PLL frequency multiplier.

Mike

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 3:07:59 PM7/3/08

to

I need a circuit that takes a 400hz sync pulse and multiplies it to
19.2khz.

I was reading around the net on PLL multipliers, but everything I have
seen are way up into the mhz range with really no schematics on aiding
to design one.

any ideas? thanks.

Frank Buss

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 3:16:21 PM7/3/08

to

Mike wrote:

I've never used it, but maybe the old 4046 works:

http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/MM/MM74HC4046.pdf

--
Frank Buss, f...@frank-buss.de
http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de

Tam

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 3:53:42 PM7/3/08

to

"Frank Buss" <f...@frank-buss.de> wrote in message
news:6obzd8l3akum.p...@40tude.net...

> Mike wrote:
>
>> I need a circuit that takes a 400hz sync pulse and multiplies it to
>> 19.2khz.
>>
>> I was reading around the net on PLL multipliers, but everything I have
>> seen are way up into the mhz range with really no schematics on aiding
>> to design one.
>
> I've never used it, but maybe the old 4046 works:
>

19200 / 400 = 48. So, if you have a 19.2 KHz VCO, take its output and divide
it by 48 (DIV3 followed by DIV16) . Run this signal into the feedback input
of a phase comparator, and the 400 Hz into the reference input. If you use
one of the 4046 variants, be sure to use the edge triggered comparator.

Tam

Joerg

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 4:13:23 PM7/3/08

to

Frank Buss wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
>> I need a circuit that takes a 400hz sync pulse and multiplies it to
>> 19.2khz.
>>
>> I was reading around the net on PLL multipliers, but everything I have
>> seen are way up into the mhz range with really no schematics on aiding
>> to design one.
>
> I've never used it, but maybe the old 4046 works:
>
> http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/MM/MM74HC4046.pdf
>

But the real Frank Buss method would be to pipe that 400Hz into a uC and
run a timer in there. A software loop would keep adjusting the timer's
overflow register until the timer does exactly 96 rollovers per 400Hz
cycle. Then use that timer overflow signal to toggle a port pin which
will now deliver exactly 19.2kHz at 50% duty cycle. This method should
require the least in parts. Heck, the uC doesn't even need a stable
clock, it can run off its on-chip RC oscillator. Best case it'll be two
components, the uC itself and a 0.1uF bypass cap.

Of course us analog guys will always have run out of timers by the time
a function such as this is added into the mix. Somehow there are never
enough timers ...

Mike, I can't see your posts because you probably use the google domain.
But if you want to build something around a 4046 here is the recipe,
figure 2:

http://www.mlecmn.net/~lyle/pc-syn/pc-syn.htm

The divider would be a bit more cumbersome because you have to provide a
divide ration of 48 in this circuit. Most likely needs two chips instead
of that one. But I am sure you can piece that together. Your 400Hz goes
into pin 14 and your 19.2kHz emerge at pin 4. The timing parts to the
right of the 4046 may also need some changes, that's where the datasheet
comes in.

If this runs at voltages <5V I suggest to use 74HC series chips. The PLL
comes in that family as well, would be called 74HC4046.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Frank Buss

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 4:32:17 PM7/3/08

to

Joerg wrote:

> But the real Frank Buss method would be to pipe that 400Hz into a uC and
> run a timer in there. A software loop would keep adjusting the timer's
> overflow register until the timer does exactly 96 rollovers per 400Hz
> cycle. Then use that timer overflow signal to toggle a port pin which
> will now deliver exactly 19.2kHz at 50% duty cycle. This method should
> require the least in parts. Heck, the uC doesn't even need a stable
> clock, it can run off its on-chip RC oscillator. Best case it'll be two
> components, the uC itself and a 0.1uF bypass cap.

It depends on the accuracy requirements. If I use a cheap PIC with 4 MHz
internal clock, I would need some machine cycles (4 MHz PICs runs with one
million instructions per second) to toggle the pin. Would need considerably
work to balance the code paths for the same time and even then there would
be a jitter of about 2% (19.2 kHz / 1 MHz * 100), and worse when I need to
adjust it up/down by one. I assume the CD4046 is more accurate.

Joerg

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 5:52:32 PM7/3/08

to

Yes, there will be some jitter and the 4046 will be more accurate. But
sometimes it'll be good enough if you average out the jitter over the
long term. Depends on Mike's application.

You could also do a timer up/down scheme which avoids the toggle, then
it's done by HW inside the timer CCR area. Use a zippier uC such as a
MSP430F2xxx or even better a 100MHz 8051, run the timer at max and only
nudge the rollover register a bit by your code. Takes a lot of the
jitter out.

Joerg

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 7:37:50 PM7/3/08

to

Another thought in case this comes up in some project: If you make sure
the timer overflow has the highest interrupt priority there won't be
more jitter than the granularity of the master clock. Just make sure the
assembler routine for that ISR takes exactly xx clock cycles every time.

bill....@ieee.org

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 8:03:54 PM7/3/08

to

On Jul 4, 6:13 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net>
wrote:

The NXP 74HC9046 is nicer (if you can find anybody who stocks it) and
the 74HC40103 eight-bit counter can be used as a single-chip divide-
by-48 albeit the 400Hz output would be a series of 52usec wide pulses
- fine for the edge-detecting phase detector.

http://www.standardics.nxp.com/products/hc/datasheet/74hc40103.pdf

http://www.standardics.nxp.com/products/hc/datasheet/74hct40103.pdf

http://www.standardics.nxp.com/products/hc/datasheet/74hct9046a.pdf

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Mike

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 8:12:52 PM7/3/08

to

Well timing has to be rather critical. its being used in a narrow band
video sync. so it has to be accurate.

Well, see i play around with NBTV scanning disk television as a hobby.
I was going to make an NBTV emulator with a 32x48 LED matrix.

since it is a 32 line resolution, at 12.5 frames per second, you have
a line sync of 400hz.

the problem is theres 48 vertical resolution pixels per 1 line scan.
so that means i would have to multiply my 400hz pulse by 48 or 19.2khz
to scan the vertical LEDs to keep them in sync.

Im going to be using an ATmel AVR, so if you know of a way to make a
multiplier out of an AVR CPU. let me know.

Thanks!

Ben Jackson

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 10:37:08 PM7/3/08

to

On 2008-07-03, Joerg <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>>
>> I've never used it, but maybe the old 4046 works:
>

> But the real Frank Buss method would be to pipe that 400Hz into a uC and
> run a timer in there. A software loop would keep adjusting the timer's

> overflow register...

Implementing a good digital PLL has all the design challenges of an
analog PLL, but in discrete time instead of continuous time. The major
difference is that EEs get training in PLL design, and even if they
can't recall it immediately, they know that there are tools like Bode
plots and impulse response to help them evaluate their design. Computer
programmers have not been warned about hazards like poor step response,
long settling time and instability and even if they discover those
hazards experimentally it's not obvious how to fix them.

So I would recommend even to someone more comfortable with microcontrollers
that if you have to ask this question ('how do I multiply 400Hz by 48?')
you should strongly consider the analog solution. There are a lot more
4046 cookbooks out there than there are examples of how to build a digital
PLL that will perform as well.

If you do decide to use the uC, shine the batsignal in the sky and Tim
Wescott will swoop down and remind you that he wrote a book that you should
read.

--
Ben Jackson AD7GD
<b...@ben.com>
http://www.ben.com/

Frank Buss

unread,

Jul 3, 2008, 11:17:10 PM7/3/08

to

Mike wrote:

> Well timing has to be rather critical. its being used in a narrow band
> video sync. so it has to be accurate.
>
> Well, see i play around with NBTV scanning disk television as a hobby.
> I was going to make an NBTV emulator with a 32x48 LED matrix.
>
> since it is a 32 line resolution, at 12.5 frames per second, you have
> a line sync of 400hz.

NBTV sounds interesting. But according to this webpage
http://www.nbtv.wyenet.co.uk/index1.htm (chapter "Club standard"), there is
a sync every line. So I don't think that it would be a good idea to use a
PLL for the pixel clock, but you should simply start scanning with each
sync pulse. You can even increase or decrease the pixel clock to scale the
image, like with old analog monitors. Or you can measure the average time
between two syncs and calculate a counter delay for full screen fit, like
the auto-adjust button on more modern monitors.

A PLL could be useful for restoring missing line syncs with noisy signals.

> Im going to be using an ATmel AVR, so if you know of a way to make a
> multiplier out of an AVR CPU. let me know.

There are ATMega parts with hardware multipliers, but I think you won't
need it for this project.

Another nice page about NBTV:

http://www.nbtv.wyenet.co.uk/conv04.htm

But looks (and sounds) a bit like a coffee party for retired electronic
engineers :-)

Nevertheless I like the idea with the mirror. Reminds me to this video:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=oLygWkHo9nw

In this video you can see how such a globe could be built:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=LYo0LOUK5Rs

Mike

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 7:15:17 AM7/4/08

to

yea i could do it that way, just the picture will be smaller or taller
vertically if the vertical scan clock is too fast or too slow.

I was thinking about using the sync pulse to trigger INT0, but then i could
set, reset the timer and use it as a TOP value on a overflow interrupt, so
the overflow interrupt will scan it vertically, that way its always locked.

"Mike" <tubegra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d89f9681-6cf0-4a5f...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

Martin Griffith

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 7:25:34 AM7/4/08

to

Would something like the EL4584 from intersil be any use?
http://www.intersil.com/cda/deviceinfo/0,0,EL4584,0.html

martin

Mike

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 7:41:35 AM7/4/08

to

it would have worked, but its divisors are setup for NTSC and other systems.
it doesnt have a 48 divisor.

"Martin Griffith" <mart_in...@yah00.es> wrote in message
news:l32s649brckjbomus...@4ax.com...

Joerg

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 10:57:41 AM7/4/08

to

Ben Jackson wrote:
> On 2008-07-03, Joerg <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>>> I've never used it, but maybe the old 4046 works:
>> But the real Frank Buss method would be to pipe that 400Hz into a uC and
>> run a timer in there. A software loop would keep adjusting the timer's
>> overflow register...
>
> Implementing a good digital PLL has all the design challenges of an
> analog PLL, but in discrete time instead of continuous time. The major
> difference is that EEs get training in PLL design, and even if they
> can't recall it immediately, they know that there are tools like Bode
> plots and impulse response to help them evaluate their design. Computer
> programmers have not been warned about hazards like poor step response,
> long settling time and instability and even if they discover those
> hazards experimentally it's not obvious how to fix them.
>

But it's the challenge, man, the challenge! On my first trip to Yosemite
we skipped the bus and hiked up to Glacier Point, then the whole long
loop back to the valley. One of us nearly didn't make it ...

> So I would recommend even to someone more comfortable with microcontrollers
> that if you have to ask this question ('how do I multiply 400Hz by 48?')
> you should strongly consider the analog solution. There are a lot more
> 4046 cookbooks out there than there are examples of how to build a digital
> PLL that will perform as well.
>

Agree. This is clerly a 4046 application. OTOH if you master this
project you can embark on uC driven switch mode conversion and such
where there is a fine line between RHP zero stability and one hellacious
kablouie. That'll make you a highly sought engineer.

> If you do decide to use the uC, shine the batsignal in the sky and Tim
> Wescott will swoop down and remind you that he wrote a book that you should
> read.
>

Those who never did that definitely should consider that.

Tim Wescott

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 2:18:39 PM7/4/08

to

Ben Jackson wrote:
> On 2008-07-03, Joerg <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>>> I've never used it, but maybe the old 4046 works:
>> But the real Frank Buss method would be to pipe that 400Hz into a uC and
>> run a timer in there. A software loop would keep adjusting the timer's
>> overflow register...
>
> Implementing a good digital PLL has all the design challenges of an
> analog PLL, but in discrete time instead of continuous time. The major
> difference is that EEs get training in PLL design, and even if they

-- snip --

> If you do decide to use the uC, shine the batsignal in the sky and Tim
> Wescott will swoop down and remind you that he wrote a book that you should
> read.
>

What? Who?

(Book reference in my tag line :-)

The book doesn't reference digital PLLs specifically, although it does
give you wrenches that you will be able to fit to bolts in a PLL design
problem. If business slows enough that I can write an article, that's
what's up next.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

Tim Wescott

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 2:29:00 PM7/4/08

to

Do pretty much what Joerg said.

If the AVR has a timer capture function with all the right features,
then it can be pretty direct. The narrative below tells how to do it on
an 'ideal' system; you'll have to see if your AVR will cope.

Set up a timer to run at a nominal 19.2kHz, with the fastest incoming
clock that you can get away with. Then set up your 400Hz sync to
trigger the timer capture, and interrupt the processor at the same time.

Each time the processor gets interrupted, look at the capture register.
If it's bigger than 1/2 the timer period subtract the timer period
from it, to make it into a signed phase error. Then take that phase
error and feed it into a PID filter (most likely you just need a PI
filter) that controls the period register value. See
http://www.wescottdesign.com/articles/Sampling/pidwophd.html for tips on
tuning your PI filter.

Fortunately this is a hobby project, so the most important specification
you have to meet is "am I having fun yet". It's amazing how much stress
you can relieve by temporarily abandoning things like fast lock, absence
of overshoot, and noise immunity while you're concentrating on getting a
pretty picture.

Joerg

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 4:11:10 PM7/4/08

to

Mike wrote:
> yea i could do it that way, just the picture will be smaller or taller
> vertically if the vertical scan clock is too fast or too slow.
>
> I was thinking about using the sync pulse to trigger INT0, but then i could
> set, reset the timer and use it as a TOP value on a overflow interrupt, so
> the overflow interrupt will scan it vertically, that way its always locked.
>

Sure, but mind the chance of the missing or garbled sync. There needs to
be something that then "places" on in roughly the correct spot. That's
what a sync'd oscillator or PLL does. Like a flywheel.

>
> "Mike" <tubegra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d89f9681-6cf0-4a5f...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> I need a circuit that takes a 400hz sync pulse and multiplies it to
>> 19.2khz.
>>
>> I was reading around the net on PLL multipliers, but everything I have
>> seen are way up into the mhz range with really no schematics on aiding
>> to design one.
>>
>> any ideas? thanks.
>
>

Joerg

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 4:14:44 PM7/4/08

to

The best stress relief will be that you don't have to whip it through a
standards body review process, EMC certification and all that. Got to do
one of those again next week. Oh what fun ... where's that tequila bottle?

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 4:32:53 PM7/4/08

to

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:14:44 -0700, Joerg
<notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

>Tim Wescott wrote:
[snip]

>>
>> Fortunately this is a hobby project, so the most important specification
>> you have to meet is "am I having fun yet". It's amazing how much stress
>> you can relieve by temporarily abandoning things like fast lock, absence
>> of overshoot, and noise immunity while you're concentrating on getting a
>> pretty picture.
>>
>
>The best stress relief will be that you don't have to whip it through a
>standards body review process, EMC certification and all that. Got to do
>one of those again next week. Oh what fun ... where's that tequila bottle?

Tequila?? I've got to introduce you to some better "stuff" ;-)

Joerg

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 4:40:57 PM7/4/08

to

Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:14:44 -0700, Joerg
> <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> Tim Wescott wrote:
> [snip]
>>> Fortunately this is a hobby project, so the most important specification
>>> you have to meet is "am I having fun yet". It's amazing how much stress
>>> you can relieve by temporarily abandoning things like fast lock, absence
>>> of overshoot, and noise immunity while you're concentrating on getting a
>>> pretty picture.
>>>
>> The best stress relief will be that you don't have to whip it through a
>> standards body review process, EMC certification and all that. Got to do
>> one of those again next week. Oh what fun ... where's that tequila bottle?
>
> Tequila?? I've got to introduce you to some better "stuff" ;-)
>

I used to like fine cognac and single-malt but somehow I don't fancy the
hard stuff much anymore. I do like margaritas though. Oh, and we just
became club members here:

http://www.madronavineyards.com/

Martin Griffith

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 4:44:09 PM7/4/08

to

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:32:53 -0700, in sci.electronics.design Jim
Thompson <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:14:44 -0700, Joerg
><notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>Tim Wescott wrote:
>[snip]
>>>
>>> Fortunately this is a hobby project, so the most important specification
>>> you have to meet is "am I having fun yet". It's amazing how much stress
>>> you can relieve by temporarily abandoning things like fast lock, absence
>>> of overshoot, and noise immunity while you're concentrating on getting a
>>> pretty picture.
>>>
>>
>>The best stress relief will be that you don't have to whip it through a
>>standards body review process, EMC certification and all that. Got to do
>>one of those again next week. Oh what fun ... where's that tequila bottle?
>
>Tequila?? I've got to introduce you to some better "stuff" ;-)
>
> ...Jim Thompson

Ouzo?

martin

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 4:52:02 PM7/4/08

to

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:40:57 -0700, Joerg
<notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

>Jim Thompson wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:14:44 -0700, Joerg
>> <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Tim Wescott wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>> Fortunately this is a hobby project, so the most important specification
>>>> you have to meet is "am I having fun yet". It's amazing how much stress
>>>> you can relieve by temporarily abandoning things like fast lock, absence
>>>> of overshoot, and noise immunity while you're concentrating on getting a
>>>> pretty picture.
>>>>
>>> The best stress relief will be that you don't have to whip it through a
>>> standards body review process, EMC certification and all that. Got to do
>>> one of those again next week. Oh what fun ... where's that tequila bottle?
>>
>> Tequila?? I've got to introduce you to some better "stuff" ;-)
>>
>
>I used to like fine cognac and single-malt but somehow I don't fancy the
>hard stuff much anymore. I do like margaritas though. Oh, and we just
>became club members here:
>
>http://www.madronavineyards.com/

Good stuff?

I prefer wine, though I'll have a _very_ occasional beer when it's
really hot. (Widmer Hefeweizen that Larkin introduced me to is one of
my favorites... most American beers are so "lite" as to be tasteless.)

And I like Dry Sack Sherry as an aperitif, and Drambuie, and Jack
Daniels and... ;-)

Frank Buss

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 5:04:37 PM7/4/08

to

Joerg wrote:

> I used to like fine cognac and single-malt but somehow I don't fancy the
> hard stuff much anymore. I do like margaritas though.

This would be too hard for me, but it is understandable that you need
something harder to forget a good Koelsch or Hefeweizen :-)

Joerg

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 5:22:16 PM7/4/08

to

That's what they are making, wine. And you probably never tasted
American stuff like this:

http://www.placervillebrewing.com/our_beer.asp

> And I like Dry Sack Sherry as an aperitif, and Drambuie, and Jack
> Daniels and... ;-)
>

Hennessy, Camus, Glenlivet, Beerenburger would be da good stuff :-)

Joerg

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 5:25:12 PM7/4/08

to

Frank Buss wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>
>> I used to like fine cognac and single-malt but somehow I don't fancy the
>> hard stuff much anymore. I do like margaritas though.
>
> This would be too hard for me, but it is understandable that you need
> something harder to forget a good Koelsch or Hefeweizen :-)
>

Oh, I'll never forget Frueh Koelsch. We've got good Hefeweizen here,
Widmer's, the one Jim mentioned. But it's just not quite as good as some
Bavarian varieties and it's pronounced "Heffawhysen" out here.

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 6:12:39 PM7/4/08

to

I like Ouzo, though I like Sambuca better... isn't it the Italian
equivalent? (I find Ouzo a little weak-kneed ;-)

I also like blinies with caviar and ice-cold Vodka shots ;-)

Joerg

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 6:16:53 PM7/4/08

to

Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:44:09 +0200, Martin Griffith
> <mart_in...@yah00.es> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:32:53 -0700, in sci.electronics.design Jim
>> Thompson <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:14:44 -0700, Joerg
>>> <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tim Wescott wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>> Fortunately this is a hobby project, so the most important specification
>>>>> you have to meet is "am I having fun yet". It's amazing how much stress
>>>>> you can relieve by temporarily abandoning things like fast lock, absence
>>>>> of overshoot, and noise immunity while you're concentrating on getting a
>>>>> pretty picture.
>>>>>
>>>> The best stress relief will be that you don't have to whip it through a
>>>> standards body review process, EMC certification and all that. Got to do
>>>> one of those again next week. Oh what fun ... where's that tequila bottle?
>>> Tequila?? I've got to introduce you to some better "stuff" ;-)
>>>
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>> Ouzo?
>>
>>
>> martin
>
> I like Ouzo, though I like Sambuca better... isn't it the Italian
> equivalent? (I find Ouzo a little weak-kneed ;-)
>
> I also like blinies with caviar and ice-cold Vodka shots ;-)
>

Where do you get caviar? I mean the real deal.

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 6:59:59 PM7/4/08

to

From Germany... in 1998 I brought back two 2kg tins of Russian caviar,
obtained for me by the Russian wife of my client at Bosch, Bühlertal.
Customs really didn't know what it was and passed me right through ;-)

Jamie

unread,

Jul 4, 2008, 7:44:47 PM7/4/08

to

Mike wrote:

> yea i could do it that way, just the picture will be smaller or taller
> vertically if the vertical scan clock is too fast or too slow.
>
> I was thinking about using the sync pulse to trigger INT0, but then i could
> set, reset the timer and use it as a TOP value on a overflow interrupt, so
> the overflow interrupt will scan it vertically, that way its always locked.
>
>
> "Mike" <tubegra...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Maybe Slow Scan TV (SSTV) would interest you ?
Lots of it being done on the HF radio these days via the
sound card.
If you ever get interested in how the various formats
are spec'd out, I could give you some info.

http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"

Mike

unread,

Jul 5, 2008, 12:39:05 PM7/5/08

to

thanks for hijacking my thread, i appricate that.

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
message news:2mat641j7f63p8g21...@4ax.com...

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 5, 2008, 1:36:14 PM7/5/08

to

>> obtained for me by the Russian wife of my client at Bosch, B?al.

>> Customs really didn't know what it was and passed me right through ;-)
>>
>> ...Jim Thompson

You are quite welcome ;-)

But it's you own fault, you posted from googlegroups AND used a gmail
address, so I never saw your original or follow-up posts, just the
banter about what to drink when a "project" is for-amusement-only.

Assuming that you will resist further petulant behavior, I have added
you my "good guy" filter exceptions.

Now, getting back to your original post...

You could use MC4024 and MC4044 which I designed around 45 years ago,
but I doubt that Lansdale (see my website and click on the Lansdale
link... they bought the production rights from Motorola) will sell
small quantities.

So your best bet is to get an 'HC4046, use Phase Comparator II, and
wrap a DIV48 into the feedback loop.

DIV48 can be accomplished with a programmable divider, or D-flops with
your own reset logic.

| Obama-lackey! Obama-lackey! Boom! Boom! Boom! |
| |
| Obama-lackey Wesley Clark opines:"He (McCain) hasn't held exe- |
| cutive responsibility. I don't think riding in a fighter plane|
| and getting shot down is a qualification to be president." |
| |
| But being a small potatoes politician who's served only three |
| years in the Senate does ??? |

Due to excessive spam, gmail, googlegroups, UAR, AIOE are blocked!

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Jul 5, 2008, 5:03:29 PM7/5/08

to

Jameco: http://www.jameco.com

MC4044P
1+ 9.99
10+ 7.49
100+ 5.25

>
> So your best bet is to get an 'HC4046, use Phase Comparator II, and
> wrap a DIV48 into the feedback loop.
>
> DIV48 can be accomplished with a programmable divider, or D-flops with
> your own reset logic.
>
> ...Jim Thompson
> --
> | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
> | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
> | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
> | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
> | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
> | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
> | |
> | Obama-lackey! Obama-lackey! Boom! Boom! Boom! |
> | |
> | Obama-lackey Wesley Clark opines:"He (McCain) hasn't held exe- |
> | cutive responsibility. I don't think riding in a fighter plane|
> | and getting shot down is a qualification to be president." |
> | |
> | But being a small potatoes politician who's served only three |
> | years in the Senate does ??? |
>
> Due to excessive spam, gmail, googlegroups, UAR, AIOE are blocked!

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 5, 2008, 5:26:27 PM7/5/08

to

On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:03:29 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>Jim Thompson wrote:
>>
[snip]

>>
>> You could use MC4024 and MC4044 which I designed around 45 years ago,
>> but I doubt that Lansdale (see my website and click on the Lansdale
>> link... they bought the production rights from Motorola) will sell
>> small quantities.
>
>Jameco: http://www.jameco.com
>
>MC4044P
>1+ 9.99
>10+ 7.49
>100+ 5.25
>
>

[snip]

Son-of-a-gun! Those must have come from someone's private stock!

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Jul 5, 2008, 6:05:56 PM7/5/08

to

Jim Thompson wrote:
>
> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:03:29 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Jim Thompson wrote:
> >>
> [snip]
> >>
> >> You could use MC4024 and MC4044 which I designed around 45 years ago,
> >> but I doubt that Lansdale (see my website and click on the Lansdale
> >> link... they bought the production rights from Motorola) will sell
> >> small quantities.
> >
> >Jameco: http://www.jameco.com
> >
> >MC4044P
> >1+ 9.99
> >10+ 7.49
> >100+ 5.25
>

> Son-of-a-gun! Those must have come from someone's private stock!

Jameco has a lot of oddball stuff. They have been in business long
enough to have sold them when they were in full production. We were
still using the 4044 in a product at Microdyne in sept, 2001. It was
used as a repacment for the orininal Signetics version the product was
designed with. It also used several ECL ICs and was built at about 30-60
units a month. That basic board was used in several generations of
recievers. The next generation used PLL ICs develeped for the cell phone
industry.

I had already made notes to be able to replace the 4044 with the
4046/9046 PLL IC if the 4044 became too much trouble.

JosephKK

unread,

Jul 6, 2008, 5:20:47 AM7/6/08

to

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:12:52 -0700 (PDT), Mike
<tubegra...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Well timing has to be rather critical. its being used in a narrow band
>video sync. so it has to be accurate.
>
>Well, see i play around with NBTV scanning disk television as a hobby.
>I was going to make an NBTV emulator with a 32x48 LED matrix.
>
>since it is a 32 line resolution, at 12.5 frames per second, you have
>a line sync of 400hz.
>
>the problem is theres 48 vertical resolution pixels per 1 line scan.
>so that means i would have to multiply my 400hz pulse by 48 or 19.2khz
>to scan the vertical LEDs to keep them in sync.
>
>Im going to be using an ATmel AVR, so if you know of a way to make a
>multiplier out of an AVR CPU. let me know.
>
>Thanks!

How weird, you just lit up all of my "wrong approach" alarms.

Mike

unread,

Jul 6, 2008, 11:59:47 AM7/6/08

to

What do you mean by that?

"JosephKK" <quiett...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:og31749t44dqdpp8v...@4ax.com...

JosephKK

unread,

Jul 6, 2008, 1:06:16 PM7/6/08

to

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:22:16 -0700, Joerg
<notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Substitute Laphroaig for Glenlivet.
Napoleon Grand Fine is above what i will pay now.

Mike

unread,

Jul 7, 2008, 8:40:24 PM7/7/08

to

the CD4059 is going to serve as my divider in the PLL circuit, it seems it
can handle a division by 48 all in itself.

"Mike" <tubegra...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 7, 2008, 8:51:38 PM7/7/08

to

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:40:24 -0400, "Mike" <n...@spam.ne> wrote:

>the CD4059 is going to serve as my divider in the PLL circuit, it seems it
>can handle a division by 48 all in itself.
>

Certainly. It's a programmable counter, as I suggested in a prior
post.

You might consider something more modern ;-)

>
>"Mike" <tubegra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:d89f9681-6cf0-4a5f...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>I need a circuit that takes a 400hz sync pulse and multiplies it to
>> 19.2khz.
>>
>> I was reading around the net on PLL multipliers, but everything I have
>> seen are way up into the mhz range with really no schematics on aiding
>> to design one.
>>
>> any ideas? thanks.
>

...Jim Thompson

It's what you learn, after you know it all, that counts.

Mike

unread,

Jul 7, 2008, 10:26:59 PM7/7/08

to

like what.

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in

message news:gee574lbpup43hen7...@4ax.com...

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 8, 2008, 11:11:06 AM7/8/08

to

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:59 -0400, "Mike" <n...@spam.ne> wrote:

>like what.
>
>
>"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
>message news:gee574lbpup43hen7...@4ax.com...
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:40:24 -0400, "Mike" <n...@spam.ne> wrote:
>>
>>>the CD4059 is going to serve as my divider in the PLL circuit, it seems it
>>>can handle a division by 48 all in itself.
>>>
>> Certainly. It's a programmable counter, as I suggested in a prior
>> post.
>>
>> You might consider something more modern ;-)
>>>
>>>"Mike" <tubegra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:d89f9681-6cf0-4a5f...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>>I need a circuit that takes a 400hz sync pulse and multiplies it to
>>>> 19.2khz.
>>>>
>>>> I was reading around the net on PLL multipliers, but everything I have
>>>> seen are way up into the mhz range with really no schematics on aiding
>>>> to design one.
>>>>
>>>> any ideas? thanks.
>>>
>>
>> ...Jim Thompson

Stop top posting and snipping pertinent portions of the thread.

Also use a competent reader which follows the rules for signature
deletion.

Use something like a 74HC292

though you should sharpen your own skills by making your own DIV3
followed by DIV16.

"It isn't that democrats are ignorant. Far from it... it's just that
they know so much that just isn't so" -Ronald Reagan

JosephKK

unread,

Jul 8, 2008, 11:13:04 PM7/8/08

to

It means that i cannot find an erroneous cause of the alarms, nor can
i find what is wrong with the approach. At least not in any way i can
explain. Perhaps you can go into more detail about the modulation
methods. I can get any uC to multiply and divide, albeit slowly, my
issues start with these multiplies are slow, can you run an accurate
software pll and demodulator with the slow multiply? It would be easy
in hardware with a couple 22V10s.

JosephKK

unread,

Jul 8, 2008, 11:16:37 PM7/8/08

to

For that ratio i prefer div 8 followed by div 6. Or vice versa,
depending on the locking wave shape you want.

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 8, 2008, 11:59:17 PM7/8/08

to

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:16:37 -0700, JosephKK <quiett...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Binary DIV should be last, to ensure symmetry. Doesn't really matter
though with Type II phase detector, which matches leading edge only.

It's what you learn, after you know it all, that counts.

Due to excessive spam, gmail, googlegroups, UAR, and AIOE blocked!

MooseFET

unread,

Jul 9, 2008, 9:42:32 AM7/9/08

to

On Jul 8, 8:16 pm, JosephKK <quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:11:06 -0700, Jim Thompson
>
>
>
> <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:59 -0400, "Mike" <n...@spam.ne> wrote:
>
> >>like what.
>

> >>"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
> >>messagenews:gee574lbpup43hen7...@4ax.com...

>
> >>> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:40:24 -0400, "Mike" <n...@spam.ne> wrote:
>
> >>>>the CD4059 is going to serve as my divider in the PLL circuit, it seems it
> >>>>can handle a division by 48 all in itself.
>
> >>> Certainly. It's a programmable counter, as I suggested in a prior
> >>> post.
>
> >>> You might consider something more modern ;-)
>

> >>>>"Mike" <tubegraveyar...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> >>>>news:d89f9681-6cf0-4a5f...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> >>>>>I need a circuit that takes a 400hz sync pulse and multiplies it to
> >>>>> 19.2khz.
>
> >>>>> I was reading around the net on PLL multipliers, but everything I have
> >>>>> seen are way up into the mhz range with really no schematics on aiding
> >>>>> to design one.
>
> >>>>> any ideas? thanks.
>
> >>> ...Jim Thompson
>
> >Stop top posting and snipping pertinent portions of the thread.
>
> >Also use a competent reader which follows the rules for signature
> >deletion.
>
> >Use something like a 74HC292
>
> >though you should sharpen your own skills by making your own DIV3
> >followed by DIV16.
>
> > ...Jim Thompson
>
> For that ratio i prefer div 8 followed by div 6. Or vice versa,
> depending on the locking wave shape you want.

The type-2 phase detector is edge operated so you can even use a thin
pulse for it.

If you make the last two divides two, you can use an XOR to make a 90
degree shifted version of the counter output. This is handy when
using the XOR type phase detector that makes a 90 degree shift at
locked.

Mike

unread,

Jul 9, 2008, 10:21:38 AM7/9/08

to

WTF are you talking about:

>Stop top posting and snipping pertinent portions of the thread.
>
>Also use a competent reader which follows the rules for signature
>deletion.

you got a bad attitude. a really bad one. so fuck off.

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in

message news:bm0774tmd0efgokta...@4ax.com...

Jim Thompson

unread,

Jul 9, 2008, 10:28:33 AM7/9/08

to

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 10:21:38 -0400, "Mike" <n...@spam.ne> wrote:

>WTF are you talking about:
>
>>Stop top posting and snipping pertinent portions of the thread.
>>
>>Also use a competent reader which follows the rules for signature
>>deletion.
>
>you got a bad attitude. a really bad one. so fuck off.
>
>

[snip]

And you are ignorant beyond definition. Bye!

It's what you learn, after you know it all, that counts.

Due to excessive spam, gmail, googlegroups, UAR, and AIOE blocked!

Mike

unread,

Jul 9, 2008, 11:40:57 AM7/9/08

to

yeap, and definition is never defined ;-)

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in

message news:uli974ll0nvrrskvl...@4ax.com...