1928 Transmitter Tuning

Ross Hull's QST article documents a lot of experimentation done to understand the behavior of self-excited oscillators. Whether Hartley, Colpitts, TPTG or TNT Hull concluded that all of them behave about the same and the same tuning guidelines apply to all of them. In summary, any self-excited oscillator should be run at only about half power in order to produce at acceptable signal.

After the transmitter is on frequency and running at full plate voltage:

1) Tighten the antenna coupling as much as possible. In the case of my transmitter this meant moving the antenna coil until it almost touched the tuning coil. At maximum antenna coupling tune antenna loading for maximum output and note this "maximum output".

2) Back off antenna coupling to 75% maximum power (watts) or 85% output current (RF Amps) retuning antenna loading along the way.

3) Once you are at 75% power (or 85% RF current) output, detune antenna loading by adding capacitance to reduce output another 75% power (or 85% RF current). After detuning check your signal. In some cases Hull found that detuning antenna loading worked best if capacitance was reduced rather than added.

Hull plotted frequency vs load capacitance. His curves show a fairly steep curve around resonance and then they flatten out. When a self-excited oscillator is peaked up for maximum output any changes in antenna loading will have a maximum impact on frequency. At this tuneup point an antenna swaying in the wind (changing the load that the transmitter sees) will have a maximum impact on the signal frequency. Detuning the output the oscillator away from peak output moves the operating point to the flatter part of the frequency vs load capacitance curve. Antenna sway will have less impact.

1928 Transmitter Signal Quality

Ross Hull's August 1928 QST article, "Overhauling the Transmitter for 1929", is a great article for anyone interested in putting a late 20s/early 30s self excited oscillator on the air. This includes the Hartley, Colpitts, TPTG and TNT transmitters used in the AWA Bruce Kelley 1929 CW Party. In the words of QST, this "is, we feel, one of the most important articles ever published for the radio amateur. Let every amateur study it most carefully, and apply its information, for it contains salvation for 1929." It can be found by searching the QST magazine article archives at http://www.arrl.org/.

Ross Hull's major point is that the poor signals legal in 1928 will no longer be acceptable in 1929. He further states that the main problem is the "men pushing the keys". How 1929 transmitters are tuned up makes a big difference in signal quality. The actual transmitter required to meet 1929 standards can be fairly simple. To prove his point he describes the one I built, a "simple -- in fact crude -- rig...capable of performing quite creditably". He even goes on to say that he anticipates some "raspberries" over the crudity of his simple transmitter.

Transmitter features helping signal quality include a heavy tank coil/circuit, mounting the tube so tuned circuit heating is minimized and high tuning capacity/low inductance. Ross Hull emphasizes that the inexpensive hardware features he's listed combined with proper tuning over come lots of the frequency shift introduced by marginally filtered or unregulated B+ supplies, antennas swaying in the wind and components heating up. Simple 1929 transmitters don't need to "splutter, wobble, creep and rattle across great slices of the bands".

In fairness, I still find that moderate winds causing antenna sway does introduce some FMing, but my signal is acceptable. Hull, in fact, states that a DC (T9) note is extremely uncommon and rather unpleasant. He much prefers a more "musical note" that we might rate T8. Given proper tuning that's about where mine is: a sweet, musical, T8 signal. Also keep in mind that this transmitter design does not address other "creature comforts". It is microphonic requiring it to be placed on a table separate from the operating position, hand capacity is a problem and bandspread, such that there is, is barely adequate for getting on frequency. These could be addressed in a more expensive design but their solution is not required in order to archive "any reasonable [signal quality] standard set for 1929".

1928 Hartley Coils

Pictured are my 80 and 40 meter tank coils. Ross Hull made a strong point in his QST article that these coils need to be able to handle a lot of current (5 amps of RF for this design), be mechanically stable and tune with as much capacitance as possible.

These coils were wound out of 1/4" OD copper tubing. A piece of 2 3/8" OD pipe was used for a winding form. Once a coil was wound I installed it and then adjusted the turn spacing so that the bottom edge of each band fell close to maximum tank tuning capacity.

While shopping for copper tubing I found that tubing wall thickness varied brand to brand. For best current handling and mechanical stability I bought the heaviest/thickest I could find.

More 1928 Hartley

The last few evenings have included some final cleanup of the Hartley and then getting it on the air some more. There's been several of us on 80 meters around 3615 during the late evening but the 80 mtr propagation god hasn't smiled on me since my QSO with VE3AWA. Some of the others have heard me but I haven't worked anyone. Hear is how I sounded last night at VE7SL's QTH in British Columbia by clicking here.

More 1928 Hartley

Well, it's in the log...the first QSO. Tonight I worked Lou, VE3AWA, on 3565. We were 549-559 both ways and had a nice contact going until 80 meter QRM caught up with us. Lou was using his Push-Pull TPTG transmitter with a NC101X. I had my HRO Sr paired with the Hartley running 10 watts input and about 3 watts out.

For this contact I added an extension to the main tuning capacitor shaft. Both my TNT and this Hartley are really sensitive to hand capacity. Adding 8" to the tuning shaft helped a lot as I moved onto frequency. I also used a VT-25, the military version of the type 10.

Not obvious in the Hartley list of parts are the National Velvet Vernier dials used by Ross Hull. These make a big difference adding mechanical bandspread to help overcome the 80 meter CW band being crammed into a few degrees of capacitor rotation at one end of its travel.

Lou asked how come my signal was so stable. Antennas swinging in the wind typically shift the transmitter frequency as the load changes. My 105' inverted "L" happens to be a little low (only 10-20' off the ground) and behind a ridge so it is protected from the west winds. I also run with the antenna loosely coupled to the transmitter. Output is only about three watts instead of the 5-6 watts the transmitter is capable of at maximum coupling.

The RF choke is now one I hand wound on a 3/4" piece of wooden rod like Ross Hull's original 1928 design. It doesn't have quite as many turns as he called for but it works fine.

More 1928 Hartley

After a little debugging it works!

When I first put power to my version of Ross Hull's Hartley transmitter I could only get it to oscillate if the cathode clip is either not attached at all or clipped to the tank coil near the plate (rather than grid) end. RF with the clip this high on the tank coil is detectable on a nearby receiver but not measurable at the transmitter antenna.

It turned out that all things that look like RF chokes don't make good RF chokes. Mine from my junque box looked like a single layer vintage RF choke, it tested good for continuity and B+ showed up at the tube socket but didn't work well in this circuit. Replacing it with a
more modern RF choke fixed my problem. I'll need to go back and hand wind one like shown in the original 1928 QST article.

I also needed a 4:1 balun to match well to a 50 ohm load.

Now with 300 V B+ and about 25mA input I can push it to over three watts out. Backing off gives me a clean 2 watts out.

Thank you to several AWA friends that helped with parts and advice.

 

More 1928 Hartley

Except for a couple of coil clips my clone of Ross Hull's 1928 Hartley is complete. It's ready for power and checkout.

More 1928 Hartley

Today we have surface-mount-technology, before that we had pin-in-hole printed circuit cards, before that point-to-point wiring and before that we had breadboards. With breadboard construction came solid bus bar wiring. Bus bar is stiff enough that wiring takes on a 3D sort of aspect. Wiring of a transmitter such as this Hartley has height along with depth and width.

More 1928 Hartley

Working through this project has given me a new appreciation of the homebrewing skills of many of the hams during the twenties and thirties. The article on this particular transmitter has some gaps in the construction details....for coil turn information the builder is referred to the coil photo, to count the turns himself....and....Keying method is a reference to another chapter and, again, left to the builder to figure out.

I chose cathode keying for my version. I also buried the cathode resistors under the tuning capacitor. Keying added two additional Fahnestock clips along the left hand side. From the front mine lays out as keying (hot side), keying (ground side), filament, filament, B-/ground and B+.

More 1928 Hartley

That pile of old parts, wood and copper tubing is starting to look like a transmitter. The eight parts left are mostly to be wired into place so things should speed up a little.

The unsung hero of any project like this is a drill press. Without one you could never get all of the holes right.