1. BITX20@groups.io
   Date   
First microBitx contact

tonyrazzell2@...
 

Just tried out mBtix for the first time last night, no box yet(on order) so just laid out on the desk. Like some others, the BFO seemed off and it took at bit of adjustment to get received SSB to sound OK. Antenna is a long wire (W3EDP style) plus an L match. 5/7 report from OV1CDX in Denmark on 80 metres so pretty pleased with that as I guess only around 5W is getting out. If I heard correctly, Frank was running 500W!!
Tony
G0PBM
Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

4Z1NT
 

I found my BITX 40 to be much better on receive than my old Sommerkamp FT277ZD on the same antenna. The difference was such that I could hear all the digital wurble with the BITX40 and not at all on the Sommerkamp FT277ZD.

Menashe



On 13 May 2018 at 07:48, Zbigniew L <zlipecki@...> wrote:
On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 08:10 pm, Tom, wb6b wrote:

I see a lot of good conversations here about improving the uBITX transmitter output. However, I see very little about how good the receiver is. My question is, have many people done comparisons of the uBITX receiver vs their other radios; particularly on SSB?

 

In my case I have noticed that my SDR using a cheap dongle seems to outperform the uBITX receiver substantially. Even though I don’t consider the SDR dongles to be the pinnacle of RF design, I guess throwing brute force real time math at the receiver side makes up for some of it.

 

Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement?

 

Additional miscellaneous thoughts:

 

Rather than cutting up the uBITX or trying to cram more software into the one Arduino Nano on the uBITX I was pondering running multiple Nano’s communing on the I2C bus. They are only about $3.50 apiece. (The 3.3v bus [albeit barely] is in spec for the Nano.) 

 

But, rather than cutting up the radio I think I’d rather simply treat the uBITX as a peripheral to a Raspberry Pi. I’d place the Pi (and USB audio adaptors) in a metal box packaged in the same case as the uBITX.

 

What I’d do with the Pi is:

 

  1. Process and level the microphone audio for transmitting.
  2. Process, level and noise filter the receive audio, as well use a DSP library to add bandpass and notch filters.
  3. Use one of the digital mode libraries for digital mode communication. 
  4. Maybe get rid of the T/R audio pop while processing the receive audio. 
  5. Control other gizmos I may add to the transceiver.
  6. Put a fancy touch screen display on the whole thing.

Additionally, I’m doing a literature search to see what work has been done on training Neural Nets to decode Morse Code. It would seem that a technology that can identify people, dogs and cats from low resolution photos (although there was a study that found AI could mistake pictures of muffins for chihuahuas), could finally realize an adaptable, reliable CW decoder. (This would run on the Pi, also).

 

I’m sure others must be working on the same things. Anyone know about such projects. That would save time over starting from scratch.

Tom, wb6b

Next time just click on the 3 bars completely to the right, it will show the advance toolbar...

 Zbigniew L...73


 
Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

iz oos
 

Sensitivity is fine. I have used an homemade norcal S3 generator to see if it could receive it and was right. I check all receivers with it and all from ham radio, mil rigs and cheap portables behave like that. All have plenty of sensitivity just like dongles. I would add an accessory like the inrad output for the IC-7300 to add eventually an external preselector. And I would add to buffered outputs before and after the filter to add an sdr receiver. In any case it would not become an elecraft K3S as the oscillator has more phase noise so close very strong signals will increase the overall noise level of the receiver and in that case you can only use an attenuator. The 8bits cheap dongles have an extremely limited dynamic range and I would never use them unless in the outputs of the Ubitx I described before where all the filtering is done before. I have to say the receiver is well designed and adding an sdr in the chain can really add everything can desire, given the limitations of the phase noise.


Il 13/mag/2018 05:10, "Tom, wb6b" <wb6b@...> ha scritto:

I see a lot of good conversations here about improving the uBITX transmitter output. However, I see very little about how good the receiver is. My question is, have many people done comparisons of the uBITX receiver vs their other radios; particularly on SSB?

 

In my case I have noticed that my SDR using a cheap dongle seems to outperform the uBITX receiver substantially. Even though I don’t consider the SDR dongles to be the pinnacle of RF design, I guess throwing brute force real time math at the receiver side makes up for some of it.

 

Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement?

 

Additional miscellaneous thoughts:

 

Rather than cutting up the uBITX or trying to cram more software into the one Arduino Nano on the uBITX I was pondering running multiple Nano’s communing on the I2C bus. They are only about $3.50 apiece. (The 3.3v bus [albeit barely] is in spec for the Nano.) 

 

But, rather than cutting up the radio I think I’d rather simply treat the uBITX as a peripheral to a Raspberry Pi. I’d place the Pi (and USB audio adaptors) in a metal box packaged in the same case as the uBITX.

 

What I’d do with the Pi is:

 

  1. Process and level the microphone audio for transmitting.
  2. Process, level and noise filter the receive audio, as well use a DSP library to add bandpass and notch filters.
  3. Use one of the digital mode libraries for digital mode communication. 
  4. Maybe get rid of the T/R audio pop while processing the receive audio. 
  5. Control other gizmos I may add to the transceiver.
  6. Put a fancy touch screen display on the whole thing.

Additionally, I’m doing a literature search to see what work has been done on training Neural Nets to decode Morse Code. It would seem that a technology that can identify people, dogs and cats from low resolution photos (although there was a study that found AI could mistake pictures of muffins for chihuahuas), could finally realize an adaptable, reliable CW decoder. (This would run on the Pi, also).

 

I’m sure others must be working on the same things. Anyone know about such projects. That would save time over starting from scratch.

Tom, wb6b

 
Re: can I bypass the CP2102 chip on the NANO with an FTDI based serial adapter? #arduino #cp2102 #ftdi #nano

Tom, wb6b
 

One more comment. I was assuming your cable is intended for 5 volt digital logic connections, not actual RS-232. If it is RS-232 then the voltages may be an issue. But, you may be able to use limiting resistors and diodes to protect the Nano, you will need to experiment.
Re: Should we adopt the KD8CEC firmware?

Mike Woods
 

There’s always a link on the right hand menu of http://www.ubitx.net 

The current release v1.061 version of the manual can be found here:


Cheers

Mike ZL1AXG ubitx.net


On Sun, 13 May 2018 at 2:37 PM, marjannorm <marjannorm@...> wrote:
Hi Mike,
where can I get hold of Ian's manual?   Can you please direct me to the url?
thanks
Norm vk5gi
McLaren Vale
South Australia

Re: boosting the power on 28 MHz #ubitx

K9HZ <bill@...>
 

See the posts in the 3/21-3/31 date range (look for “RD16HHF1 power curve flattening”)… We’ve been through this.  There were SPICE simulations, changes to all of the RF stages (bypass caps), including changing out T11 including various tries at compensating for excess inductance at HF with parallel C, different feedback resistors and caps. RD16HHF1 transistors for IFR510’s, PA voltage is 14V.

 

Sorry for the terse answer, I’m trying to finish a prototype line section before I leave for Dayton.

 

 

Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ

 

Owner - Operator

Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC

Staunton, Illinois

 

Owner – Operator

Villa Grand Piton – J68HZ

Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.

Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com

Like us on Facebook! facebook icon

 

Moderator – North American QRO Group at Groups.IO.

 

email:  bill@...

 

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 10:24 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] boosting the power on 28 MHz #ubitx

 

When you see 26 and 19 Watts, what exactly are you looking at?
What mods, and at what voltage to the drains?

Jerry

On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 07:59 pm, K9HZ wrote:

I see a maximum of 26 watts on 40 meters and 19 watts on 10 meters...


Virus-free. www.avg.com

Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

Raj vu2zap
 

tom,

I suggest you keep the font color black! the grey makes it difficult to read.

Raj

At 13-05-18, you wrote:

I don't see a way to re-edit a post, so here it is again, I hope, in an easier to read font. It looks like the issue is with writing in another editor and pasting that into the on-line editor here.
Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

Ashhar Farhan
 

The QTC, the sweden's ham radio magazine has put the ubitx+rtl_sdr on par with some top rated ICOM dsp radio. You might want to see how that author did it. 

- f

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Zbigniew L <zlipecki@...> wrote:
On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 08:10 pm, Tom, wb6b wrote:

I see a lot of good conversations here about improving the uBITX transmitter output. However, I see very little about how good the receiver is. My question is, have many people done comparisons of the uBITX receiver vs their other radios; particularly on SSB?

 

In my case I have noticed that my SDR using a cheap dongle seems to outperform the uBITX receiver substantially. Even though I don’t consider the SDR dongles to be the pinnacle of RF design, I guess throwing brute force real time math at the receiver side makes up for some of it.

 

Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement?

 

Additional miscellaneous thoughts:

 

Rather than cutting up the uBITX or trying to cram more software into the one Arduino Nano on the uBITX I was pondering running multiple Nano’s communing on the I2C bus. They are only about $3.50 apiece. (The 3.3v bus [albeit barely] is in spec for the Nano.) 

 

But, rather than cutting up the radio I think I’d rather simply treat the uBITX as a peripheral to a Raspberry Pi. I’d place the Pi (and USB audio adaptors) in a metal box packaged in the same case as the uBITX.

 

What I’d do with the Pi is:

 

  1. Process and level the microphone audio for transmitting.
  2. Process, level and noise filter the receive audio, as well use a DSP library to add bandpass and notch filters.
  3. Use one of the digital mode libraries for digital mode communication. 
  4. Maybe get rid of the T/R audio pop while processing the receive audio. 
  5. Control other gizmos I may add to the transceiver.
  6. Put a fancy touch screen display on the whole thing.

Additionally, I’m doing a literature search to see what work has been done on training Neural Nets to decode Morse Code. It would seem that a technology that can identify people, dogs and cats from low resolution photos (although there was a study that found AI could mistake pictures of muffins for chihuahuas), could finally realize an adaptable, reliable CW decoder. (This would run on the Pi, also).

 

I’m sure others must be working on the same things. Anyone know about such projects. That would save time over starting from scratch.

Tom, wb6b

Next time just click on the 3 bars completely to the right, it will show the advance toolbar...

 Zbigniew L...73


 
Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

Vince Vielhaber
 

Don't bother. Many of us read via email so all you'll do is send out another copy of your message.

Vince.

On 05/12/2018 11:42 PM, Tom, wb6b wrote:
If there is a way to edit posted messages, I'll be glad to do that. (and
fix a misspelling I see, also). I only see one size font that is not a
"header" size though.

--
Michigan VHF Corp. http://www.nobucks.net/ http://www.CDupe.com/
http://www.metalworkingfun.com
Re: Should we adopt the KD8CEC firmware?

Tom Christian
 

Here's the link for the KD8CEC manual, Norm: http://ubitx.net
It's one of the site menu items.
Tom
AB7WT
Re: Should we adopt the KD8CEC firmware?

Tom Christian
 

I vote for the stock code with CAT added.
Tom
AB7WT
Re: PA breaking into oscillation? (uBitx)

Mike
 

I could have a balance issue with the mixer diodes, I suppose. I'm using discrete BAT85 . . . not necessarily matched but from the same lot (Digi-Key).
The BAT85 is electrically identical to the BAT54.
Re: can I bypass the CP2102 chip on the NANO with an FTDI based serial adapter? #arduino #cp2102 #ftdi #nano

Tom, wb6b
 

You should be able to connect your FTDI cable directly to the D0 and D1 pins on the Nano. The onboard chip drives the serial data through 1K resistors and allows the D0 and D1 pins to override the onboard chip. You may need to manually press the reset button before starting a new program upload. 
Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

Tom, wb6b
 

I don't see a way to re-edit a post, so here it is again, I hope, in an easier to read font. It looks like the issue is with writing in another editor and pasting that into the on-line editor here.

----

I see a lot of good conversations here about improving the uBITX transmitter output. However, I see very little about how good the receiver is. My question is, have many people done comparisons of the uBITX receiver vs their other radios; particularly on SSB?

In my case I have noticed that my SDR using a cheap dongle seems to outperform the uBITX receiver substantially. Even though I don’t consider the SDR dongles to be the pinnacle of RF design, I guess throwing brute force real time math at the receiver side makes up for some of it.

Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement?


Additional miscellaneous thoughts:

Rather than cutting up the uBITX or trying to cram more software into the one Arduino Nano on the uBITX I was pondering running multiple Nano’s communicating on the I2C bus. They are only about $3.50 apiece. (The 3.3v bus [albeit barely] is in spec for the Nano.) 

But, rather than cutting up the radio I think I’d rather simply treat the uBITX as a peripheral to a Raspberry Pi. I’d place the Pi (and USB audio adaptors) in a metal box packaged in the same case as the uBITX.

What I’d do with the Pi is: 

  1. Process and level the microphone audio for transmitting.

  2. Process, level and noise filter the receive audio, as well use a DSP library to add bandpass and notch filters.

  3. Use one of the digital mode libraries for digital mode communication. 

  4. Maybe get rid of the T/R audio pop while processing the receive audio. 

  5. Control other gizmos I may add to the transceiver.

  6. Put a fancy touch screen display on the whole thing.

Additionally, I’m doing a literature search to see what work has been done on training Neural Nets to decode Morse Code. It would seem that a technology that can identify people, dogs and cats from low resolution photos (although there was a study that found AI could mistake pictures of muffins for chihuahuas), could finally realize an adaptable, reliable CW decoder. (This would run on the Pi, also).

I’m sure others must be working on the same things. Anyone know about such projects. That would save time over starting from scratch.

Tom, wb6b
Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

Tom, wb6b
 

If there is a way to edit posted messages, I'll be glad to do that. (and fix a misspelling I see, also). I only see one size font that is not a "header" size though.
Re: uBITXII

VE7CWS WRSeiler <waltrseiler@...>
 

I fully agree, address the microphone audio, the frame power out issues and generally do a complete workaround on those things that have been addressed. As to the software, keep it simple and for those that want to adapt other sketches or write their own continue support for that. 

The principals that have conceptualized this entire project have done an incredible task. This group has and is a great helpful resource for those wishing to experiment and learn

isnt that the spirit of amateur radio!

WRS VE7CWS
Re: Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

Lee
 

Tom, could you maybe use a larger font?  Just one size bigger.  My old eyes are struggling to read your message.
--
      Lee - N9LO

    
"I Void Warranties"
Re: boosting the power on 28 MHz #ubitx

Jerry Gaffke
 

When you see 26 and 19 Watts, what exactly are you looking at?
What mods, and at what voltage to the drains?

Jerry


On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 07:59 pm, K9HZ wrote:
I see a maximum of 26 watts on 40 meters and 19 watts on 10 meters...
Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement? -- And some other miscellaneous thoughts.

Tom, wb6b
 

I see a lot of good conversations here about improving the uBITX transmitter output. However, I see very little about how good the receiver is. My question is, have many people done comparisons of the uBITX receiver vs their other radios; particularly on SSB?

 

In my case I have noticed that my SDR using a cheap dongle seems to outperform the uBITX receiver substantially. Even though I don’t consider the SDR dongles to be the pinnacle of RF design, I guess throwing brute force real time math at the receiver side makes up for some of it.

 

Are the uBITX receivers ripe for improvement?

 

Additional miscellaneous thoughts:

 

Rather than cutting up the uBITX or trying to cram more software into the one Arduino Nano on the uBITX I was pondering running multiple Nano’s communing on the I2C bus. They are only about $3.50 apiece. (The 3.3v bus [albeit barely] is in spec for the Nano.) 

 

But, rather than cutting up the radio I think I’d rather simply treat the uBITX as a peripheral to a Raspberry Pi. I’d place the Pi (and USB audio adaptors) in a metal box packaged in the same case as the uBITX.

 

What I’d do with the Pi is:

 

  1. Process and level the microphone audio for transmitting.
  2. Process, level and noise filter the receive audio, as well use a DSP library to add bandpass and notch filters.
  3. Use one of the digital mode libraries for digital mode communication. 
  4. Maybe get rid of the T/R audio pop while processing the receive audio. 
  5. Control other gizmos I may add to the transceiver.
  6. Put a fancy touch screen display on the whole thing.

Additionally, I’m doing a literature search to see what work has been done on training Neural Nets to decode Morse Code. It would seem that a technology that can identify people, dogs and cats from low resolution photos (although there was a study that found AI could mistake pictures of muffins for chihuahuas), could finally realize an adaptable, reliable CW decoder. (This would run on the Pi, also).

 

I’m sure others must be working on the same things. Anyone know about such projects. That would save time over starting from scratch.

Tom, wb6b

 
Re: boosting the power on 28 MHz #ubitx

K9HZ <bill@...>
 

Yes it does increase the output across the entire spectrum, but mostly above 18 MHz, and it is greatest at 28 MHz . It cancels some inductance at higher frequencies that is problematic. I see a maximum of 26 watts on 40 meters and 19 watts on 10 meters... you can easily dial that back with RV1 accordingly.


Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ

Owner - Operator
Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC
Staunton, Illinois

Owner – Operator
Villa Grand Piton – J68HZ
Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.
Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com
Like us on Facebook!

Moderator – North American QRO Group at Groups.IO.

email: bill@wjschmidt.com

-----Original Message-----
From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim Gorman
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 6:59 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] boosting the power on 28 MHz #ubitx

Does the cap provide output leveling or increased output from 80m to 10m?

I mainly operate 80m, 40m, and a little 20m. The output there seems to be fine for what I do.

tim ab0wr

On Sat, 12 May 2018 16:56:57 -0500
"K9HZ" <bill@wjschmidt.com> wrote:

I just put mine at the base of T11 but there are many ways of doing it
depending the type of part you use... I also replaced T11 but let's
not go there yet.


Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ
PJ2/K9HZ

Owner - Operator
Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC
Staunton, Illinois

Owner – Operator
Villa Grand Piton – J68HZ
Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.
Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com
Like us on Facebook!

Moderator – North American QRO Group at Groups.IO.

email: bill@wjschmidt.com



-----Original Message-----
From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim
Gorman Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 4:31 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] boosting the power on 28 MHz #ubitx

How do you recommend doing that? A disc ceramic between IRF510 pins?
Can you get an smd cap between the pins on the bottom of the ckt
board?

tim ab0wr

On Sat, 12 May 2018 13:38:52 -0500
"K9HZ" <bill@wjschmidt.com> wrote:

Did you try putting about 330pf across the primary of T11 (PA output
transformer). That will make a big difference...


Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ
PJ2/K9HZ

Owner - Operator
Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC
Staunton, Illinois

Owner – Operator
Villa Grand Piton – J68HZ
Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.
Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com
Like us on Facebook!

Moderator – North American QRO Group at Groups.IO.

email: bill@wjschmidt.com



-----Original Message-----
From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Skip
Davis via Groups.Io Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 1:27 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] boosting the power on 28 MHz #ubitx

Allison I tried the 220pf cap on RV1 and didn’t see any gain at 28
MHZ. I also tried removing the feedback resistors in the finals
suggested by Farhan without any gain. What I also have done was the
capacitor/choke mod suggested by Howard for the driver stages and
that has worked. With RV1 set to 10 watts on 40 meters I now get
about 2.5 watts on 28 MHZ up from the 1.25 - 1.5 watts before. I
also see about 8 or 9 watts on 20 meters. I’m running Ian’s firmware
I think version 1.06 something.

Skip Davis, NC9O




---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
37861 - 37880 of 86575