IGSL

[simonbaker]

Oscillator presented there is pretty good indeed. More voltage you apply - higher the amplitude you will get.
Of course some limits must exist.
So gain of 1V more in supplying that oscillator will give us more comfort to adjust nice and stable oscillations and a bit higher amplitude than if it was supplied with 8V (in reality it is usually 7.8 - 7.9v because of the overall draw at 7808 output) .
It can be done without 7809 - of course. First i did it without 7809 and it worked just fine.
But than i think - is better to disengage oscillator from the main 7808 because some transients still can occur under certain conditions.
So what we gained here is 1V higher oscillator supply (higher amplitude too) and separate stabilization just for oscillator stage.
Diode 01 there is not necessary - i put it just to have 2 more holes on the pcb!
Of course it is there to preserve space for some experiments later too....
Also; 78L09 is quite sufficient for that role.. but than again i still put 7809, because later i could use that separated voltage (and power) for something else more....

P.S.

Right now i don't have neither one low drop regulator in my workshop, otherwise i would experiment with some higher voltages to supply oscillator. I would like to see what would be the limit for amplitude rise. For example; i would use 10V low drop... or even 11V, if i had it.
But since battery is 12V and i don't have modern low drops here - i used just 7809 for now...

I agree, might as well have higher voltage -- and I'm thinking, why not use 7809 for whole circuit as well (less parts), but maybe that would make some levels off, so OK.

Of course, the good thing with lower voltage is battery lasts longer -- so must decide if you like more oscillator voltage, or longer battery life.

With rechargable batteries, not really an issue -- life about the same I think.

-SB

[ivconic]

...

Could a single 7809 regulator be used for entire circuit?

...
-SB

I just spotted this!? Must be that i gone blind lately!?
Yes; it is good question!
But than i am not sure about swing at some opamps? 1V difference (on positive side) seems not relevant.... but!
Pity, i can't elaborate that right now (for each claim i could make right now - you would expect me to prove on examples, right?)
It's been a while since i was whole in TGSL "business" - many things i forgot!
Making IGSL i just took the good old (and many times proven) "symmetry" principle from TGS/TGSL.
Simply didn't wanted to waste time on "philosophy" and reinvent another way to supply those opamps.
Also i am sure that there is a reason for origin Tesoro decision to use such "symmetry" as +8V/-6.2V in many of their designs.
It could be much simpler, otherwise.
It is much easier simply to "split" battery voltage to half... and there you go with "symmetry"!
Just like it was done at White's Classic....
But i am afraid that TGS/TGSL and now IGSL will not work "in range" with such "symmetry"...
It is indeed very interesting question. I would like to elaborate it in details later... or on some other topic maybe...

[Wiltran]

igsl2

Ivconics, I just finished tr coil 1mh, and it peaks my curiosity thicker wire for tr coil, bigger transistor thus more power for tr thus explaining better performance over TGSL! right?

[ivconic]

As you may have noticed, I have created a poll where you can vote for either (or both) the Musketeer or TGSL version of Ivconic's IGSL design. I will leave the poll open indefinitely. Then Silverdog can decide how long to wait before placing an order for the PCBs. Please remember that Silverdog is going on holiday very soon, so be patient and don't keep pushing for a quicker response that you're going to get.

Cool!
Poll will make much easier job to Silverdog - that's for sure!
Splendid!
Cheers!

(I already voted! )

[Qiaozhi]

Your chance to vote.

As you may have noticed, I have created a poll where you can vote for either (or both) the Musketeer or TGSL version of Ivconic's IGSL design. I will leave the poll open indefinitely. Then Silverdog can decide how long to wait before placing an order for the PCBs. Please remember that Silverdog is going on holiday very soon, so be patient and don't keep pushing for a quicker response that you're going to get.

[ivconic]

I admit I am confused at this time, I am hoping it will get cleared up in the next few days.

Thanks

Andy

Andy no need to be confused.
All the guilt is my; because i was to lazy to update second schematic at the right time.
I posted second version of pcb without to be followed with proper schematic update. Sorry! Now all is corrected and updated.
Your job is just to choose one of those 2 versions and to make it.
Just pick which version will suit you more and inform Silverdog.

[der_fisherman]

Mr. fisherman, you are confusing the first version with the second and the third is the Minelab TX. The first version has bugs, if you read though the posts from the beginning you will notice that Ivconic has been reported that version 1 has failed and can not be taken into account

I admit I am confused at this time, I am hoping it will get cleared up in the next few days.

Thanks

Andy

[ivconic]

It is interesting that minelab version has extra 7809 regulator for TX oscillator, is that crucial?

Could a single 7809 regulator be used for entire circuit?

It looks like Schottky diode would be preferred choice for D17, or maybe just leave it out?

-SB

Oscillator presented there is pretty good indeed. More voltage you apply - higher the amplitude you will get.
Of course some limits must exist.
So gain of 1V more in supplying that oscillator will give us more comfort to adjust nice and stable oscillations and a bit higher amplitude than if it was supplied with 8V (in reality it is usually 7.8 - 7.9v because of the overall draw at 7808 output) .
It can be done without 7809 - of course. First i did it without 7809 and it worked just fine.
But than i think - is better to disengage oscillator from the main 7808 because some transients still can occur under certain conditions.
So what we gained here is 1V higher oscillator supply (higher amplitude too) and separate stabilization just for oscillator stage.
Diode 01 there is not necessary - i put it just to have 2 more holes on the pcb!
Of course it is there to preserve space for some experiments later too....
Also; 78L09 is quite sufficient for that role.. but than again i still put 7809, because later i could use that separated voltage (and power) for something else more....

P.S.

Right now i don't have neither one low drop regulator in my workshop, otherwise i would experiment with some higher voltages to supply oscillator. I would like to see what would be the limit for amplitude rise. For example; i would use 10V low drop... or even 11V, if i had it.
But since battery is 12V and i don't have modern low drops here - i used just 7809 for now...

[simonbaker]

It is interesting that minelab version has extra 7809 regulator for TX oscillator, is that crucial?

Could a single 7809 regulator be used for entire circuit?

It looks like Schottky diode would be preferred choice for D17, or maybe just leave it out?

-SB

[eduardo1979]

Excellent work. I think from now nobody will have more doubts. Congratulations to Ivconic.

[ivconic]

Ok, let's "draw the line" here and agree on those 2 final versions!
To void further confusions i will repost again both FINAL versions. From this point we can agree on further works that Silverdog may accept to do. So Silverdog, take those 2 final versions and decide which to make.
Cheers!

[ivconic]

And here is the second version update:

[eduardo1979]

Mr. fisherman, you are confusing the first version with the second and the third is the Minelab TX. The first version has bugs, if you read though the posts from the beginning you will notice that Ivconic has been reported that version 1 has failed and can not be taken into account

[der_fisherman]

The changes I have noted are far more than what you describe, at least 4 caps on the schematic, are not in the parts list at all, some pF caps are suddenly µF electrolytics in the parts list, a gigantic leap in value.....

We do need to check carefully, and that's simply not possible at this time.

With regard to the two New PCBs, both versions, are the differences purely component changes or are they also Board changes?

By lining one above the other I could not detect any PCB differences (but I was using a bad method!)

My take is an out of date schematic.....but only Ivconic can be certain or not.

Due to the fact that the values are not in the data for the PCB, only the part, I cannot check better.

Also, some pads are in the wrong layer, they show up as yellow with the wiring and will not get etched on the PCB......fatal!!

Regards

Andy

[ivconic]

Der Fisherman you confused first schematic (IGSL for TGS/TGSL coils) with second version (IGSL for Musketeer coils). Be patient for half an hour and you will have both versions completed.
By now i finished first version update, here it is: