论坛风格切换切换到宽版
  • 7933阅读
  • 22回复

火腿往事-2:火腿们在40米及以下波段常用LSB模式,而在20米及以上波段常用USB模式。请问这是为什么呢? [复制链接]

上一主题 下一主题
离线BA6AA
 
发帖
3632
只看楼主 倒序阅读 0楼 发表于: 2009-06-05
如题,有奖征答!!
离线ahhui
发帖
7429
只看该作者 1楼 发表于: 2009-06-05
啥奖品啊? :d

准确的说是9mhz为分界,因为还有30m波段。这个问题一直是有争议的。比较流行的解释是早期的ssb机器都使用9mhz的中频,而且没有lsb/usb开关。所以自动的就在9mhz以上用usb、9mhz以下用lsb了。这个惯例延续至今,而且只是个惯例而不是法规。另外还有其他一些看法。
离线BA4RF
发帖
4097
只看该作者 2楼 发表于: 2009-06-05
这个奖品肯定是我的了...
要出去了,来不及说,跟军队的剩余物资的再利用,以及一款经典改造机器有关!
离线ahhui
发帖
7429
只看该作者 3楼 发表于: 2009-06-05
'
这个奖品肯定是我的了...
要出去了,来不及说,跟军队的剩余物资的再利用,以及一款经典改造机器有关!
'

arc-5? 那只是多种有争议的说法之一吧。 :)
离线BA7CK
发帖
76027
只看该作者 4楼 发表于: 2009-06-06
无聊到想嫖过
离线BD6QZ
发帖
4648
只看该作者 5楼 发表于: 2009-07-04
等答案。。
离线BA6AA
发帖
3632
只看该作者 6楼 发表于: 2009-07-07
'
这个奖品肯定是我的了...
要出去了,来不及说,跟军队的剩余物资的再利用,以及一款经典改造机器有关!
'


帅哥快说,大伙等一个多月啦!!


离线BA7JS
发帖
3712
只看该作者 7楼 发表于: 2009-07-07
'
啥奖品啊? :d
准确的说是9mhz为分界,因为还有30m波段。
'
30米不让用ssb。10100以下的其他业务ssb用什么模式,lsb还是usb,有人考证过吗?
离线ahhui
发帖
7429
只看该作者 8楼 发表于: 2009-07-07
算了,自己看这里吧。我就是从这里看的。 :d

http://www.ac6v.com/73.htm#lsb
离线BA4RF
发帖
4097
只看该作者 9楼 发表于: 2009-07-07
这个帖子还在啊:
20 和 75 米波段上的ssb
—9 和 5 之间的关系
ssb 最先在75米波段上试验是因为它是被广泛使用的频率最低的电话波段。
由于20米波段总是很拥挤同时由于它的dx潜力,20m也要求使用ssb。一些早期的设备只包含这两个波段。流行的w2ewl 自制设备基于经典的战后剩余物资 arc-5 发射机, 使用它的 5 mhz vfo,使用移相法在 9 mhz 产生单边带信号。九加五是14 mhz,九减五是 4 mhz,通过对两个混频产物进行选择、滤波和放大,形成对75 或者 20 米的覆盖。因此,两个波段被相同的vfo/if组合覆盖。其他的设备使用从 5.0 到 5.5 mhz可变的中频。 从 9-mhz 晶体减去得到 4.0 到 3.5 mhz,加上9 mhz 来覆盖14.0 to 14.5 mhz。 这样的处理使得边带反转,最后导致了在低波段上使用lsb 和在高波段上使用usb 的惯例。这也解释了为什么一些古老设备的75米波段的拨号盘显示是反向的!
---选自中文版arrl手册,20090707提前出版:)
离线BA6AA
发帖
3632
只看该作者 10楼 发表于: 2009-07-08
'
这个帖子还在啊:
20 和 75 米波段上的ssb
—9 和 5 之间的关系
ssb 最先在75米波段上试验是因为它是被广泛使用的频率最低的电话波段。
由于20米波段总是很拥挤同时由于它的dx潜力,20m也要求使用ssb。一些早期的设备只包含这两个波段。流行的w2ewl 自制设备基于经典的战后剩余物资 arc-5 发射机, 使用它的 5 mhz vfo,使用移相法在 9 mhz 产生单边带信号。九加五是14 mhz,九减五是 4 mhz,通过对两个混频产物进行选择、滤波和放大,形成对75 或者 20 米的覆盖。因此,两个波段被相同的vfo/if组合覆盖。其他的设备使用从 5.0 到 5.5 mhz可变的中频。 从 9-mhz 晶体减去得到 4.0 到 3.5 mhz,加上9 mhz 来覆盖14.0 to 14.5 mhz。 这样的处理使得边带反转,最后导致了在低波段上使用lsb 和在高波段上使用usb 的惯例。这也解释了为什么一些古老设备的75米波段的拨号盘显示是反向的!
---选自中文版arrl手册,20090707提前出版:)
'

哈哈,如果引用一下会不会有版权纠纷啊?
离线BA4RF
发帖
4097
只看该作者 11楼 发表于: 2009-07-08
'
哈哈,如果引用一下会不会有版权纠纷啊? [表情]
'
如果就这么点,我想不会有啥问题吧,这章是我翻的。
离线BA6AA
发帖
3632
只看该作者 12楼 发表于: 2009-07-09
多谢多谢。

如果陈兄有空,不妨编一本《业余无线电中的有趣故事》。我赞助您出本书,一定好卖。 :))
离线BA6AA
发帖
3632
只看该作者 13楼 发表于: 2009-07-09
以下是6aa综合版本,鸣谢6bf和4rf两位大佬:


要说清楚这个问题,首先要简单了解一下单边带调制技术的起源和发展。第一部 14mhz 单边带发射机起源于战后的1947年10月,五六十年代开始在业余爱好者中普及,七八十年代单边带话成为业余无线电通信的主流模式。在80年代中后期pll锁相环技术和电路全面应用以前,大多数火腿们依旧在享受着使用分立元件自己diy业余收发信机的乐趣(也许是被迫的,因为那个时候商品业余机价格昂贵,并不是所有爱好者都买得起)。自制单边带收发信机的关键器件是边带晶体滤波器。当时的晶体滤波器价格很高(事实上直到今天也是这样,连yaesu ft-897d的窄带晶体滤波器都是选购件,需要另外花钱买),火腿们只能用尽可能少的晶体滤波器。于是下面这种电路逐渐成为主流:用9mhz的晶体组合成边带晶体滤波器,用lc回路搭出可变的5mhz本振电路(通常可变范围介于5-5.5mhz),两者混频产生需要的业余频率。9+5=14mhz,9-5=4mhz,通过对两个混频产物进行选择、滤波和放大,覆盖了75米和20米这两个当年最主要的业余频段。因为一个是上差,一个是下差,这样的处理使得边带反转,在20米波段产生的是上边带信号,在80米波段产生的是下边带信号,最后导致了在低波段上使用lsb 和在高波段上使用usb 的惯例。
离线BG6BTH
发帖
70
只看该作者 14楼 发表于: 2009-07-25
似懂非懂,最终还是不太懂,有点把我绕进去的感觉了。嘿嘿!
离线BG7RNE
发帖
452
只看该作者 15楼 发表于: 2009-07-25
搬凳听大佬讲课
离线BG6BTH
发帖
70
只看该作者 16楼 发表于: 2012-07-18
事隔三年后再读
呼号 BG6BTH
姓名 张  勇
设备 IC-725  FT-857D FT-8900R  YAESU 3R
         TSB-3305 5.2米UV双段GP天线  10单元八木UV天线
         PAC-12GP天线 二段DP天线 四波段温顿天线  
博客:http://blog.sina.com.cn/jhspic
本地中继:439.650 -5 88.5(模拟)  438.800(数字中继) 
Email  330417689@qq.com
QQ   330417689
发帖
105
只看该作者 17楼 发表于: 2012-11-20
学习了,谢谢!
离线bg7cnt
发帖
65
只看该作者 18楼 发表于: 2013-02-17
还是不懂,我也是在想为啥不同,20M下是LSB,以上是USB

离线ahhui
发帖
7429
只看该作者 19楼 发表于: 2013-02-17
3年前的老帖子了,这个问题是有有争议的,因为ARC-5的改造而是用这种分法只是说法之一。有兴趣的HAM可以自行阅读以下内容,或者直接访问原始网站(上文提到的AC6V)

WHY LSB BELOW 9 MHz AND USB ABOVE
NOTICE
This subject is highly controversial. Many agree with the synopsis below - others disagree- take it for what is worth.
You have to see the circuitry for early SSB transceivers to appreciate this -- but the easy explanation is --  in the early days of SSB design, one of the common SSB generating schemes used a 9 MHz carrier oscillator/IF.  Anything below that freq was inverted (LSB) compared to those freqs above it (USB). So there was no USB/LSB switch, it automatically went to LSB for frequencies below 9MHz and vice versa. The protocol has stayed with us to this very day. But you can operate USB at 7 MHz and below if you want and vice versa. Few do (or should) as it is a gentlepersons agreement (not an FCC rule).
Another opinion from the internet. Once upon a time we had 9 Mcs carrier generators for ssb.   We used surplus ARC-5 aircraft transmitters as a VFO.  TWO MOST popular bands were 75 and 20.  Subtract 5 Mhz from 9 and there was 75.  ADD 5 mhz to 9 and you had 20.  The side bands weretranslated.  So there is the rest of the story why 75 was LSB and 20 was USB in general!
Another opinion from the internet. The answer is not dependent on the ARC-5.  The original rigs generated the sideband signal at 9 MHz and either added 5 MHz to get 14 MHz or subtracted 5 MHz to get 4 MHz.  The addition process preserves the sideband (upper or lower) and the subtraction process inverts it.  Since nearly all rigs generated the 9 MHz signal as USB, we came to use USB when adding and LSB when subtracting.  Many hams used the ARC-5 as a VFO for the mixer, but *any* 5 MHz VFO would do.  ARC-5s were cheap and easy but not required.
Someone else e-mailed me complete with intricate math and vehemently sed that there is NO inversion or translation --- hmmm I sed after being confused with the math.
-------------------------------
This from Sweden
Dear Mr. Dinkins,

I have "stumbled" across your very interesting web-site, and noticed that you have some discussion about the reason for the amateur radio use of LSB below 10 MHz and USB above.(As you probably know, the relevant Radio Regulations explicitly prescribes the USB mode for all other regulated SSB users).

In the early days of SSB, the frequency translation scheme of contemporary SSB and ISB exciters used a signal processing IF in the "few" MHz range (a common amateur IF was 5.2 MHz, and commercial IF's were 2 and 3.1 MHz) which was mixed with a variable injection frequency. You ended up with a sideband inversion when the IF was subtracted from the injection frequency. (Example: to obtain 3.8 MHz LSB using 5.2 MHz USB IF and 9 MHz injection). When the IF is added to the injection frequency no inversion occurs. (Example: to obtain 14.2 MHz USB using 5.2 MHz USB IF and 9 MHz injection).

Commercial ISB exciters were often equipped with 4 independent sidebands (often called the B2 or LLSB, B1 or LSB, A1 or USB and A2 or UUSB, their relationships to the center frequency according to  CCIR Recommendation 348-2) each containing a telephone channel or a voice frequency telegraph system.

When international HF circuits using SSB/ISB became commonplace, it turned out that there frequently were incompatiblity between the mixing schemes, so there was a genuine risk that the two ends of a circuit were using different mixing conventions, ending up in mirror-image audio frequencies and VFT channel numbering and keying polarities.

For that reason the CCIR adopted the Recommendation 249 in 1959, in which a provision was prescribed for inverting the ISB channel arrangement if the operating frequency was on either side on 10 MHz.

Progress in the design of  commercial receivers and exciters (for example the Wadley loop that made IF's above the signal frequency range practical) soon made this Recommendation obsolete, but it seems that the radio amateur community still hang on to its provisions.

A good account of the reasoning behind the mixing schemes of that era can be found in the first edition of  "Single Sideband Principles and Circuits" and in the articles "Die fernbedienbare Nachrichtensendeanlage Elmshorn" and "Fernbedienbarer Steuervorsatz fur Kurzwellen- Nachrichtensender", both in the December 1962 edition of the "Telefunken-Zeitung".


73/ Karl-Arne Markstrom SM0AOM
Senior Radio Engineer
Maritime Networks
----------------------------------

And from Don WØPEA
Hi Rod, Here is the rest of the story........
Tony Vitale W2EWL who lived in Denille NJ wrote an article in CQ in the early1950's entitled "Cheap and Easy Sideband".  It was a 9 Mhz USB phasing generator tweaked for optimum suppression on LSB and an ARC-5 used as a 5 Mhz VFO.  It summed the 9 Mhz USB signal and 5 Mhz VFO to work on 20 meters.  Sum mixing does not invert the USB signal.  It used difference mixing to work on 75 Meters, causing the USB signal to be inverted to LSB.  At this time commercial SSB rigs were virtually non existent.  Shortly after this article was published, Wes Schaum & Joe Batchelor formed Central Electronics and utilized a similar design to make the 10A, 10B, & 20A. The few hams using "Ducktalk" had only the capability of USB on 20 meters and LSB on 75 meters.  Thus the convention was set.  When other rigs like the 10A, 10B, & 20A came along, they followed the precedent that had been set by the "Cheap and Easy Sideband" article by Tony Vitale.  I met Tony in 1975 when I worked for Cessna. Tony retired in the late '70's and died in the mid 80's.

I also met Russel Farnsworth in the 1968 when I lived in Champaign Ill.  but that is another story........ Don WØPEA

The Latest on the controversy -- From N2EY

-------Original Message-------
From: N2EY@aol.com
Date: 10/16/07 19:50:20
To: ac6v@arrl.net
Subject: LSB/USB Urban Legend
Hello,

Was just perusing your excellent website when I found the part about why we hams use LSB on 75 and USB on 20.
Unfortunately, the myth about a 9 MHz SSB generator and 5 MHz VFO is there. While that combo allows sum and difference mixing to reach both bands, the sideband *is not* inverted. This isn't a question of opinion - it's just basic math of how SSB and mixers work. There's also a part about the W2EWL "Cheap and Easy SSB" exciter, which has several errors in it. I'm sure they're unintentional errors, but they're still wrong.


Here's what I found: Quoting the website http://www.ac6v.com/73.htm#LSB
Tony Vitale W2EWL who lived in Denille NJ wrote an article in CQ in the early1950's entitled "Cheap and Easy Sideband".
Tony Vitale was indeed W2EWL, but the article appeared in QST, not CQ.  March, 1956. I have the issue and can scan it if you want proof.

  >It was a 9 Mhz
> USB phasing generator tweaked for optimum suppression on LSB and an
> ARC-5 used as a 5 Mhz VFO.  It summed the 9 Mhz USB signal and 5
> Mhz VFO to work on 20 meters.  Sum mixing does not invert the USB
> signal.  It used difference mixing to work on 75 Meters, causing
> the USB signal to be inverted to LSB.

NO. It doesn't work that way. The sideband does not invert on either band using the mixing scheme W2EWL used. And there's a sideband switch included so that the right sideband can be chosen. The alignment procedure includes making the adjustments so that the unwanted sideband rejection is equally good for both positions of the sideband selector switch.


  >At this time commercial SSB
> rigs were virtually non existent.

No, that's just not true.

I pulled the March 1956 QST off the shelf to be sure. In that issue, which carried "Cheap and Easy SSB" for the first time, the following SSB rigs are advertised:

- Collins KWS-1 and 75A4
- B&W 5100 with 51SB SSB adapter, plus 370 receiving adapter
- Hallicrafters HT-30 exciter, HT-31 linear amplifier, and SX-100 receiver
- RME 4300 receiver with 4301 SSB receiving adapter
- Central Electronics 10B and 20A exciters, 600L *no-tune* linear amplifier, plus Model A and Model B receiving adapters
- Eldico SSB-100A transmitter and SSB-500 linear amplifier
- P&H LA-400 linear amplifier

- Lakeshore Phasemaster II transmitter and P-400-GG linear amplifier.

Just for the heck of it I looked at QST for March 1955 - a year before the "Cheap & Easy SSB" article appeared. Advertised in it are:

- Collins KWS-1 and 75A4
- B&W 5100 with 51SB SSB adapter, plus 370 receiving adapter
- Hallicrafters HT-30 exciter, HT-31 linear amplifier, and SX-96 receiver

- Central Electronics 10B and 20A exciters, plus receiving adapter
- Lakeshore Phasemaster Junior transmitter

Now I grant that these rigs weren't inexpensive, and that there was a far wider selection of AM gear. But there was no shortage of SSB gear for the ham when W2EWL's article appeared.

>Shortly after this article was
> published, Wes Schaum & Joe Batchelor formed Central Electronics
> and utilized a similar design to make the 10A, 10B, & 20A.

They used the same frequency scheme but CE was producing rigs long before the W2EWL article appeared. In fact, the 20A is advertised as a new rig in QST for November 1953, and the 10A was first advertised in QST in September of 1952. CE's first rig predates the W2EWL article by 3-1/2 years!

The few
> hams using "Ducktalk" had only the capability of USB on 20 meters
> and LSB on 75 meters.  Thus the convention was set.  When other
> rigs like the 10A, 10B, & 20A came along, they followed the
> precedent that had been set by the "Cheap and Easy Sideband"
> article by Tony Vitale.

Nice story but it cannot be true. Both the W2EWL and CE exciters can do either sideband equally well. And the CE rigs predate the W2EWL article by *years*, as shown above. W2EWL did not invent the LSB/USB convention at all. I don't think he ever claimed to, either. His rig would do either sideband on either band equally well. With phasing rigs, all it takes is a DPDT switch to reverse the phase of one audio channel. This isn't an opinion - it's verifiable facts.

Here's a simple explanation of the mixing scheme: If you generate USB at 9 MHz, the carrier is at 9 MHz and the sideband is on the upper side of 9 MHz. Add 5 MHz and the carrier will be at 14 MHz and the sideband will be on the upper side of 14 MHz, because all you did was add 5 MHz to every frequency in the signal.


If you generate USB at 9 MHz, the carrier is at 9 MHz and the sideband is on the upper side of 9 MHz. Subtract 5 MHz and the carrier will be at 4 MHz and the sideband will be on the upper side of 4 MHz, because all you did was subtract 5 MHz from every frequency in the signal. That's how it works. No sideband inversion from a 9 MHz SSB generator and 5 MHz VFO. The USB/LSB thing came from elsewhere. The myth lives on because too many hams repeat it without checking the math, nor actual sources of info.

Thanks for reading. 73 de Jim, N2EY

More on the controversy
-------Original Message-------
From: Alan Larson
Date: 10/17/2007 11:34:51 AM
To: ac6v@arrl.net
Subject: sideband generation
The subject came up on the QRP mailing list, and one of the participantsquoted your web site. Going back to the web site, I see that the actual quote was from W0PEA.   Anyway, it doesn't work.  Just as you say others wrote that the math doesn't work when you presented it above that point in the page, it doesn't work here.
Here is why:  If you start with a USB SSB generator (of any type) at 9 MHz, and mix it with a signal around 5.2 MHz, you get 14.2 MHz.  Now, let's see if it comes out USB or LSB.
  To test the resulting sideband, we take a bit of the upper sideband signal from that generator, and see where it lands relative to the (hopefully suppressed) carrier.
        carrier               sideband        -------              - -------         9.0 MHz              9.0001 MHz         5.2 MHz              5.2    MHz  sum   14.2 MHz             14.2001 MHz      so this comes out as upper sideband.      Now, trying it for the difference         carrier               sideband        -------              - -------         9.0 MHz              9.0001 MHz         5.2 MHz              5.2    MHz  diff.   3.8 MHz              3.8001 MHz      Again, the sideband comes out above the carrier, so the result is    also upper sideband.   In order for this to work, it appears that the sideband generation mustbe at the lower frequency, so that the slightly higher sideband frequencieswill be subtracted from the reference, and will give lower results.Alanwa6azp
DE BA6IT AB9UX