FM Transmitter analysis

It has been far too long since my last update and so I decided to do a cursory analysis of an FM radio transmitter (the kind you would use to listen to your MP3 player in a vehicle which lacks an input port).

FM Transmitter Model: JH-CMWT104

FM Transmitter Model: JH-CMWT104

The transmitter under test is one which I purchased many years ago and bears the model number: JH-CMWT104. It is a 12v device and so I am using my converted ATX PSU to power the unit with a clean (verified by oscilloscope) +12v. The test bench included a Rigol DSA815-TG spectrum analyzer and a DG1022 arbitrary function generator.

Local test-bench background radio noise for comparison

Test-bench establishing local background radio noise for signal comparison

The first step was to establish local RF background measurements / spectrogram for later comparison. As an antenna, the test bench used a 1m collapsible whip antenna connected via BNC-to-N adapter with a 90° elbow.

A quick look at the resulting spectrogram (50Mhz to 550MHz span, RBW/VBW 3kHz) shows the FM broadcast band indicated in the lower portion of the display.

FM transmitter 100MHz unmodulated showing multiple odd harmonics

FM transmitter 100MHz unmodulated showing multiple harmonics

With the background parameters established, the FM transmitter was powered on with no signal at the device’s input. The transmitter was set to 100MHz for ease of demonstration.

Shown in the spectrogram, it is clear that there are multiple harmonics of the 100MHz fundamental. As the harmonics will be n-integer values, they will land nicely on the graticule lines of the display.

FM transmitter 100MHz unmodulated showing multiple odd harmonics w/ peak table

FM transmitter 100MHz unmodulated showing multiple harmonics w/ peak table

Using peak markers, the offending harmonics are shown in the spectrogram, labeled as 1 through 4.

No harmonics were visible (amplitude > 1dB above background level) beyond 500MHz and so the span was intentionally set from 50MHz to 550MHz to optimize signal display.

FM transmitter 100MHz unmodulated showing 3rd harmonic at 200MHz -27db

FM transmitter 100MHz unmodulated showing 2nd harmonic at 200MHz -27dBc

The 3rd harmonic (300MHz, -60dB relative to fundamental) was observed and has approximately 35dB of suppression from the fundamental which is pretty good.

What is intriguing is the 2nd harmonic at 200MHz which is only 27dBc (dBc = relative to the carrier) weaker than the fundamental. Recall that 26dB expresses a difference ratio of 400 times.

26dB can be broken down as: 10dB + 10dB + 3dB + 3dBrecall that for each 3dB you have a doubling (2x) and for 10dB it is an increase in magnitude (10x)
26dB can be therefore be thought of as: (10 * 10 * 2 * 2) = 400x
Transmitter output 100MHz FM "carrier"

Transmitter output of 100MHz FM “carrier”

A spectrogram of the FM carrier signal at 100MHz shows a series of sideband pairs (… Fc – Fa, Fc, Fc + Fa …)

The same carrier is seen at all harmonics and has precisely the same characteristics as the fundamental.

This means that if a radio were tuned to 200MHz and the FM transmitter was set to 100MHz (as in the test scenario), the signal could be interpreted.

Transmitter output 100MHz with 2.7kHz FM modulation

Transmitter output 100MHz with 2.7kHz FM modulation

When presented with a 2.7kHz tone, the FM signal character changes as seen as displayed in the spectrogram.

Using a function generator, it is possible to make a number of measurements of the transmitter’s performance.

I did not bother to measure the deviation of the signal at this point, though I may do so in the near future for interest’s sake. Agilent has a document with some details on how to measure deviation using a spectrum analyzer (p17).

Posted in General, Lab / Testing | Leave a comment

Changes …

Well, the end of an era has come. I just cancelled my 15+ year colocation contract in favour of hosting my domains in a more budget friendly sense. In a way, I regret cancelling the colocated server service as it has afforded me great autonomy with my hosting, etc. though I have failed to fully use the server in years.

With any luck, you did not even notice the transition! There may be a few hiccups still to come despite my best efforts to prevent any issues during the phase-out of the old system.

More to follow soon … with updates 🙂

73 for now

Posted in General | Leave a comment

APRS & Soundmodem

I was not satisfied with my prior results with the APRS testing, so I setup soundmodem in an Ubuntu environment on my trusty netbook and set-off to decode packets. As expected, everything went well – soundmodem was decoding local packets with little trouble. To be sure that the sound card itself was not at fault, I used the same USB sound-card as before.

Soundmodem working as intended

Soundmodem working as intended

It appears that my electronics workbench may not be an ideal APRS RX station locale after all – I moved the test setup to the loft of my out-building and was pulling in packets more easily. The next step will be to replicate the setup using a Raspberry Pi in place of the netbook – I just need to configure wireless networking on the Pi before I relegate the hardware to the -20°C temperatures we are experiencing.

Perhaps the received signals were in fact too weak for soundmodem to properly decode before? If this is the case, a good argument for a purpose-built TNC can be made 😉

Posted in General, Project | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

AFSK packet investigation

Raw AFSK data output from a local APRS transmission

Raw AFSK data output from a local APRS transmission

To further my investigation as to why the soundmodem TNC appears to be flaky, I decided to scope the output of some local APRS transmissions. After setting the squelch to the point where no background noise was seen / heard, I set my DS2202 oscilloscope to single-shot trigger the AFSK data.

AFSK data output from local APRS transmission showing 0dB variation on 1200 and 2200Hz tones

AFSK data output from local APRS transmission showing 0dB variation on 1200 and 2200Hz tones

To see the audio spectral content of the transmission, I engaged the FFT math function of the DS2202 and took a number of “snapshots” with the single-shot triggering.

I collected a few samples where there was a 0dBmv difference between the amplitude of the 1200Hz and 2200Hz tones. I also saw quite a few samples where there was a significant (6dBmv or more) difference. None of the packets / samples were successfully decoded by soundmodem.

AFSK data output from APRS recordings

AFSK data output from APRS recordings

When I scoped the APRS recordings that I’ve been using to test with, I captured a packet which showed a 17.6dBmv difference (which by decibel math for voltage corresponds to an 8-times) difference in amplitude. This packet for whatever reason was successfully decoded (as usual).

Now to be completely honest, I am not sure of the accuracy of my method, nor am I even sure that I can simply use FFT functions to measure the amplitude differences to establish a meaningful baseline. What I do know is that if the AFSK passes through my FT-857D it appears to be meaningless on receive.

Suspecting that it is something to do with my transceiver (perhaps alignment?) I used the APRS test CD to make a test transmission (on a vacant frequency, after announcing my callsign and “testing” while using minimal power) and attempted to decode the AFSK packets via the radio and soundmodem.

Damnit! It worked. So this suggests that the incoming APRS data that I’ve been trying to decode may very well be swamped by noise or some other characteristics, lending to it not being decoded by soundmodem.

I am very open to suggestions at this point – I am nearing my wits end with this! I think that my next course of action will be to bring the test bench into town where the APRS transmissions will tend to be stronger and try decoding the packets.

If it is a matter of the signals being too weak, I would like to investigate solutions to this problem. Some possible remedies include: receiver with better sensitivity, better antenna system (I am using a mobile 5/8λ whip indoors), preamplifier for RX.

More to follow …

 

Posted in General, Operating | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments