Date   
Re: BITX QSO Afternoon/Evening, Sunday, July 1, 3PM & 7PM Local Time, 7277 kHz in North America, 7177 kHz elsewhere.

Howard Fidel
 

Listened on 7.277 for a while, and called CQ several times tonight around 7:30 and 10 PM EST. Didn't hear anyone.

WB2VXW

On 7/1/2018 8:24 PM, Glenn Anderson wrote:
I'm just using my test leads for my multimeter (I'm at work) as an antenna... If you guys are having this much trouble it's no wonder I can't hear anything... HIHI



On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 7:25 PM, John P <j.m.price@...> wrote:
I just had a QSO with K2OCA who is only a couple of miles away. He was running significant power, so even if you didn't hear me, you might have heard him. I'm getting some significant QRM from 2275 this evening.
--
John - WA2FZW



--
73 de Glenn VE3JAU
Thunder Bay, Ontario


Re: TX frequency? of uBitx at CWL and CWU mode #ubitxcw

Glenn Anderson
 

Sorry if I'm missing something but is there a "user manual" for the Memory Manager? I've never used it before...

Thanks

On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 9:04 PM, Ian Lee <kd8cec@...> wrote:
Michael

I agree with you opinion, yes There is not enough explanation for them :)
I liked it the first time I implemented this feature. 
So I adopted it as a basic specification. That is, if no setting is made, 'TX' frequency is displayed unconditionally.
However, it is inconvenient for users who are familiar with the existing method.
So I decided to let the user choose by uBITX Manager.

Ian KD8CEC

2018-07-02 9:41 GMT+09:00 Michael Babineau <mbabineau.ve3wmb@...>:
Ian :

Thanks for the reply. I noticed that option in the uBITX Manager but I couldn't find any documentation on what I meant.
Now I know, so I will give it a try.  I am not sure that this will "fix" the issue in switching back and forth between CWU and CWL,
but I will recheck after I try with this option enabled. 

What I have observed is  that the RX Frequency stays the same when you switch from CWU to CWL, but the TX frequency is changed, which should not
be the case.

Thanks for the clarification.

Cheers

Michael VE3WMB 



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




--
73 de Glenn VE3JAU
Thunder Bay, Ontario

Re: Running on a Jump Box

AA9GG
 

The unit is going to draw (amperage wise) what it needs.  You should not limit it.  Now VOLTAGE is a different story, you will want to set that between 12 to 13.8Vdc.  As stated use RV1 to adjust the output power.

On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 9:43 PM, Gwen Patton <ardrhi@...> wrote:
That's extremely interesting and informative, and completely contrary to what I'm trying to do. I like the answers about using the pot on the board to lower the output power. Excellent. I'll probably do that.

But my initial problem was that, with a particular battery pack, the rig overdrove my tuner, making it fail to tune. Thankfully non-catastrophically, (i.e., it didn't catch fire) but it still wouldn't tune, and indications were that the power was out of range at the top end.

I realize that most users of radios want to MAXIMIZE output power, and then level it across as many bands as possible, so they have lots of output power in all of the bands they want to use. But I don't want to increase the power. I want to control it. The battery's specs list it at 12v @ 5A. So it has plenty of power and shouldn't limit the transmitter. But that's not my issue. The issue is that with that battery supply, there's TOO MUCH OUTPUT. If I run it from a bench supply, it doesn't do this. If I power the bench supply from the battery, it doesn't do this. I'm charging a battery bank I have with a 12vdc output jack, with a limit of 3A, that I'm going to test to see what IT does.

But I don't WANT to maximize RF out. I want to keep it within the limits of my tuner. I will try not setting a limit on the amperage and just try lowering the voltage, and see what that does, if limiting the amperage causes Bad Things.

Am I not being clear as to my goal in this instance? I'm trying to assemble a portable setup to take into the field for battery operation, but everything needs to play nicely with everything else, and the battery I was trying wouldn't play well with the tuner. I'm also testing to see if the problem might have been with the antenna or with the tuner, by testing different antennas and different tuners, to see if the problem actually exists with the BATTERY and not something else. If I can do it with a different battery pack that doesn't overwhelm the rig, PERFECT. But if that's going to cause bad harmonics or spurs or splattery signal, then that's not so perfect. I want to find the actual CAUSE of the difficulty, not just slap a band-aid on it or treat symptoms, but so far the assumptions I keep hearing are that I'm trying to maximize output, which is not the case. If I wanted to maximize output, I'd be building different sorts of radios, not QRP rigs.




--
Paul Mateer, AA9GG
Elan Engineering Corp.
www.elanengr.com
NAQCC 3123, SKCC 4628

Re: Compiler warnings

AA9GG
 

C++ and micro-controllers do not really play well together.  That is why I use strictly ANSI C.

On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 2:11 PM, ajparent1/KB1GMX <kb1gmx@...> wrote:
I take them seriously as it impacts future upgrades of the compiler which may
not accept it at all.  That and its a basic fix.

I'm an old Pascal user and wild type changes were not permitted.  

Also old assembler writer where you can do terrible things and
maybe survive.... ouch!


Allison




--
Paul Mateer, AA9GG
Elan Engineering Corp.
www.elanengr.com
NAQCC 3123, SKCC 4628

Re: Compiler warnings

Jack Purdum
 

Really? Why do you say that? I find the OOP benefits to be well worth the effort to use them, especially encapsulation.

Jack, W8TEE

On Sunday, July 1, 2018, 10:59:38 PM EDT, AA9GG <paul.aa9gg@...> wrote:


C++ and micro-controllers do not really play well together.  That is why I use strictly ANSI C.

On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 2:11 PM, ajparent1/KB1GMX <kb1gmx@...> wrote:
I take them seriously as it impacts future upgrades of the compiler which may
not accept it at all.  That and its a basic fix.

I'm an old Pascal user and wild type changes were not permitted.  

Also old assembler writer where you can do terrible things and
maybe survive.... ouch!


Allison




--
Paul Mateer, AA9GG
Elan Engineering Corp.
www.elanengr.com
NAQCC 3123, SKCC 4628

Re: BITX QSO Afternoon/Evening, Sunday, July 1, 3PM & 7PM Local Time, 7277 kHz in North America, 7177 kHz elsewhere.

Daniel Conklin
 

I didn't try tonight because I have the uBiTX in pieces waiting to get stuffed into a new box  
Dan, W2DLC 

Re: Bitx40 75KHz Spurious, How to solve it. #bitx40

 

Thanks Allard, goofed there. Will re-hookup the bitx40 later today and see.

At 02-07-18, you wrote:
Raj,
thanks for testing, but the issue that Akira san reported, is with BitX40,
not ubitx.
If possible, could you please repeat the same check with BitX40 and let us
know the results?

Many Thanks, 73
Allard PE1NWL

Re: Bitx40 75KHz Spurious, How to solve it. #bitx40

 

OK! connected up the bitx40 with Raduino.

Yes, there are spurious as reported. The spurious distance from carrier varies with frequency.

All the spurs all come together and disappear at near 7.2 Mhz. This is mixing of harmonics but
cant remember the maths.. Jerry and others had worked it out.

I will try out a filter that I had wired on some board but donno where I kept it!

Raj

At 02-07-18, you wrote:
Raj,
thanks for testing, but the issue that Akira san reported, is with BitX40,
not ubitx.
If possible, could you please repeat the same check with BitX40 and let us
know the results?

Many Thanks, 73
Allard PE1NWL

On Sun, July 1, 2018 15:59, Raj vu2zap wrote:
Correction 500KHz span!

At 01-07-18, you wrote:
Akira,

I just put my uBitxr4 on the spectrum analyzer and found nothing +-250
Khz. That is 500 Khz BW.

I think your measurements are being affected by switch mode power supply
in one of the items.

Raj

At 25-06-18, you wrote:
Hi!

I built Bitx40 about 2 weeks ago.

I measured the spurious of Bitx40 by using the spectrum analyzer.
The level of spurious of harmonics were under 50db. So this is fine.
But the spurious at 75KHz was observed.
The spurious might be the multiple of 25KHz.
It would be much appreciated if you could advise me the cause and
solution of this spurious of Bitx40.

In Japan, we must prove to the authority that the spurious of the
transceiver meets the criteria to obtain the certification of the
transceiver from the authority.
So if i could not resolve this spurious, I will not be able to use
Bitx40 in Japan.

Thanks in advance,
Akira
JJ1EPE



BFO adjusting procedure

iz oos
 

In traditional rigs and in DDS there is a variable capacitor that is used to precisely and easily adjust the BFO or the DDS output. In dongles it can be easily done via the software. Using the 10mhz reference signal or the carrier of any SW broadcast is a matter of seconds to adjust it precisely. As the BFO in my Ubitx is off around 150hz, I wish to know whether there is an easy way to adjust it. My rig is Ubitx ver. 3 and original firmware.

Re: TX frequency? of uBitx at CWL and CWU mode #ubitxcw

jj1epe@...
 

Hi!

Thank you for your advice and comment.

Firstly, I did not consider that frequency displayed on the commercial rigs is TX frequency even though frequency of uBitx is RX.

But I am still wondering why the difference of frequency between my ICOM transceiver and uBitx is 1.5Hz but not off set .
1.5KHz might be double of 700 or 800 Hz off set.

I think many uBitx user have been making the contact on CWL or CWU mode by uBitx.
So there is something I have not understood about offset of CW.
I would like to examine the cause of the frequency difference of 1.5KHz.

73!
Akira
JJ1EPE








Re: Homebrew from scratch #ubitx

Peter Carr
 

Here is the finished board with the on board Arduino and Si5351 alongside an original uBITX.

Re: Bitx40 75KHz Spurious, How to solve it. #bitx40

jj1epe@...
 

Hi!

Thank you for your comment and advice.

My friend have found the cause of spurious of 75 KHz.
He said the cause of spurious was the noise of VCC around 19 MHz of 0.15V.
As the result of the modifications of Bitx40 to reduce the noise, such as adding the big condenser and choke coil etc , the spurious level went down below of the criteria.

By this modification, my Bitx40 meets the criteria of the spurious of Japanese regulation.
So I am going to submit the application for obtaining the certification of Bitx40 from the relevant authority.

There are two criteria for the spurious.
   1)  Baseband area :  under -40db of power of fundamental frequency
            This frequency range is the 2.5 x  occupied band of frequency of TX mode.
   2) Spurious area :  under -50db of power of fundamental frequency.
           This frequency range is the out of Baseband area for super harmonic spurious.

The attached files are
  1) The picture of noise of VCC
 2) The picture of Spurious of 50KHz/div after the modification.
 3) The picture how the modification were added.

73!
Akira
JJ1EPE






Re: KD8CEC Firmware

Glenn
 

What about the Nextion code Ian?


On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 06:10 pm, Ian Lee wrote:
Thanks for your interresting.
You can get it from the link below
 
See the Release section for more convenience.
 
Ian KD8CEC
 

2018-07-02 10:07 GMT+09:00 MadRadioModder <madradiomodder@...>:
Where did you find it?

 

 


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

Re: Bitx40 75KHz Spurious, How to solve it. #bitx40

Allard PE1NWL
 

Hi Akira san,

thanks for your update:

He said the cause of spurious was the noise of VCC around 19 MHz of 0.15V.
As the result of the modifications of Bitx40 to reduce the noise, such as adding the big condenser and choke coil etc , the spurious level went down below of the criteria.
That's good news, congratulations!
This issue may also be related to the strong "birdie" that can be heard at 7199 kHz when the radio is in LSB mode (almost no birdie in USB mode).
It was found that the strength of the birdie greatly depends on the VFO drive level. Default drive level is 4 mA. In the SETTINGS menu, you can try different drive levels (2,4,6,8 mA). The optimum level may be different for each BitX40 radio.
The VFO drive level setting may also have an effect on the spurious signals you observed. Perhaps it is possible to fix this issue just by adjusting the drive level setting (in that case, extra hardware modification such as adding capacitor or choke could be avoided).

Could you try it out?

73 Allard PE1NWL

Re: RFI from uBitx TX after AGC and other mods installed

John KC9OJV
 

Rick,
I have a Kees kit and the symptoms are almost exactly as you describe. I don't know that I've heard squeals but otherwise muffled RFI is how I would describe it. Unless Don weighs in with a better variant of this mod I'll probably try Mark's version this morning as that's very simple for others to effect and easier to modify Kees's kit to reflect that change relative to bridging the base/emitter on Q1 with a capacitor. Thanks for the good troubleshooting and persistence- this was a tough bug to swat.

John
KC9OJV

Re: Bitx40 75KHz Spurious, How to solve it. #bitx40

Jer Tres
 

Dear Akira,
Please share with us the specific details about modifications you used that successfully solved the spurious output problems.
Thank you very much and
73
Jerry aa1of

Re: Easy, Inexpensive Cooling Fan, Excelway Case

Arvo W0VRA
 

On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 04:32 pm, n4eev wrote:
Arv, you are one smart dude! I love your idea.
Haha, well, there are always unforeseen complications.

On mine, when I open PTT the fan coasts down and I'm guessing acts like a little magnetic generator and puts quite the whir into the AF signal for a second or two.  I'm thinking the DC pulses produced by the freewheeling fan are of opposite polarity from the PS, so I could snub them with a diode, right?

Does sound kinda cool, though.  Maybe not as cool as a "Roger beep" and nobody else (I hope) can hear it.

That's what I get for testing the idea on WSPR with the volume all the way down.

Re: BITX QSO Afternoon/Evening, Sunday, July 1, 3PM & 7PM Local Time, 7277 kHz in North America, 7177 kHz elsewhere.

William Cullison
 

I really don't have myself setup for portable and I'm on vacation visiting with family in South Carolina so I'm off net for 7 days.
73 Bill WA8VIH/4

On Jul 1, 2018 23:15, "Daniel Conklin" <danconklin2@...> wrote:
I didn't try tonight because I have the uBiTX in pieces waiting to get stuffed into a new box  
Dan, W2DLC 


Re: Easy, Inexpensive Cooling Fan, Excelway Case

Jim Sheldon
 

Hey Arv,
If you try the "snubber" diode, you might put a .1uf or maybe even higher value cap across the diode to help take down the little overshoots that will occur even with the diode in most cases.  

Jim, W0EB

------ Original Message ------
From: "Arvo KD9HLC via Groups.Io" <arvopl@...>
Sent: 7/2/2018 8:48:36 AM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Easy, Inexpensive Cooling Fan, Excelway Case

On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 04:32 pm, n4eev wrote:
Arv, you are one smart dude! I love your idea.
Haha, well, there are always unforeseen complications.

On mine, when I open PTT the fan coasts down and I'm guessing acts like a little magnetic generator and puts quite the whir into the AF signal for a second or two.  I'm thinking the DC pulses produced by the freewheeling fan are of opposite polarity from the PS, so I could snub them with a diode, right?

Does sound kinda cool, though.  Maybe not as cool as a "Roger beep" and nobody else (I hope) can hear it.

That's what I get for testing the idea on WSPR with the volume all the way down.

Re: Bitx40 75KHz Spurious, How to solve it. #bitx40

Jerry Gaffke
 

Recommendation:  Use Allard's v2 firmware and associated hardware mods:
    https://github.com/amunters/bitx40-raduino-v2
Moving to a high side vfo using Allard's firmware should fix this spur.

When operating at 7.2 mhz with a low side vfo,
that vfo is at 12-7.2 = 4.8 mhz.
The fifth harmonic of the vfo mixes with the second harmonic
of the 12mhz bfo:    4.8*5 = 24  = 2*12
PA4Q (Cor) figured this one out:  https://groups.io/g/BITX20/message/21996

The bfo and vfo have no reason to mix, except that this rig is not shielded.
Also, both are being generated inside the si5351, there may be crosstalk there.

Going to a high side VFO should work, the vfo is now at 12+7.2 = 19.2
To operate lower sideband as is customary on 40m,
the bfo must now be moved down a few khz to the other side of the 12mhz crystal filter.
The easiest way to do all of this is to use Allard's v2 code for the Bitx40,
he uses the si5351's clk0 to drive the bfo instead of the 12mhz crystal oscillator.

Curiously enough, 19.2*5 = 96 = 12*8
So their might still be a slight birdie when operating at 7.2 mhz with a high side vfo
but much reduced from the stock low side vfo.

Jerry, KE7ER


On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 10:53 pm, Raj vu2zap wrote:
OK! connected up the bitx40 with Raduino.

Yes, there are spurious as reported. The spurious distance from carrier varies with frequency.

All the spurs all come together and disappear at near 7.2 Mhz. This is mixing of harmonics but
cant remember the maths.. Jerry and others had worked it out.

I will try out a filter that I had wired on some board but donno where I kept it!