Clifton Laboratories 7236 Clifton Road  Clifton VA 20124 tel: (703) 830 0368 fax: (703) 830 0711

E-mail: Jack.Smith@cliftonlaboratories.com


 

Home
Updates
Prior Products - no longer available
Documents
Book
Modulation
Loads
Lattice Crystal Filter
IMD Measurements
Using LP100 Coupler
Prototyping
Software Updates
K2 Measurements
Oscillator Noise Measurements
Bypassing
Capacitor Voltage Change
K2 Freq Stability
Cohn Crystal Filter
Receiver AGC Curves
K2 RX Sensitivity
Canned Osc Phase Noise
K2 Interface
K2 Filter
Surface Mount Assembly
TL750L Low Dropout Regulator
Swordfish DDS
Swordfish GLCD Module
Bessel Nulls
AM Modulation
Z10000 with FT-920
Z100 Tuning Aid
Dayton 2007
Softrock Lite 6.2
Header Adapter
Carbon Composition Resistors
Thermometers
Hakko FT-800 Thermal Wire Stripper
Heat Sinks
Diode Turn-On Time
Bill Hewlett and his Magic Lamp
Tektronix P6022 Current Probe
1N400x Diode Family Forward Voltage
Temperature Chamber
Diode Vf vs If
Ferrite Transformers
6 dB Hybrid Combiner
Type 43 Ferrite B-H Curve
K3 IF Bandpass Filter
Estimating Q of Ferrite Cores
Z10000 Buffer Amp
Z10010 Bandpass Filter
Using Softrock as a Panadapter for the K2
Signal Generator Phase Noise & Elecraft K2
Audio Transformer Data and Modeling
Measuring 60 Hz Frequency
Compact Fluorescent Lamp
Z10000-U Buffer Amp and FT-1000MP
WJ-8617B Receiver Impressions
Weather in Clifton VA
Radio Intelligence Example
Diodes for RF Probes
PIC Development Boards and Programmers
Elecraft K3 and Panadapters
Elecraft K3 AGC and S-Meter
Elecraft K3 Noise Blanker and Crystal/DSP Filtering
Jackson Harbor Press VLF Converter
Elecraft K3 Receive Audio
Headphone Impedance

 

 

 

 
Bill Hewlett and his Magic Lamp

As anyone with an interest in historical electronics knows, Hewlett Packard's breakthrough product was the 200A audio oscillator, with its first sales in 1938. Although other audio oscillators were available in the market, the 200A had two significant advantages:

First, it provided 10:1 frequency tuning for each range; and
Second, it was amplitude stabilized and with very low distortion.

William "Bill" Hewlett's 1942 patent on these inventions can be read at the following link http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/museum/earlyinstruments/0002/other/0002patent.pdf

More interesting, however, is the October 1939 Proceedings of the IRE article he co-authored with Fred Terman, Some Applications of Negative Feedback with Particular Reference to Laboratory Equipment which may be read at the following link: http://www.hparchive.com/Manuals/HP-200-IRE-Article.pdf. Figure 10 of this article and the associated text succinctly develops the theory behind the 200A, and its successor instruments, such as the 200CD oscillator. (My first piece of non-Heathkit test equipment was an HP200CD that I purchased new in June 1969. I can't find the invoice, but the list price was $250, and I'm sure I did not qualify for a quantity discount! At the time, $250 was a couple of weeks of my salary as a research assistant / grad student in electrical engineering at Wayne State University.)

The remainder of this page is devoted to lamp stabilization, but a quick mention of the 10:1 tuning range of these oscillators is worth a quick mention.

The resonant frequency of an LC circuit is:

ω is the resonant frequency in radians/sec.  In units more common for us as radio amateurs:

where f is the frequency in Hz, L is inductance in Henries and C is capacitance in Farads

Standard variable capacitors seldom have a tuning range much over 10:1, measured as maximum capacity / minimum capacity. Since the resonant frequency is inversely proportional to the square root of capacitance, a variable capacitor with a 10:1 max:min ratio allows a frequency tuning range of square root (10) or just over 3:1.  It goes without saying, perhaps, that a laboratory audio oscillator variable over a 10:1 frequency range without band changing is preferable to one offering only a 3:1 tuning range.

In Bill Hewlett's 200A oscillator circuit, which is essentially identical with the above, the relationship between frequency of oscillation and the tuning resistance and capacitance is:

In the most useful form, the two resistors, R1 and R2 are equal in value, as are the two tuning capacitors, C1 and C2 and thus the above equation has only R1 and C1 values. (If you look carefully at the 200CD schematic shown later on this page, however, you will see that C1 = 2*C2 and R1=0.5*R2. The 2x and 0.5x relationships cancel and result in the same performance as in the case where R1=R2 and C1=C2.)

Of critical importance, of course, is that the oscillator frequency is no longer related to the tuning capacitance by a square root. Rather, it's a direct inverse relationship. Hence, if the tuning capacitor has a 10:1 range, the oscillator likewise has a 10:1 tuning range. Each band on my 200CD, in fact, has a range exceeding 12:1, e.g., on the lowest band, one sweep of the dial takes the frequency from about 4.8 Hz to 65 Hz. 

How does this circuit work to sustain oscillation? The output of the second stage pentode is fed back to the first stage grid. Since there's 180 degree phase shift in each amplification stage, the net phase shift from the output stage to point "a" is 360 degrees. If, therefore the RC network R1/C1/R2/C2 has zero additional phase shift at a particular frequency, we have met one of the two Barkhausen criteria for oscillation; phase shift is an integral multiple of 360 degrees. (The second criterion is that the net gain >= 1 at the oscillation frequency. We can satisfy this by selecting component values and, of course, the negative gain stabilization feedback provided by lamp R3, as discussed below.)

The figure below shows the phase and amplitude shift at the center of the RC network, point "b" in the above schematic, generated with LTspice.  The component values are C1=C2=1000 pF and R1=R2=159.16K, computed for 1000 Hz oscillation. As the analysis shows, at 1000 Hz, the net phase is zero degrees. (Don't pay attention to the amplitude value, as I have not normalized it for the simulation values. The shape of the amplitude curve, however, is correct.)

Hence, at only one frequency is the total phase shift, from output stage plate to input stage grid, equal to 360 degrees. And, by adjusting C1 & C2, that frequency is easily shiftable.

 

Now, back to amplitude stabilization via an incandescent lamp feedback element ...

First, from the Barkhausen criteria, oscillation is sustained if the net gain is at least 1. However, if an explicit mechanism to control gain is not provided, the oscillations will increase in amplitude until a stage saturates, not a desirable condition for an oscillator designed to produce low distortion. And, we cannot reliably depend upon component choice to provide exactly the right gain, as variations in plate voltage, tube gain, component drift, etc. all may work to drop the gain below 1.0, stopping oscillations, or increase it into saturation. And, for a wide frequency range of oscillation, these problems are compounded. Hence, the oscillator designer must incorporate an explicit gain stabilizer into the design.

Amplitude stabilization in the 200A and other HP oscillators is accomplished through a particularly elegant use of an incandescent lamp as a feedback element. Consider the circuit below, taken from a 1951 instruction manual for the 200A oscillator. This circuit, with limited change, can be found in several of HP's commercial oscillators.

 

R7 is a 3 watt, 120V incandescent lamp, which serves as a cathode resistor, from which V1's grid bias is derived. If V1's plate/cathode current increases, the current through R7 increases. This current increase heats the lamp's tungsten filament, thereby causing the lamp's resistance to increase. This results in an increase in the voltage drop across the lamp, which makes V1's grid bias go further negative. However, taking V1's grid more negative decreases V1's plate current. Thus, the lamp stabilizes V1's current and thus the oscillator's signal level. Likewise, a decrease in plate current works to decrease V1's negative bias, which then increases the plate current, again a self-restoring arrangement.

With the 200CD, HP made a major revision to its audio oscillator design, as can be seen in the circuit fragment below. For our amplitude feedback purposes, note that the 200CD uses two series lamps, R13 and R14, 10 watt rating at 250 volts. The lamps have across them the AC signal voltage produced by the oscillator. R11 and R12 provide a level adjustment mechanism when the lamps are replaced.

This feedback mechanism is a bit more complex than in the 200A, and may be best understood by a more abstract view of the circuit, presented below. This circuit is from the April-June 1960 Hewlett Packard Journal article The Effect of μ-Circuit Non-Linearity on the Amplitude Stability of RC Oscillators, available here http://www.hpl.hp.com/hpjournal/pdfs/IssuePDFs/1960-04.pdf
 
This HPJ article has a detailed analysis of the oscillator and amplitude control through negative feedback with lamps and is well worth reading.
Amplifier μ is a differential amplifier, with an output signal E=μ(Eb-Ea). (The 200CD is a differential amplifier design, as may be seen in the circuit fragment above.) R1 is the lamp and R2 is a feedback setting resistor forming a voltage divider with R1.

If the oscillator output increases, Eb increases. Also, the lamp, R1, will increase in resistance thereby disproportionally increasing voltage Ea. Since the amplifier output is proportional to Eb-Ea, R1 introduces a stabilizing element, as Ea increases proportionally more than Eb.

 

I've made measurements today of the 10 watt, 250 V lamp used in the 200CD.. The figure below shows my measured data (black line) and a fifth order polynomial fit to the data.  This data is taken with an automated measurement system, employing an HP6038A system power supply, an HP3456A digital multimeter and an Agilent 34410A digital multimeter, all controlled via a GPIB bus with a Prologix controller card. The software is home made, running in Liberty Basic.
Note that I've only taken the data over the range of 0 to 10 V, even though this is a 250 V lamp. That's because when used in a feedback loop in the 200CD, the lamp sees very limited voltage across it, a small fraction of the rated 250 volts.

But, where on this curve should the designer place the lamp's operating point? It turns out that the most desirable operating point is where the change in lamp resistance is maximum for a change in voltage--thereby providing the maximum negative feedback effect. In other words, the designer will select the point at where the derivative of the resistance versus voltage curve is a maximum. The figure below plots this derivative, showing both the derivative of the measured data (black) and the derivative of the curve-fitted 5th order polynomial (red curve).  Strictly speaking, these are not derivatives but rather differentials, as they are computed by taking numerical differences between measured values, but we'll ignore the difference. The noise spikes in the measured data are artifacts in the measured data. It's better to look at it as a smoothed curve and ignore the noise spikes.

The data shows the most sensitive part of the 10 watt / 250 V lamp is at about 2 volts, although the there is not too much change in the derivative over the range of 1 volt to 5 volts. In fact, the 200A schematic fragment shows 3.2 volts DC across the lamp. However, the 200A's lamp is not the one measured and, of course, the cathode has an signal frequency AC component as well. (The bypass capacitor C7, appears to be a small value capacitor intended to boost high frequency performance.)

 
 

If we plot the lamp resistance over the same range as a function of applied power, as suggested in the HPJ article, we see two linear ranges. The first range, with the blue line extension is close to a zero temperature coefficient resistor. There's so little power in this range (less than 0.5 milliwatt) that the filament temperature changes very little as the power changes. At around 5 milliwatts, the resistance picks up a second log-log linear relationship.

I'm not going to go through the math, but this relationship is a combination of the tungsten filament change in resistance with increasing temperature, modified by the power loss due to radiation (temperature to the 4th power) and conduction.
 

I don't have the 3 watt lamp used in the 200A oscillator, but I did pick up a 4 watt 120 volt "nightlight" lamp and collected the data presented below for it.

Looking at the differentials (change in resistance / change in voltage) for the 4 watt lamp, we see that it is not nearly as suitable for a stabilization element as the 10 watt / 250 lamp used in the 200CD. There is no area where the differential is relatively constant.