ACADEMIA Letters

What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can

reveal
Chin-Leong Lim

Introduction
The Foster-Seeley discriminator was originally developed for automatic frequency control
which exploits the property of its transfer function - the s-curve [1, 2]. Like its predecessor,
the Travis / balanced discriminator, the Foster-Seeley requires two resonant tanks. However,
unlike the balanced discriminator’s dual tanks which must be tuned to slightly different fre-
quencies, the Foster-Seeley’s tanks are conveniently tuned to the same frequency; i.e. the
Foster-Seeley is an improvement on its predecessor [3]. Nowadays, the double-tuned Foster-
Seeley has been almost completely supplanted by the single-tuned quadrature discriminator in
commercial designs. However, the Foster-Seeley is irreplaceable in minimalist radio designs
due to its low active component count consisting of two diodes, as opposed to the multi-
transistor quadrature discriminator.
The Foster-Seeley discriminator requires a double tuned transformer; one that is parallel
resonated on both primary and secondary sides. This transformer is typically implemented by
winding two coils on one bobbin. The spacing between the two coils determines the coupling
coefficient which is an important parameter to proper functioning (fig. 1). The coils are tuned
by slugs which can be individually accessed from top and bottom, respectively. The slugs are
usually ferrite which has the effect of increasing the inductances.

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

1
 Fig. 1: Internal view of the double tuned intermediate frequency transformer

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

2
 By the time PC-based circuit simulators appeared in the 90s, the Foster-Seeley has already
faded from use and from engineering consciousness. Hence, it is conceivable that very few
simulations of the Foster-Seeley have ever been carried out. Simulation of the Foster-Seeley
can help understanding by visualizing the various components’ function. Moreover, compo-
nent parameters that are either difficult or tedious to manipulate on a physical circuit, such
as the primary-secondary coupling, can be easily varied in the circuit simulator. Although
one Foster-Seeley simulation has been demonstrated before, it only evaluated the demodu-
lated audio in the time domain [4]. However, without simulating the s-curve, which is in the
frequency domain, it is not possible to know what the zero crossing frequency is or what the
discriminator’s sensitivity and linearity performances are. Without knowing these parame-
ters, one cannot determine whether the component values are optimum or not. To simulate
the s-curve, we performed a frequency domain simulation on the Foster-Seeley discrimina-
tor. To our knowledge, this work is the first ever simulation of the Foster-Seeley’s transfer
function in the frequency-domain. This article details the equivalent circuit model used in the
simulation and the results obtained.

Material & method

To enable simulation of transfer function, we utilized the circuit simulator’s harmonic balance
engine. We elected to reuse the design previously simulated by Scher because it is well docu-
mented and the prior result could serve as comparison to our own. The said design operates at
10.7 MHz as is typical of those used in FM broadcast radios. In the simulation circuit, the IF
signal is supplied by a generator (PORT1) with a 10.7 MHz nominal frequency (fig. 2). The
generator impedance is set to 5 kOhm to replicate the output impedance of the IF amp. The
transformer primary L1 combines with C1 to resonate at 10.7 MHz. The secondary windings
L2 & L3 form a resonant circuit with C2. Since L2 & L3 are actually one coil with a centre
tap, their coupling factor (k) approaches 1. Hence, the combined secondary inductance is
Lsec = L2 + L3 + 2k√(L2 x L3) ≈ 17.6 uH. Resistor R4 represents the secondary coil’s loss.
Although Schottky diodes are used in D1 & D2, the choice of diodes is not critical.

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

3
 Fig. 2: Simulation circuit of the Foster-Seeley discriminator

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

4
 The simulation will focus on the adjustment of three components that are critical to proper
functioning. To facilitate understanding, we will begin with the most easily understood com-
ponent first and then move on to progressively less obvious ones.
We also investigated whether the said prior art could be further optimized. An engineering
text specified two conditions for optimum sensitivity versus linearity: k. Qsec = 1.5 and Lsec
/ L1 = 1.77, where Qsec is the secondary loaded Q [5]. To satisfy the first condition, the
simulation’s R4 resistance is reduced to 5k, then for the second condition, L1 is reduced to
9.9 uH. To compensate for the reduced L1 value, C1 is increased to 22.5 pF, so that the 10.7
MHz resonant frequency is maintained.

Results
Tuning the Foster-Seeley discriminator is not as straightforward as tuning an ordinary IFT as
the conventional wisdom of “tune for maximum output amplitude” will not lead to optimal
performances. Instead, the results will need to be graphed before the optimal component value
can be deduced.
Correct adjustment of the primary resonant tank results in the s-curve having symmetri-
cal top & bottom halves. Although, IFTs are universally adjusted by slug tuning, for ease of
simulation, we chose to vary the capacitance instead. Anyway, adjusting either component
will yield similar results. When C1 = 12.6 pF, which combines with L1 to resonate at the
frequency of 10.7 MHz, the s-curve’s top and bottom excursions are of equal amplitude (fig.
3, blue trace). The other two C1 values, 6.6 pF & 18.6 pF, represent off-tuning the primary to
above and below 10.7 MHz, respectively. The latter two capacitances have s-curves with un-
equal halves. Moreover, their s-curves have reduced linear (straight line) segments compared
to the correctly tuned case. Quite unexpectedly, the zero crossing frequency is unchanged for
the three capacitance values; hence, the zero-crossing frequency cannot be used as a tuning
indicator.

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

5
Fig. 3: When the primary is correctly tuned to 10.7 MHz using C1 = 12.6 pF, then, the s-curve
is symmetrical. When off-tuned, e.g. C1 = 6.6 / 18.6 pF, the s-curve becomes asymmetrical

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

6
 In contrast to primary tuning, secondary tuning can shift the zero crossing frequency ac-
cordingly. When C2 = 13.3 pF, the zero crossing is at 10.7 MHz (fig. 4, blue trace). The
other two capacitance values of 14.3 pF and 12.3 pF result in the zero crossing being wrongly
positioned below and above the target frequency, respectively. Hence, one can rely on output
voltage measurement to guide the secondary tuning.

Fig. 4: The zero crossing frequency will change with secondary tuning. At C2 = 13.3 pF, the
zero crossing is correctly positioned at 10.7 MHz

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

7
 The separation between primary and secondary coils can be adjusted to trade-off between
sensitivity and linearity. When the coils are loosely coupled, e.g. k = 0.1, the s-curve is
steepest but has the shortest linear segment (fig. 5, red trace). As coupling tighten, the slope
gradually flattens, and the linear segment widens. So, k = 0.3 represents a good balance of
sensitivity and low distortion.

Fig. 5: An optimum sensitivity versus linearity trade-off occurs at the coupling coefficient of
k = 0.3

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

8
 Compared to the Scher design, the optimized one has a gentler slope and is linear over a
wider bandwidth (fig. 6, red trace). However, we don’t feel the improved linearity is useful in
practice because broadcast’s peak deviation is typically limited to 75 kHz.

Fig. 6: The optimized discriminator improves linearity but sacrifices sensitivity

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

9
Conclusion
Simulating the Foster-Seeley’s transfer function - the s-curve - can provide more insight than
simulating the demodulated audio in the time-domain. It can identify the parameter that must
be monitored during alignment. It also enables tuning of a parameter that is difficult to ad-
just empirically, e.g. coupling coefficient. Different designs’ sensitivity and linearity can be
compared via their simulated s-curves.

References
[1] D. E. Foster & S. W. Seeley, “Automatic Tuning, Simplified Circuits and Design Practice,”
Proc. Inst. Radio Engineers, vol. 25, no. 3, Mar. 1937

[2] “Foster Seeley Discriminator: FM detector / demodulator”, [Online] Available: https://

www.electronics-notes.com/articles/radio/modulation/fm-frequency-demodulation-foster-
seeley-detector-discriminator.php

[3] P. Vizmuller, RF design guide, Norwood, MA: Artech, 1995, sect. 2.7.2 FM detectors &
modulators

[4] A. Scher, “Foster-Seeley FM Detectors”. [Online] Available: http://aaronscher.com/

Circuit_a_Day/week_by_week/August_2016_FM_Foster_Seeley_detector/FM_Foster_Seeley_Detector.
html

[5] P. H. Young, Electronic communication techniques, 4th ed., New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,
1999, pp. 356.

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Chin-Leong Lim, biastee@yahoo.com

Citation: Lim, C. (2021). What simulation of the Foster-Seeley discriminator can reveal. Academia Letters,
Article 2875.

10