Date   

Re: Mica Cap replacements for WA2EBY Filter?

Jack, W8TEE
 

The date etching shows how good the etch was. What did you end up using, from method to etchant?

Jack, W8TEE



From: Mark Baldridge <marktbaldridge@...>
To: BITX20@groups.io
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2018 1:21 AM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Mica Cap replacements for WA2EBY Filter?

I just etched the filter board! Not a perfect toner transfer, but not too bad. The traces are solid and pass the beep test. :)



On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:18 PM, Mvs Sarma <mvssarma@...> wrote:
Jstin, If you make PCB, it could have facity for both throhiole for silver mca and for smd too.

Regards
MVS Sarma
 

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 3:04 AM, Mark Baldridge <marktbaldridge@...> wrote:
This will be great. I plan to order the SMT parts as they are cheap, and then "upgrade" to the mica caps if I need to.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:15 AM, <freefuel@...> wrote:
Hi Mark, I have started to build up two filter boards for this amp, one with mica caps I was lucky enough to find at a local surplus outlet, and another with SMT parts. I'll post the results as soon as I test them. 

-Justin N2TOH 



--




--
Mark Baldridge
608.561.3853



Virus-free. www.avast.com


Re: Software support Request for Full QSK BITX40

Gary O'Neil
 

Hi Allard;

I replaced the relays to switch and purge the TX/RX supply lines, and a SPDT RF switch to isolate the receiver during Transmit. It all switches in less than a microsecond, but with all the capacitive loading it has to dump, it's probably moving up to somthing close to a millisecond. QSK speeds are not an issue. The transmitter transmits instantly, and the receiver recovers to full sensitivity between dits at between 40 and 50 WPM (measured it at 48 WPM with my keyer at max speed), but I rarely operate at 30, and 35 is approaching my maximum copying speed.

72

Gary, N3GO


Re: Creating Gerber files for pcb construction

Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
 

Wow!!! Thank you for that wonderful tip.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 20, 2018, at 06:51, Kerr Smith <kerrsmithusa@...> wrote:

Have you looked at PCB Shopper? You just set the size of your PCB and how any boards you require and it will list all the main PCB fabrication sites and how much it will cost:

https://pcbshopper.com

For my latest PCBs I tried AllPCB and was extremely pleased with the results, they had an offer on at the time so for $5 I got 7 boards on one order and for my second $5 order I got 17 boards (if your boards are small they seem to add in extra to your order) - they were all shipped using TNT and arrived in just 5 days. At the current time the total cost is $12 for 5 boards up to 35mm x 35mm with free TNT shipping:

http://www.allpcb.com

The other site I would recommend is OSHPark:

https://oshpark.com

They are the ones who do the purple PCBs which look really great and also pretty cheap, only a few dollars (around $9.50) for three
35mm x 35mm boards with shipping included.

I am so pleased that the price for creating PCBs yourself is now this low, up until now I have been carefully making my own by etching them but now I can get them in a few days if I need them fast or a couple of weeks if I don't mind waiting. There are so many different fabrication sites there is always going to be a great deal to be had if you shop around a bit, the
PCB Shopper site I mentioned above is really great for this.


Re: Creating Gerber files for pcb construction

Kerr Smith
 


Have you looked at PCB Shopper? You just set the size of your PCB and how any boards you require and it will list all the main PCB fabrication sites and how much it will cost:

https://pcbshopper.com

For my latest PCBs I tried AllPCB and was extremely pleased with the results, they had an offer on at the time so for $5 I got 7 boards on one order and for my second $5 order I got 17 boards (if your boards are small they seem to add in extra to your order) - they were all shipped using TNT and arrived in just 5 days. At the current time the total cost is $12 for 5 boards up to 35mm x 35mm with free TNT shipping:

http://www.allpcb.com

The other site I would recommend is OSHPark:

https://oshpark.com

They are the ones who do the purple PCBs which look really great and are also pretty cheap, only a few dollars (around $9.50) for three
35mm x 35mm boards with shipping included.

I am so pleased that the price for creating PCBs yourself is now this low, up until now I have been carefully making my own by etching them but now I can get them in a few days if I need them fast or a couple of weeks if I don't mind waiting. There are so many different fabrication sites there is always going to be a great deal to be had if you shop around a bit, the
PCB Shopper site I mentioned above is really great for this.


Re: Software support Request for Full QSK BITX40

Allard PE1NWL
 

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 09:34 pm, Gary O'Neil wrote:
I've got my BITX40 modified to work Full QSK, but I've noticed your software doesn't support that mode. Any chance you can add this to your 1.27.x Code?
Hi Gary,
In order to better understand your request, can you explain what modifications you did to your BitX40 so that it can do full QSK?
73 Allard PE1NWL


Re: Mica Cap replacements for WA2EBY Filter?

Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
 

More power to ya!!

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 20, 2018, at 01:21, Mark Baldridge <marktbaldridge@...> wrote:

I just etched the filter board! Not a perfect toner transfer, but not too bad. The traces are solid and pass the beep test. :)



On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:18 PM, Mvs Sarma <mvssarma@...> wrote:
Jstin, If you make PCB, it could have facity for both throhiole for silver mca and for smd too.

Regards
MVS Sarma
 

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 3:04 AM, Mark Baldridge <marktbaldridge@...> wrote:
This will be great. I plan to order the SMT parts as they are cheap, and then "upgrade" to the mica caps if I need to.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:15 AM, <freefuel@...> wrote:
Hi Mark, I have started to build up two filter boards for this amp, one with mica caps I was lucky enough to find at a local surplus outlet, and another with SMT parts. I'll post the results as soon as I test them. 

-Justin N2TOH 




--





--
Mark Baldridge
608.561.3853
<photo_2018-01-20_00-21-12.jpg>


Re: Creating Gerber files for pcb construction

Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
 

I believe I've now satisfied two different Chinese manufacturers  with the files from DIPTRACE.  (Version 3.2, Freeware, non profit use, 300 pins:   https://diptrace.com/#download_form1​  )    The key was to not only export the Gerber files, but to go back and additionally request an export of the N/C drill files as shown in the screen capture below.


Save all those files, the Gerber files PLUS the drill fie (ends in .drl)   (a bunch of them!) into one subdirectory, select them all, and then in Windows 10 right click, send them to a "Compressed (zipped) folder" -- which makes a zip file, then select that zip file with the web upload software of the manufacturer.  


I'm experimenting with:

http://www.pcbway.com   

https://easyeda.com


We'll find out how well I did! 





From: BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> on behalf of Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 7:32 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Creating Gerber files for pcb construction
 
Well all I spent was $20 for this bit of education. Five boards, if they work at all it will be a huge advance. I did some bread boarding at home so I think I got things correct. The cost for using express PCB is so out of sight that it is worth it to me to try these Chinese systems.

If I can learn how to do this, there is a slew of projects I can do for local ARES  group.

Many of these people built something for the very first time last year when we worked on building soundcard interfaces.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 19, 2018, at 18:57, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke@...> wrote:

You learned that tool very quickly!

For me at least, it's amazing how many ways a board fab can go wrong
And how hard those bugs can be to spot.

Jerry

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 03:31 pm, Gordon Gibby wrote:

So I found a few mistakes and corrected them and I managed to somewhat figure out the process of exporting gerber files (including a "drill file") and got them submitted to easyEDA....

 


Re: Mica Cap replacements for WA2EBY Filter?

Mark Baldridge
 

I just etched the filter board! Not a perfect toner transfer, but not too bad. The traces are solid and pass the beep test. :)



On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:18 PM, Mvs Sarma <mvssarma@...> wrote:
Jstin, If you make PCB, it could have facity for both throhiole for silver mca and for smd too.

Regards
MVS Sarma
 

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 3:04 AM, Mark Baldridge <marktbaldridge@...> wrote:
This will be great. I plan to order the SMT parts as they are cheap, and then "upgrade" to the mica caps if I need to.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:15 AM, <freefuel@...> wrote:
Hi Mark, I have started to build up two filter boards for this amp, one with mica caps I was lucky enough to find at a local surplus outlet, and another with SMT parts. I'll post the results as soon as I test them. 

-Justin N2TOH 




--





--
Mark Baldridge
608.561.3853


Re: Maybe a dumb Bitx40 BFO question and others

Jerry Gaffke
 

If you want to vary the BFO, I think it best to go with Allard's V2 firmware and drive the BFO from the si5351.
But yes, if you really want to push and pull the crystal oscillator BFO, you could vary the frequency a bit by adding coils and caps.
The BFO would have to be pulled lower by about 3khz to switch to the other sideband.

Solid state relays are often designed to switch 120 VAC power, that kind of "relay"
won't work at RF, and probably not at DC either.
I consider relays to be relatively unreliable, and am inclined to replace them with silicon.
The only one on the Bitx40 that would be a puzzle is how to switch the antenna over between RX and TX.
This version of the Bitx has found a way:  http://www.qrpkits.com/bitx20a.html
A more typical solution would be a PIN diode TR switch, see posts 32099 and 32109
One good reason to do away with the relays would be to get fast breakin CW.

The crystals are matched for frequency to within 50hz by hand at hfsignals,
other crystal characteristics are also important.
You don't want to just swap in some random crystals without careful measurements.
Not at all clear that tall crystals would be better than short ones.
    https://www.arrl.org/files/file/QEX_Next_Issue/Nov-Dec_2009/QEX_Nov-Dec_09_Feature.pdf
You might figure out how to measure your crystal filter passband,
determine how well it is doing before trying to improve it.

I suppose the receiver noise figure could get lower if you redesigned the amp at Q1.
But noise figure is not an issue at 7mhz, as atmospheric and galactic noise determine the noise floor.
We're more concerned with dynamic range and linearity.
I think you will find that the mmbt3904 currently at Q1 is doing just fine.

Jerry, KE7ER 


On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 08:28 pm, James Lawrie wrote:
I have 3 Bitx 40s and a uBitx I have not mounted yet, I’m still getting misc parts together to build/mods. My question is this, looking at original Bitx schematic it shows a variable cap and an inductor in the BFO section. Would it not be possible to mount a small panel mount variable cap and inductor to “pull” the BFO to desired frequency?

If so would that not cover both LSB and USB?

Purchased several 12mhz Full sized series crystals to swap out the short ones and low noise npn surface mount transistors to swap out at least the rf side ones. I only plan this for one of the bitx40s unless it makes a big difference.

Oh one other question for the gurus, would replacing the relays with solid state or even mercury wetted relays solve the noise issues? I have both types.


Software support Request for Full QSK BITX40

Gary O'Neil
 

Greetings Allard;
 
I've got my BITX40 modified to work Full QSK, but I've noticed your software doesn't support that mode. Any chance you can add this to your 1.27.x Code? I think your V2 code requires other hardware mods which I don't think are needed for the single band radios.The hardware switches in the sub or very low microsecond range, but its an unusable feature with your software due to the built in timer, pop mitigation delays, turning of CLK2 off and on, etc. Full QSK should be an easier mode to implement, since everything switches simultaneously (by necessity), and doesn't require sequencing. i.e. offset the display to read the transmit operating frequency, then simultaneously enable PTT and the CW Carrier. For full QSK, everything follows the keying. 

The fast switching enables it to work like a real SSB transceiver now also, but it is a bit problematic to use in Full QSK mode because it keeps the transmitter keyed between elements (Semi-QSK). The RF switch follows the keying during Full QSK so you can receive between elements; and since your software doesn't anticipate such instantaneous T to R transitions, the transmitter feeds back on itself for the duration of the hang time. while the key is up, creating a 5 to 10 W spur at around 8.5 MHz. LOL! My workaround for this was to use the Mic PTT line which doesn't introduce the delays. This requires that I force the carrier offset outside your code, and of course your code doesn't recognize this as CW, disables my ability to use the keyer features, interferes with using the rig on SSB, etc. No T/R or R/T transition pops are generated, so there's no need for generating delays to mitigate them. Of course the Hang-Time spur issue makes Semi-QSK unusable as implemented. 

If you don't feel quite up to adding another feature to the V1 code, can you recommend an earlier version I could migrate back to that preceded the CW upgrades?

72

Gary, N3GO



Re: Interesting IDE hiccup

Jerry Gaffke
 

Jack,

That's good to know I suppose.
But still, my primary point is that the Arduino IDE works best when
fed a single *.ino file.  Breaking up a small project for the Nano into files
and adding headers just adds potential for trouble and confusion with not much upside.
 
Though I have mostly worked on pcb design or VHDL firmware, I've also written in C
off and on these last 40 years, some were significant programming efforts, 
In '89 while working in Tokyo, I wrote a DMA device driver for a Sony News workstation.
Manuals for that Sony flavor of Unix were in Japanese, though most of the technical words
were borrowed from English and written phonetically in katakana, so I managed to
blunder my way through.  You'll be relieved to know I didn't cat all those files into one
big one before compiling the kernel. 
  
Jerry, KE7ER


On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 07:48 pm, Jack Purdum wrote:
If you create a project with multiple files in the IDE, each of those files will have it's own tab


Re: Interesting IDE hiccup

Ken Frazer
 

Jack,
I entirely agree with your position but it will never convince the naysayers. If you develop or have developed any significant software that needs to be maintained, multiple files are a must or you soon become overwhelmed. On the other hand, many hobbyist programmers will continue with the single file model. To each their own.

Ken
ke5jcb


On Jan 19, 2018, at 9:28 PM, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum@...> wrote:

Cross referencing would be pretty far down my list of reasons for switching to a different IDE, especially if you practice encapsulation in your coding. Number 1 on my list would be a true symbolic debugger...that would have real value and I'd switch in a heartbeat. I do agree that, working with the Nano and its small resource base, splitting the file may not make sense. 

But, what if you're not working with a 16x2 LCD display. Instead, pretend you want some like this:

<ForcedTest.jpg>
First of all, the code behind such a system is not going to fit into 32K. You need more Flash and SRAM and probably a much more powerful µC. Then suppose you want to make it a true touch screen over and above encoder support. That adds another layer of complexity. And you also want to have features hidden behind the display and allow for all kinds of custom settings (keyer speed, Farnsworth, sidetone frequency, attach/decay, filter selection, S meter, power meter, SWR meter, etc.). Then, on top of that, you want to write the code in such a way that you can port it to a different processor down the road, cuz you know one's coming. Making all of that fit into a single file is cumbersome. Do that, and you'll start to appreciate segmented project files and incremental compiles. Still, breaking out the various parts of such a project is easily manageable in the Arduino IDE with multiple files. A single file is like try to eat an elephant in a single gulp. Breaking it up makes the task less daunting. All I need to do to work on a specific element of the project is click on a tab. No reason to load another file...it's already there.

I have no reason to break up Allard's files. It works beautifully and, even better, works within the confines of the Nano. Indeed, somehow Farhan managed to add more features to the µBITX code and still have it all fit into a Nano (even though he did break it up into multiple files). That said, Farhan has given all of us a set of shoulders to stand on. What we choose to do with that new viewpoint depends upon the beholder. No view is wrong...it's what you see.

Jack, W8TEE


From: Michael Babineau <mbabineau.ve3wmb@...>
To: BITX20@groups.io 
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Interesting IDE hiccup

I  agree with Jerry.

Given the relatively small  amount of code that will fit in a Arduino Nano, you might as well put it all into a single file, IMHO.
This also makes it easier to manipulate with the rather simplistic Arduino IDE. 

If you put your Arduino code into multiple files you can certainly impose better code structure, but then you really want to be using a better IDE (like Visual Studio Code with the PlatformIO Arduino/AVR plugin) as then you get cross-referencing etc.  That makes it less accessible to less experienced developers who
might want to make some slight changes or customizations to their copy of the Arduino sketch.  Arduino is all about making micro-controllers accessible
to the masses, so I think that there is sometime to be said for keeping it simple. 

Cheers

Michael VE3WMB


<ForcedTest.jpg>


Re: Maybe a dumb Bitx40 BFO question and others

 

#Bitx40

If you do the V2 firmware mod you wont need to worry about either.

Yes if you wanted to you could mount it away from the board but that's not "best" conditions for a BFO circuit like this one. If you put your hand near it will shift, mounting it to the case with wires to and from the BFO will cause it to be unstable I would guess. Every time you shift the BFO you will need to realign the radio as well.

As to the relays noise? what noise mine are fine?

Can't help you with anything regarding the Ubitx yet mine hasn't shipped :-)


--
David

 N8DAH
Kit-Projects.com


Re: Interesting IDE hiccup

Jack, W8TEE
 

Cross referencing would be pretty far down my list of reasons for switching to a different IDE, especially if you practice encapsulation in your coding. Number 1 on my list would be a true symbolic debugger...that would have real value and I'd switch in a heartbeat. I do agree that, working with the Nano and its small resource base, splitting the file may not make sense.

But, what if you're not working with a 16x2 LCD display. Instead, pretend you want some like this:

Inline image
First of all, the code behind such a system is not going to fit into 32K. You need more Flash and SRAM and probably a much more powerful µC. Then suppose you want to make it a true touch screen over and above encoder support. That adds another layer of complexity. And you also want to have features hidden behind the display and allow for all kinds of custom settings (keyer speed, Farnsworth, sidetone frequency, attach/decay, filter selection, S meter, power meter, SWR meter, etc.). Then, on top of that, you want to write the code in such a way that you can port it to a different processor down the road, cuz you know one's coming. Making all of that fit into a single file is cumbersome. Do that, and you'll start to appreciate segmented project files and incremental compiles. Still, breaking out the various parts of such a project is easily manageable in the Arduino IDE with multiple files. A single file is like try to eat an elephant in a single gulp. Breaking it up makes the task less daunting. All I need to do to work on a specific element of the project is click on a tab. No reason to load another file...it's already there.

I have no reason to break up Allard's files. It works beautifully and, even better, works within the confines of the Nano. Indeed, somehow Farhan managed to add more features to the µBITX code and still have it all fit into a Nano (even though he did break it up into multiple files). That said, Farhan has given all of us a set of shoulders to stand on. What we choose to do with that new viewpoint depends upon the beholder. No view is wrong...it's what you see.

Jack, W8TEE


From: Michael Babineau <mbabineau.ve3wmb@...>
To: BITX20@groups.io
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Interesting IDE hiccup

I  agree with Jerry.

Given the relatively small  amount of code that will fit in a Arduino Nano, you might as well put it all into a single file, IMHO.
This also makes it easier to manipulate with the rather simplistic Arduino IDE. 

If you put your Arduino code into multiple files you can certainly impose better code structure, but then you really want to be using a better IDE (like Visual Studio Code with the PlatformIO Arduino/AVR plugin) as then you get cross-referencing etc.  That makes it less accessible to less experienced developers who
might want to make some slight changes or customizations to their copy of the Arduino sketch.  Arduino is all about making micro-controllers accessible
to the masses, so I think that there is sometime to be said for keeping it simple. 

Cheers

Michael VE3WMB



Maybe a dumb Bitx40 BFO question and others

James Lawrie
 

I have 3 Bitx 40s and a uBitx I have not mounted yet, I’m still getting misc parts together to build/mods. My question is this, looking at original Bitx schematic it shows a variable cap and an inductor in the BFO section. Would it not be possible to mount a small panel mount variable cap and inductor to “pull” the BFO to desired frequency?

If so would that not cover both LSB and USB?

Purchased several 12mhz Full sized series crystals to swap out the short ones and low noise npn surface mount transistors to swap out at least the rf side ones. I only plan this for one of the bitx40s unless it makes a big difference.

Oh one other question for the gurus, would replacing the relays with solid state or even mercury wetted relays solve the noise issues? I have both types.

Thanks,

James Lawrie


Re: Mica Cap replacements for WA2EBY Filter?

MVS Sarma
 

Jstin, If you make PCB, it could have facity for both throhiole for silver mca and for smd too.

Regards
MVS Sarma
 

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 3:04 AM, Mark Baldridge <marktbaldridge@...> wrote:
This will be great. I plan to order the SMT parts as they are cheap, and then "upgrade" to the mica caps if I need to.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:15 AM, <freefuel@...> wrote:
Hi Mark, I have started to build up two filter boards for this amp, one with mica caps I was lucky enough to find at a local surplus outlet, and another with SMT parts. I'll post the results as soon as I test them. 

-Justin N2TOH 




--
Mark Baldridge
608.561.3853



Re: Interesting IDE hiccup

Jack, W8TEE
 

"If you have a file named keyer then you have to search for a file named keyer."

Jerry:

Actually, you don't. If you create a project with multiple files in the IDE, each of those files will have it's own tab. All you do is click on the tab and the "keyer" (or whatever) file pops up. Based on your comment, I don't think you've tried a multi-file project in the Arduino IDE. Just create a bogus project with a couple of files, place them in the same directory and load it into the IDE (e.g., bogus.ino, myHeader.h, keyer.cpp). You find one click is faster than you can type anything in vi.

Jack, W8TEE



From: Vince Vielhaber <vev@...>
To: BITX20@groups.io
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Interesting IDE hiccup

I thought it was "Do unto others before they do you"

Vince.



On 01/19/2018 05:32 PM, Ronald Pfeiffer via Groups.Io wrote:
> Your right ,  we do what works for each of us.
>
> I never believed in that saying
> "do unto others as you would want them to do for you"
> After all how do they know what I want! hihi
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke=yahoo.com@groups.io>
> *To:* BITX20@groups.io
> *Sent:* Friday, January 19, 2018 5:28 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [BITX20] Interesting IDE hiccup
>
> If you have a file named keyer then you have to search for a file named
> keyer.
> However it is that you go about that.
>
> What works best depends on how you work.
> Me, I'd much rather touch-type "/KEYER" within vi
> than screw around with popping open some other file.
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 01:41 pm, Ronald Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>    Of course if you had a file named keyer you would not have to search
>    for it.
>
>
>
>
>

--
  Michigan VHF Corp.  http://www.nobucks.net/   http://www.CDupe.com/
                          http://www.metalworkingfun.com






Re: Raduino v1.27.6 (few small improvements) released #bitx40

Jerry Gaffke
 

FIrst off, I suggest you get the Bitx40 working exactly as it comes out of the box,
as per the instructions up on hfsignals.com/Bitx40
You may not want to get on the air (the tuning mechanism jumps around a hundred hz or so),
but at least listen to some signals and get some power out to a dummy load.
Once the rig works, then start doing hardware hacks and updating firmware

Allard has two branches of code:  
V1  code   https://github.com/amunters/bitx40
requires the fewest hardware mods, and leaves the BFO using the 12mhz crystal osillator
V2 code    https://github.com/amunters/bitx40-raduino-v2
requires more mods, including one that drives the BFO from the si5351's clk0.

Both branches are being actively developed.
The V2 code allows you to do more stuff, such as adjust the BFO frequency to better align with your crystal filter.

Jerry, KE7ER

 


On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 06:08 pm, AGØH wrote:
I'm somewhat confused.  I have a BitX40 that came with the radiuno  last November.  I'm still trying to go through all the mods I want to make before I start initial construction.  I had planned on '
updating the radiuno to 127.6 before I start construction.  I assumed the radiuno does supply the the digital osc for the BFO.  So, if V2 is for digital BFO, then I guess I'm confused and maybe should
start with Ver 2?  
73,
Keith - AG0H


Re: Raduino v1.27.6 (few small improvements) released #bitx40

AGØH
 

Hi Allard,

I'm somewhat confused.  I have a BitX40 that came with the radiuno  last November.  I'm still trying to go through all the mods I want to make before I start initial construction.  I had planned on '
updating the radiuno to 127.6 before I start construction.  I assumed the radiuno does supply the the digital osc for the BFO.  So, if V2 is for digital BFO, then I guess I'm confused and maybe should
start with Ver 2?  
73,
Keith - AG0H


Re: Excellway EF01 panel dimensions

Jim Sheldon
 

Ditto on the Amazing, I flunked mechanical drawing (drafting) in college too many years ago to count.  I'm lucky I can even mill a straight line on my little bench top milling machine from Harbor Freight Tools.  It does come in handy for cutting the rectangular windows for LCD displays though - LOL.

Jim Sheldon - W0EB

------ Original Message ------
From: "Jeffrey Peters" <dek9jp@...>
Sent: 1/19/2018 7:29:32 PM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Excellway EF01 panel dimensions

Mike you are amazing!

Sure wish I had some of your skills!

73, Jeff K9JP

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 8:10 PM, Michael Hagen <motdog@...> wrote:


On 1/19/2018 5:08 PM, Michael Hagen wrote:

I printed panels, this is the rear.  I can help you.

I made them 1/8" then took away the back portion so they fit the 1/16" slot.

I will try to find that picture.  Here are the dimensions  I put a fan in the rear centered on the heatsinks.

Mike, WA6ISP


On 1/19/2018 3:30 PM, ekelley wrote:
Excellway EF01

-- 
Mike Hagen, WA6ISP
10917 Bryant Street
Yucaipa, Ca. 92399
(909) 918-0058
PayPal ID  "MotDog@..."
Mike@...

-- 
Mike Hagen, WA6ISP
10917 Bryant Street
Yucaipa, Ca. 92399
(909) 918-0058
PayPal ID  "MotDog@..."
Mike@...




--
Not all of me will die - - - The good I do will live forever.  <><