Date   
Re: Ubitx delivery suggestion

rlawson695@...
 

Call DHL, and ask them. When my uBITX came a man in regular car stop at end of drive,put it at front door and left. No signature was needed.  73’s de AC8XZ 

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

walt hodges
 

Please place me in the queue to purchase!!



On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Nik VK4PLN <nickpullen@...> wrote:
Ok, its comming along nicely.
So the idea is an EASY DIRECT replacment for the raduino with the option of 3 extra I2C devices.
Minimal soldering, NO SMD if you dont want to.
The SI5351 is implemented via a common breakout board.
So Solder on your headers, 7805, 3 capacitors, 1 recommended resistor(cut the joining trace) and your RV1 for the backlight, or convert to i2c LCD backpack and free up 6 digital IOs.

Please have a look at the board design and let me know if you see any issues...

I will order 30 boards and when they arive, test a few, and then the rest will be sold at cost price + postage: Maybe $5 all up? Ill have to see...

Thanks
73 VK4PLN


Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

Nick VK4PP
 

HI All, I will list on eBay when ready and post up a link..

73.

Re: Si5351 Programming Flowchart

K9WIS
 

there is a windows program on the adafruit website that will give you the parameters after you enter the frequency..I am using a nano($3) and one of the adafruit si5351break out boards($8) with a low pass filter9$5) for a QRSS 20mW xmtr I plan to release with a balloon..total cost under $20
Brian K9WIS

---- Pavel Milanes Costa <pavelmc@...> wrote:

Hi to all.

The flowchat is a instructive guide for the curious of how to doit
without float point math and an expression of the KISS principle.

It's just a cheat sheet to learn from.

The trick is to understand the way he (like Gerry) find a, b and c not
needing floating point math. (for the PLL/VCO Msynths case is)

a = int(Fvco/xtal)

b = Fvco % xtal (module, aka: rest of the division)

c = xtal

For example Gerry do a do..while to find a value of b/c that match the
allowed size of c, he need it because he is working with the output
Msynth dividers not the PLL/VCO Msynth, in his case c = fout and is
variable.

In the later case (moving the PLL/VCO Msynth, output Msynth dividers are
fixed) c is fixed and equal to the Xtal and we know it already then we
can do a simple x >> 5 to both b/c to retain maximum accuracy and make
it fit on the register. If we do that just set the output Msynth divider
to a integer & even value to minimize jitter or phase noise.

In Gerry routines he fixes the VCO and moves the output divider Msynth
and that make some jitter or phase noise (almost negligible in real
applications, I know) and makes 3 outs from just one fixed VCO and does
not handles the R values or the DIV_BY4 feature limiting the full range
of output frequencies (not needed on his target application, I know).

This is just another way of doing things, a way that can be better
understood because it uses a simple and elegant image (flowchart), to
make life (& code) easier (& smaller)...

BTW I found a possible bug that can haunt more than one in the routines
of computing MSx_P2. A tip for the "math" experts... and a common fault.

As per the data:

MSx_P2 = 128 * b - c * floor (128 * b / c)

Right?

It's very tempting to reduce it but the floor functions is in there...
let see... floor is the lower integer for that float number, hum...

Floor is on the C of Gcc the compiler used by the arduino project but it
implies the use of floating point math hence bigger code, just eliminate
it and do the math, let try to reduce it...

MSx_P2 = (128 * b) - (c * 128 * b / c)
MSx_P2 = (128 * b) - (128 * b) ---> (c is eliminated as it's * and /  in
the expression)
MSx_P2 = 128 * (b - b) ---> ( hum....)
MSx_P2 = 128 * 0 ---> (HUMMMM!!!)
MSx_P2 = 0 ---> (WTF !!!!)

Doing some math and wall head-hiting you can conclude that the floor
function is instructing you to IGNORE the use of fractions and then you
get a value in MSx_P2 that it related to the amount of error or rest of
division of doing things (math) with integers... hence the floor
function... forcing you to use just integers... nice.

For example Gerry users in his code this:

msxp2 = 128 * msb - 128 * msb / msc * msc;

If you play that same function with human and integer rules it play well
and result is different from zero, but if you use floating point math it
always equals to ZERO!

Let's play it with me in full integer math

let's say msb = 900 and msc = 1000

msxp2 = 128 * 900 - 128 * 900 / 1000 * 1000;
msxp2 = 115200 - 115200 / 1000 * 1000;
msxp2 = 115200 - 115 * 1000;   // <<<<=== here is the floor in action
(result in float is 115.200 we get it down to 115, all with the magic of
integer math)
msxp2 = 115200 - 115000;
msxp2 = 200;

In this case 200 is a relation of the error of using integer math...
interesting, mind you how the chip use it internally

For correctness and just to be sure to maintain the best accuracy you
must get sure the compiler do the 128*b/c * c in the correct order, that
is as per Gerry code fragment:

msxp2 = 128 * msb - 128 * msb / msc * msc;

Must be forced to execute in the correct order by placing some
parenthesis to maintain more accuracy.

msxp2 = 128 * msb - ((128 * msb) / msc) * msc;

Firmware size impact is unchanged, compiled code is the same (sha256sum)
with and without the parenthesis so GCC compiler is doing he job right,
beware of others...

I mentioned this because I have a ham fellow in university (freshman)
that hit his head against this wall a few times, "that's impossible,
that has no sense.... MSx_P2 is always zero..." he said...

Just my two cents for other that may be in troubles like this
understanding the chip.

Cheers, Pavel.

El 12/02/18 a las 12:07, JuanCarlos Berberena Gonzalez escribió:
Hi Guys
A weeks ago Josué Marin-CO7RR- sent me this information to share with
my group.
I am only try to be a good 'USER" testing some interesting project I
can get on the web and afterward share it with my group.
Now Pavel-CO7WT- sent me this link and I think is a good idea to share
with all of you.
https://nt7s.com/2018/02/si5351-programming-flowchart/

It is a Josué Marin email address
marinjosue75atgmaildotcom
Qrv's
73's Jc

Re: wrong frequency after software change. #ubitx

Ian Lee
 

Michael.
You seem to be doing a great project with BITX40. 
I have never used BITX40, so I can not talk about BITX40.
My EEProm WIPE routine , It runs only once when my firmware is used for the first time.
After that, it will not run again in any case.
As most engineers know, this is to defend against the same problem as the original questioner of the poem.

Each firmware has different eeprom address. Even in the same product, the address of the eeprom used by the version may be different.
So we can put the firmware ID or version value in the eeprom to avoid problems.
So if user are new to my firmware, you should see the message 'Init EEProm' on first boot. And after that, user have not seen it in any case.
(If erase the eeprom frequently, it will not be saved)
But the first questioner has had a problem. This is because the calibration area is not initialized For compatibility.
So, most users can use the firmware without updating the firmware again.

I hope your BITX40 project ends successfully. 

Ian KD8CEC


2018-02-13 2:27 GMT+09:00 Michael Shreeve <shreevester@...>:

Another strange twist which may be related. I changed a BITX40 rad to uBITX Raduino. Hardware change, you remove the 5 pin plug and put a header in its place. I really looked hard for any other differences in Hardware. Saw none. So, I programed with original software. Crazy, but LSB is USB on 80 and 40 (up to 10mhz) and other than that, seems stable and might be on freq. So, I tried Ians latest 1.01 and LSB is correct, USB is correct, have control also, but freq is off about 400khz. So, found an EEPROM WIPE routine, says it works for all size eproms, and did the wipe. No luck. Still off, I re-loaded the original Ashhar software stil backwards. Thinking I would need to use memory manager but not sure I have the skills. Any ideas ? 

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:01 AM, at91r40008 <yvon@...> wrote:
Thank you Jack, the problem is that it shows all the same name because it takes the project
name uBitx20. Every project I downloaded has a new folder name but inside
Arduino it shows uBitx20.
That is why I am going to rename them each time I download one.
--
73, Yvon NU6I




--
Michael Shreeve N6GRG
15901 Cloverdale Road
Anderson, CA 96007
530-410-8678
"Don't worry about a thing, 'Cause every little thing gonna be all right!" -Bob Marley





--
Best 73
KD8CEC / Ph.D ian lee
kd8cec@...
www.hamskey.com (my blog)

Re: Ubitx delivery suggestion

Tim Gorman
 

Same here. I wasn't here when the DHL guy left it at my front door today! BTW, my order date was 12/20/2017.

Re: My Bitx40 90% done

 

Nice job. Still waiting for my ubitx . It'll be a while. Ordered late Jan.

Re: Ubitx delivery suggestion

bill richardson
 

I didn’t have to sign using DHL

On Feb 20, 2018, at 9:48 PM, Bill Robbins <wa8cdu@...> wrote:

I will be gone for an extended time when my DHL ubitx arrives. If a signature is required does anyone have a suggestion to get my hands on it. Neighbors are too remote.

Bill


Re: R141/Q15

 

Mike check the R142, it may be open! Then what you describe may happen.

Raj

At 13-02-2018, you wrote:
I too had the now famous R141 getting smokin' hot. At the suggestion of forum members, I replaced Q14 with no success. I read and re-read voltages as well as component values in and around the circuitry. I now have Q14 mounted like a long legged bug vs flush to the board. Although I could see no connection/short from the device case to anywhere on the board, it's the only logical explanation for drawing X amps through R141. Nothing else made sense.

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

Nick VK4PP
 

Updated: Im pretty happy with it now, short of any major errors...

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

William R Maxwell
 

Nice but hmm, you might like to correct the spelling of OSCILATORS, Nick :)

Bill, VK7MX


On 13/02/2018 2:50 PM, Nik VK4PLN wrote:
Updated: Im pretty happy with it now, short of any major errors...

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

Nick VK4PP
 

Done, Thanks. ;-)

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

MVS Sarma
 

The Child card of si5351  --was it placed at right angles to the controller board?
 

Regards
MVS Sarma
 

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Nik VK4PLN <nickpullen@...> wrote:
Done, Thanks. ;-)


Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

Nick VK4PP
 

Flat ontop, but installed backwards:

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

MVS Sarma
 

Thanks please.
 It makes a totall\ of 3 cards atop lcd display.

Regards
MVS Sarma
 

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:59 AM, Nik VK4PLN <nickpullen@...> wrote:
Flat ontop, but installed backwards:


Re: Blown by nearby transceiver #bitx40help

AC9NM - Jerry Ponko
 

Arv,

Shielding, whether it's tin foil, copper, steel or aluminum forms what is called Faraday cage invented by Michael Faraday. When an outside electromagnetic (EM) wave encounters a Faraday cage its electric field induces a field in the cage which causes them to cancel. So the only requirement for the Faraday cage to work is that the material used be conductive. The cage doesn't have to be solid. For example, you may have seen power supplies, etc. covered by extruded aluminum or steel screening which will work as long as the holes are much smaller than a wavelength of the signal of interest. I myself use oak or birch enclosures lined with aluminum tape like the kind used for the joints of heating/cooling ducts. For the front panels I use 1/8" plexiglass with a laser printed sheet for panel markings. I'll have to post a photo someday of my BITX40 case as an example. I can't see myself paying the prices charged for aluminum or steel enclosures that cost as much as the BITX and you still have to do the cutouts for the controls and the panel markings.
JP

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

Nick VK4PP
 

Ebay Prices:
VK4PLN RadinoI2C : $8
LCD + Backpack : $3
Si5351 : $8
Arduino: $4
+bits : $2
= $25, not too bad.

73, VK4PLN

Re: Raduino seperate

Glenn
 

One reason for not doing that, is you might have a lot of parts on the other side also.  To dual footprint smd and through hole, means the smd pads need to be double sided with a thru hole. So taking up space on the other side.

Another reason is that in many pcb packages, the pcb has to be the same as the Schematic. Which means every part you wish to dual footprint needs to have two parts on the Schematic where required. Or to avoid this, every part needs  a special PCB dual  footprint in the Library.

glenn

vk3pe



Virus-free. www.avast.com

Re: Raduino Replacemnt, COMING SOON!

Nick VK4PP
 

Added bonus is that the SI5351 board uses 5v logic levels and has the shiters build in for the Si5351 chip.
Now the LCD I2C backpack can be used without modification. No reliance at all on the arduino 3.3v regulator.
Splice in an I2C TPA2016 AGC Amp and you are cooking!
73

Re: wrong frequency after software change. #ubitx

Mike Woods
 

Michael

I suspect I may have slightly misread your email post. 

You have a uBITx not a BITx40?

Is your Raduino 400kHz off frequency (or did you mean 400Hz)?   It does sound like it could be a similar problem to Yvon's if it is 400kHz off frequency and the LSB/USB are backwards! i.e. the EEPROM has become scrambled.  However, reinstalling the stock firmware should fix that.  If it doesn't the EEPROM may in fact be damaged in the Nano. It is possible there is something really wonky with your replacement Raduino: either the Nano chip (most likely) or the SI5351a chip.

Mike ZL1AXG


On 13/02/18 6:27 AM, Michael Shreeve wrote:
Another strange twist which may be related. I changed a BITX40 rad to uBITX Raduino. Hardware change, you remove the 5 pin plug and put a header in its place. I really looked hard for any other differences in Hardware. Saw none. So, I programed with original software. Crazy, but LSB is USB on 80 and 40 (up to 10mhz) and other than that, seems stable and might be on freq. So, I tried Ians latest 1.01 and LSB is correct, USB is correct, have control also, but freq is off about 400khz. So, found an EEPROM WIPE routine, says it works for all size eproms, and did the wipe. No luck. Still off, I re-loaded the original Ashhar software stil backwards. Thinking I would need to use memory manager but not sure I have the skills. Any ideas ? 

_._
--
Mike Woods
mhwoods@...