « **Reply #11 on:** October 17, 2007, 05:48:28 PM »

Quote from: bolt on October 17, 2007, 06:05:53 AM

No need to worry about PLL at this time as no one has yet seen anything that resembles extra power. Wait till you get a big bang then quickly write down the frequencies and then worry about PLL later

Will I survive the blast long enough to be coherent? Or will my coherency shift to another plane?

--giantkiller.

angryScientist · « **Reply #12 on:** October 30, 2007, 06:36:53 PM »

I fried my PLL the other day. It was a result of having another datasheet in mind when I was hooking up power. The chip was not rated for 12Volts.

I'll put in an order to get some 18Volt chips.

Quote

No need to worry about PLL at this time as no one has yet seen anything that resembles extra power. Wait till you get a big bang then quickly write down the frequencies and then worry about PLL later Smiley

That is why I think the PLL could be useful. It could lock right on to the right frequency, depending on the physical location of the pickup coil on the toroid.

The frequencies will be higher with the smaller cores.

Diameter of coil times Pi gives the length of the coil (for one loop)

Speed of light / wave length = frequency
*( The speed of light through copper is about 94% the speed of light through a vacuum)

I'm thinking it would be easier to reach the harmonic wave length of the coil if the coil where bigger. Oh well, we'll see.

angryScientist · « **Reply #13 on:** November 06, 2007, 02:51:14 AM »

I just got my order from mouser. I tell ya I am beaming. I can see that my workbench is a mes. I guess I'll have to clean up a bit befor I can get started.

angryScientist · « **Reply #14 on:** November 12, 2007, 06:07:16 PM »

Well here is where I'm at.

Like I said before, I received my new PLL's. I also got a few decade counters at the same time. (MC14046BCPG and MC14017BCPC for the recored)

I built my frequency generator. It worked as expected. Here is a brief description;
I took the output from the VCO section and fed it into the frequency divider section. I used two decade counters in series for an effective divide by 100. I fed the divided signal into one side of the comparator section. Into the other side of the comparator I fed a frequency that I generate with my SX microcontroller. The PLL locks onto the microcontroller signal but is 100 times the frequency.

So I have my little frequency generator with digital push button control. Cool cool.

But, (there is always one of those) it will only go up to 1.2MHz. Way, way too slow for smaller TPU's

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Phase Locked Loop (Read 15413 times)

angryScientist

Phase Locked Loop

giantkiller

Re: Phase Locked Loop

BEP

Re: Phase Locked Loop

angryScientist

Re: Phase Locked Loop

angryScientist

Re: Phase Locked Loop

olympios

Re: Phase Locked Loop

AhuraMazda

Re: Phase Locked Loop

angryScientist

Re: Phase Locked Loop

giantkiller

Re: Phase Locked Loop

bolt

Re: Phase Locked Loop

AhuraMazda

Re: Phase Locked Loop

giantkiller

Re: Phase Locked Loop

angryScientist

Re: Phase Locked Loop

angryScientist

Re: Phase Locked Loop

angryScientist

Re: Phase Locked Loop