Date
1 - 20 of 36
AD9850/51 module pc boards
|
Jim Pruitt
I have several AD9850 samples. I wonder if anyone knows where I can find the gerbers for the module pc boards themselves? I would prefer to make my own and use my existing stash of chips rather than pay the high price they are going for these days. So far I have not found that layout. Someone on the QRP-Tech group said it might be open source since the Si5351 module layout is open source but I have no clue how to even search for that as Google has not been my friend on this so far!
Thank you. Jim Pruitt WA7DUY
|
|
|
|
Maybe you can buy an unpopulated DDS-60 Daughtercard board from Midnight Design Solutions here:
https://midnightdesignsolutions.com/dds60/index.html The DDS board is described here also: http://cwtd.org/Jun4.html -- Dave - AC2GL All typing errors are my own work and subject to copyright laws, except errors by the spell checker which are open source.
|
|
|
|
EB4APL
There is a problem with this board, it is used in another version of the PHSNA (DDS-60 and Arduino Nano) so you will need the main board for it.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Regards, Ignacio, EB4APL
El 28/09/2018 a las 19:27, Dave Hartman via Groups.Io escribió:
Maybe you can buy an unpopulated DDS-60 Daughtercard board from Midnight Design Solutions here:
|
|
|
|
Jim Pruitt
The DDS60 is a totally different footprint than the AD9850 modules and will not work for my application.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thank you. Jim Pruitt WA7DUY
On 9/28/2018 10:27 AM, Dave Hartman via Groups.Io wrote:
Maybe you can buy an unpopulated DDS-60 Daughtercard board from Midnight Design Solutions here:
|
|
|
|
Terry VK5TM
Type 1 or 2?
I have one (single row of pins each side) without the filter components on board 3/4 done which I mentioned in an email to Jim a little while ago. Give me a day or so and I will post it in the files section, but would appreciate someone just doing a double check to make sure here are no errors.
|
|
|
|
Terry VK5TM
Here is a preliminary 3 pics of the pcb, combined top and bottom layers, top only and bottom only.
Nothing is set in concrete, so changes can be made. The other style module version could also be done. Couple of points to note: Obvious one is there is no on-board filter. The output is through a 1:1 transformer (Coilcraft), this can be changed, but the transformer gives a better output signal both level wise and harmonic suppression wise. There are some either/or components depending on whether the square wave output is required, these will be explained fully if this goes any further than just an idea. Most smd components are 0805 sized rather than the smaller size on the current modules.
|
|
|
|
Steven Dick
Looks good. I like the coilcraft transformer on-board as I have used one myself (Coilcraft WB1-6TSLB)
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
and it allows good wideband performance and adequate output power for me with a lowpass filter and no output power amp which adds harmonics. Some of those amps are marginal, some can oscillate if the layout is not adequate. There is a problem with the xtal oscillator on EBAY AD9851 type II boards. For the ebay modules. the AD9851 was running off 5 volts but its crystal oscillator also ran on 5 volts but was only rated for 3.3v. Make sure the xtal oscillator is really compatible with 5V input voltage. for AD9850, 125 MHz oscillator labelled MCO 1510A 125 MHz TQG-9h is a 5 volt oscillator made by Shenzhen Great Electronics. Data sheet: http://www.szgreat.com/UploadFiles/2010322153029.pdf For AD9851, 30 MHz oscillator Type II AD9851 boards are labelled CETDCJ 30 032. They are made by Taiten Electronics. It is a 3.3V oscillator, much to my dismay. One of them already failed. See part numbering guide: http://www.taitien.com.tw/db/download/Model%20Numbering%20Guide_XO.pdf I ordered a CTS CB3-3C-30M0000 which is rated for 5V. Mouser sells them: https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/CTS-Electronic-Components/CB3-3C-30M0000?qs=HL%252bYNjdyZ0s2KrBi4NmH2g%3D%3D See file https://groups.io/g/PHSNA/files/K1RF/Bandpass%20Filter%20measurement%20anomalies%20R2.pdf discussing output amplifier and file https://groups.io/g/PHSNA/files/K1RF/Expected%20power%20output%20from%20Type%20II%20PHSNA.pdf -Steve K1RF
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry VK5TM Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:10 PM To: PHSNA@groups.io Subject: Re: [PHSNA] AD9850/51 module pc boards Here is a preliminary 3 pics of the pcb, combined top and bottom layers, top only and bottom only. Nothing is set in concrete, so changes can be made. The other style module version could also be done. Couple of points to note: Obvious one is there is no on-board filter. The output is through a 1:1 transformer (Coilcraft), this can be changed, but the transformer gives a better output signal both level wise and harmonic suppression wise. There are some either/or components depending on whether the square wave output is required, these will be explained fully if this goes any further than just an idea. Most smd components are 0805 sized rather than the smaller size on the current modules.
|
|
|
|
Terry VK5TM
I think if the oscillator module has to be replaced, it should be replaced with a TCXO.
It is surprising how much change in frequency there is with just a light draft across the oscillator, even just breathing on them can produce a shift of more than 100Hz.
|
|
|
|
Steven Dick
I think you'll be hard pressed finding a TCXO that runs on 5V.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-Steve K1RF
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry VK5TM Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 7:29 AM To: PHSNA@groups.io Subject: Re: [PHSNA] AD9850/51 module pc boards I think if the oscillator module has to be replaced, it should be replaced with a TCXO. It is surprising how much change in frequency there is with just a light draft across the oscillator, even just breathing on them can produce a shift of more than 100Hz.
|
|
|
|
Henning Weddig
Terry,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Your pcb looks awfully good! Especially that You have included an output transformer whcih is already suggested in an Analog Devices app note. For the 125 Mhz osc: I think there is still some space left to include a 3V3 LDO for the xtal osc. To my knowledge most of the xtal oscs and especially the SMD types are for 3V3. I am sure Your board will be a bestseller as the chinese units are getting up and up in price. 73 Henning Weddig DK5LV Am 29.09.2018 um 04:10 schrieb Terry VK5TM:
Here is a preliminary 3 pics of the pcb, combined top and bottom layers, top only and bottom only.
|
|
|
|
Tony Jaques
Hi all,
Three things: One is that if the distortion introduced by an AD8008 output stage can not be tolerated the perhaps the AD985x device is not a good enough starting point. (Search the files for "an investigation into output stages" - or something close to it. The second is that modifying the module to give the oscillator a 3.3 volts supply. Again there is a message somewhere in which I show my solution to that. A search in messages might find it, but i no longer remember what the subject line was. A third comment is that, if you have a 'scope, do make sure that you allow for Gary A Winblad's sweep modification later, even if you don't add it to start with. I agree - very nicely done board layout Terry. Tony Jaques (G3PTD)
|
|
|
|
Terry VK5TM
I've seen at least three different options for using 3.3v oscillator modules on 5V boards, namely:
a couple of series diodes a 47 ohm resistor a proper 3.3v regulator. The first two options work, but do have their own problems, so I will go with the third option of a 3.3v LDO reg. I will use the LP2985 which is rated at 150mA so will cope with a TCXO and is readily available at Mouser. And just in case anybody is wondering why not run the whole thing at 3.3v, the AD9850/51 is not specced to run at it's maximum possible osc speed at 3.3v. While they do and are being run in that condition on the modules, current consumption and heat generation are increased markedly.
|
|
|
|
Terry VK5TM
Updated pics with the 3.3v reg underneath the Xtal osc.
I have moved some things around to shorten the length of tracks between IC output, transformer and pin at the edge of the pcb. Will leave this alone for a day or two, firstly so any comments can be added/updated and secondly, I find getting away from a design sometimes suggests improvements that can be made or something shows that has been missed (like a power track missing in the first set of pics).
|
|
|
|
William R Maxwell
Nicely done Terry. I'll certainly take a couple once you get to production.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Bill VK7MX
On 30/09/2018 1:34 PM, Terry VK5TM wrote:
Updated pics with the 3.3v reg underneath the Xtal osc.
|
|
|
|
Henning Weddig
Terry,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I am missing a lof of decoupling caps close to the Vcc pins of the AD9850. Plöease have a look on the AD9850 data sheet, a lot of .1 µF caps are used there, althoug not easily seen where they belong to. My guess as they are on the bottom side they are close to the AD9850 pins too. Another hint: the Analog Devicers app note "A Technical Tutorial on Digital Signal Synthesis" from page 45 on gives good reasons to use a transformer on the DAC outputs! Henning Weddig DK5LV Am 30.09.2018 um 05:34 schrieb Terry VK5TM:
Updated pics with the 3.3v reg underneath the Xtal osc.
|
|
|
|
Henning Weddig
Terry,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
anohter idea: i just read in an Analog Devices app note that the jitter of the reference clock has a large influence of the overlall jitter performance of the DDS. From my own experience a well regulated and low noise supply to the xtal osc and also TCXO will improve the phase nosie performance of the reference clock and therefore minimize the jitter. The best known low noise regualtor is the LT3045-- unfortunately not cheap and sometimes hard to get due its large demand. Another idiea ist o use a "super cap" i.e. an emitter follower with a large cap from the the base to ground. This cap will be multipleid wth the hfe of the transistor. I had the idea for a piggy back pcb on the chinese units, but never tried. See the attached schematic file. Henning Am 30.09.2018 um 05:34 schrieb Terry VK5TM:
Updated pics with the 3.3v reg underneath the Xtal osc.
|
|
|
|
Steven Dick
I would recommend the TI TLV75733PDBVR for a 5V to 3.3V regulator. It uses an SOT23-5 package, is relatively low noise, and inexpensive (.86 at Mouser.) I have used the 5V version with excellent results. The "super cap" is a good circuit but doesn't help high frequency performance. It is best used in low frequency power supply applications. simple regulator will more than do the job in a compact and low cost solution. Here's a link to the Mouser part:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Texas-Instruments/TLV75733PDBVR?qs=sGAEpiMZZMsGz1a6aV8DcD1rpA6FsR3JV0%2fewXLxMYU%3d -Steve K1RF
-----Original Message-----
From: Henning Weddig via Groups.Io Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2018 7:37 AM To: PHSNA@groups.io Subject: Re: [PHSNA] AD9850/51 module pc boards Terry, anohter idea: i just read in an Analog Devices app note that the jitter of the reference clock has a large influence of the overlall jitter performance of the DDS. From my own experience a well regulated and low noise supply to the xtal osc and also TCXO will improve the phase nosie performance of the reference clock and therefore minimize the jitter. The best known low noise regualtor is the LT3045-- unfortunately not cheap and sometimes hard to get due its large demand. Another idiea ist o use a "super cap" i.e. an emitter follower with a large cap from the the base to ground. This cap will be multipleid wth the hfe of the transistor. I had the idea for a piggy back pcb on the chinese units, but never tried. See the attached schematic file. Henning Am 30.09.2018 um 05:34 schrieb Terry VK5TM: Updated pics with the 3.3v reg underneath the Xtal osc.
|
|
|
|
Terry VK5TM
Henning,
There are two decoupling caps right at the chip on the underside of the pcb, I can't get them any closer without cutting the top off and mounting them on the die :) <-smiley face Another one next to the V+ pin on the underside and the 10µF next to the other V+ pin. Looking at the evaluation board, which has much longer supply lines, it only has one more than this around the DDS chip, the others are associated with the interface chips. Re the supply to the xtal osc, the LP2985 is listed as a low noise regulator and I believe should be more than adequate. It is well decoupled and again is on the underside of the pcb. I did some digging through Analog's forums and engineering notes today and one thing that I noticed was that, in their own words, some of their recommendations for decoupling, seperate ground planes etc was somewhat over the top and simpler schemes made no noticeable difference. Re oscillator phase noise, well you're already hindered by the limitations of the AD9850 to begin with, so I can't see using ultra pure regulators and massive amounts of decoupling are going to do anything useful. I could be wrong, which wouldn't be anything unusual, but I don't think so in this case. The obvious proviso is of course to use a good quality Xtal Osc module. The test will be to build a couple and compare them against the standard module and rework it if necessary.
|
|
|
|
Terry VK5TM
Steve,
Same package and pinout as the LP2985, so a straight drop-in. Quick look at the datasheet shows not much difference between the two other than 1A verses 150mA
|
|
|
|
Steven Dick
LP2985 is an excellent part. go for it.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-Steve K1RF
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry VK5TM Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2018 8:58 AM To: PHSNA@groups.io Subject: Re: [PHSNA] AD9850/51 module pc boards Henning, There are two decoupling caps right at the chip on the underside of the pcb, I can't get them any closer without cutting the top off and mounting them on the die :) <-smiley face Another one next to the V+ pin on the underside and the 10µF next to the other V+ pin. Looking at the evaluation board, which has much longer supply lines, it only has one more than this around the DDS chip, the others are associated with the interface chips. Re the supply to the xtal osc, the LP2985 is listed as a low noise regulator and I believe should be more than adequate. It is well decoupled and again is on the underside of the pcb. I did some digging through Analog's forums and engineering notes today and one thing that I noticed was that, in their own words, some of their recommendations for decoupling, seperate ground planes etc was somewhat over the top and simpler schemes made no noticeable difference. Re oscillator phase noise, well you're already hindered by the limitations of the AD9850 to begin with, so I can't see using ultra pure regulators and massive amounts of decoupling are going to do anything useful. I could be wrong, which wouldn't be anything unusual, but I don't think so in this case. The obvious proviso is of course to use a good quality Xtal Osc module. The test will be to build a couple and compare them against the standard module and rework it if necessary.
|
|
|