Date   
Re: Perspex Case

umesh kumar anand
 

Awesome


On Mon, Sep 3, 2018, 1:03 AM <george.ellis@...> wrote:
Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (george.ellis@...) Add cleanup rule | More info
Just couldn’t hide the beautiful electronics 😆

K5BCQ uBITX Relay Switched LPF/BPF board

Kees T
 

In the interest of avoiding any confusion, I break this out to a separate thread.

73 Kees K5BCQ

Re: K5BCQ uBITX Relay Switched LPF/BPF board

Kees T
 

Since most keep talking about the need for BPFs for certain bands, I "guess" the 80m-10m uBITX direction should be a board with 6 filter capability. How about a basic dual relay switched filter board (3-1/4" x 3-7/8") with up to 6 pluggable filters, all manually selected with a 6 position rotary switch --AND-- you can add a small mux board with 2N3904 relay drivers for the filters and a CD4028B mux to go from the 3 Raduino pins to the filters. Start with the existing 111,110,100,000 and add two others when you have the code modified.

73 Kees K5BCQ 

Re: UBITX TX level diagramme

MVS Sarma
 

Lawrance,
 are you using uBITX  with BAT54S as mixer diodes ?
If you used 1n4148, then your tests could be valid.
regards
sarma
vu3zmv


On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 6:59 PM Lawrence Galea <9h1avlaw@...> wrote:
Hi Allison
You said that ( I measured not more than 3dbm at the mixer) mixer, which shows not enough rf drive.
Ever thought of adding a small amplifier for more rf drive to the mixer with suitable padding to maintain the required drive and impedance?
Possibly this could cause more spurii and more carrier leakage due to the board layout, but do you think it is worth a try?
Regards
Lawrence


On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 11:40 PM ajparent1/KB1GMX <kb1gmx@...> wrote:
On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Henning Weddig wrote:
The result is intersting: als Allison already stated the gain of the TX stage after the first mixer is 48 dB under these assumptions. My guess is that "normally" a lower level (-10 dBm) will do better in respect of IMD resulting in nearly 60 dB of gain!
Doesn't sound at all correct.  Since the mixer output is in the near -20dbm you need 60db of gain to
achieve +40DBm (10W).   I believe I've been saying at least 60db is the target for some time.  What we get is
far less but that an amplifier design issue. FYI most that get maybe 1.7w at 10M are getting far less maybe 48-50db
at 10M.

Most level 7 mixers for "clean" (quoted as they are never pure or clean) output need an input 10db less than
the LO drive minus the insertion loss of the mixer.  So we start at 7dbm (or up to 10 dbM) of LO and that means
input max is -3dbm -another 7db for the mixer loss or minus 10dbm (-10).  Than another 2-4db loss for a
bandpass filter if done right so you at -14.  So you can if lucky get away with 54 db of gain but you need a
tiny bit more for losses and errors.  That is idealized sometimes  you can push the mixer harder, but you
get more unwanted products.

uBitx case is more complicated as you have ground currents inducing signals where they should not be
and a lack of filters to scrub the output.  Now add to that a output low pas filter system that is compromised
by layout.  Now you have a mix of signals that should not be there at all mixing with those that should be
plus excess gain in the IF to overdrive the RF starved ( I measured not more than 3dbm at the mixer) mixer,
output contains a lot of not mathematically predicted outputs because there are inputs not recognized like
a sample of what the power amp is putting out ( coupling though incidental and current loops).

So for a simple 3.5mhz output the mixer may have 45mhx, 48mhz, 3.5mhz, 7mhz, 14mhz, and on
with unpredictable levels and those are the likely inputs the output products are .[...]  many!

Now I did try a 45mhz low pass and it helped a little, less than 6db.  Reason was simple you
have unpredictable paths (ground currents, DC supply lines with RF...) you cannot stop.  But
some are also the nature of the DBM and cannot be filtered with a low pass filter.  An example
of that is the 2IF (90mhz) mixing with the LO (we will use 28Mhz) of 73mhz to get both 28mhz
output and 90-73 or 17mhz.  A low pass cannot prevent the 17mhz if it is to pass 28mhz.  Also
the existing 33mhz low pass reflects sum products back the mixer so figure all the possible
sums returning to the mixer.

Remember a DBM is both a 4 quadrant multiplier and a chopped sampling system the products
out suggest both as its linear and no linear.  With clean 45mhz you still get diode limited and
squared 45mhz with harmonics circulating internally.

In short you have to map all the possible signals that may exist and their unwanted return
paths and then do the matrix of sums and differences for the fundamentals and their harmonics.

IT made my head hurt and spurtune went nuts listing all of them though the 11th order.

By then levels are no longer an issue.

Allison

Re: K5BCQ uBITX Relay Switched LPF/BPF board

Kees T
 

Here is what all 4 uBITX LPFs look like as plug-ins. Note that the 6x LPF board is arranged to where you can cut off 1 or 2 of the LPF/BPF positions with no ill effect.

73 Kees K5BCQ

Re: K5BCQ uBITX Relay Switched LPF/BPF board

Kees T
 

 W0PWE
Sep 2   

Kees - With 6 filters is the plan as follows?
LPF1 = 80M
LPF2 = 40M and 30M
LPF3 = 20M and 17M
LPF4 = 15M
LPF5 = 12M
LPF6 = 10M

Re: K5BCQ uBITX Relay Switched LPF/BPF board

Kees T
 

You can assign the filters to any LPF/BPF you want. Your list looks good to me, maybe combine the 12m/10m LPFs and make the 15m a BPF.

73 Kees K5BCQ

Re: uBitx Unfiltered

 

W.r.t the current discussions on ubitx transmitter woes ... the route forward that I chose was to order LPFs plus the relay board from QRP Labs. My thoughts were to use a 2nd Arduino Nano clone configured as an I2C slave to allow the Raduino to communicate with the LPF board over I2C. This would require some very minor code changes to send band change info to the new filter board.

This solution would give me clean CW TX from 160m through 10m but does nothing to address the spur problem on the higher bands when using SSB nor the more recent concerns about other IMD. 

This got me thinking that for another $20 I could just order the QRP Labs 5W PA kit and build a separate 160m to 10m CW TX with raised cosine wave shaping.
I do mostly CW anyway so giving up SSB wouldn't be a big loss for me.

So now I am considering the option of just using my ubitx as an HF receiver. The RX works quite well so if I just forget the TX, at a little over $100 for my v3 ubitx is was still a great deal IMHO. 

Has anyone else thought  of just designing  a separate  TX board  for use with the V3/V4 ubitx? I know that this sounds like giving up ... but in many ways this could be a simpler solution than attempting major surgery on the existing ubitx.

I have yet to package my ubitx in a permanent enclosure so for now I am going to put it aside and wait a month or two to see if there is a better option.

Cheers 
Michael VE3WMB 




TIA amplifiers

George
 

Dear members you can check:
1. Add parallel to R12 C=470 pF: in my analiser I could see 3 dB gain rising on 30 MHz, 0805 smd resistor over R12;
2. Added two 100 Ohm  to collectotrs Q11 and Q12 (had to cut PCB roads to them). Emitter-follower do not like HF signals and small collector resistor gives light feed back.
3. After this reception has become more sensitive - I had to change my switching Power Supply to transformer analog one.
Best 73s to all George 

Re: uBitx Unfiltered

MadRadioModder
 

Sort of… I added a second receiver to my uBITx on VFO B.  It’s great for DXing. I, like you, do like the uBITx receiver.  You can even do some clever things with the audio (stereo channels one for each receiver) and even diversity with a second antenna input.

 

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Michael Babineau
Sent: Monday, September 3, 2018 9:26 AM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] uBitx Unfiltered

 

W.r.t the current discussions on ubitx transmitter woes ... the route forward that I chose was to order LPFs plus the relay board from QRP Labs. My thoughts were to use a 2nd Arduino Nano clone configured as an I2C slave to allow the Raduino to communicate with the LPF board over I2C. This would require some very minor code changes to send band change info to the new filter board.

 

This solution would give me clean CW TX from 160m through 10m but does nothing to address the spur problem on the higher bands when using SSB nor the more recent concerns about other IMD. 

 

This got me thinking that for another $20 I could just order the QRP Labs 5W PA kit and build a separate 160m to 10m CW TX with raised cosine wave shaping.

I do mostly CW anyway so giving up SSB wouldn't be a big loss for me.

 

So now I am considering the option of just using my ubitx as an HF receiver. The RX works quite well so if I just forget the TX, at a little over $100 for my v3 ubitx is was still a great deal IMHO. 

 

Has anyone else thought  of just designing  a separate  TX board  for use with the V3/V4 ubitx? I know that this sounds like giving up ... but in many ways this could be a simpler solution than attempting major surgery on the existing ubitx.

 

I have yet to package my ubitx in a permanent enclosure so for now I am going to put it aside and wait a month or two to see if there is a better option.

 

Cheers 

Michael VE3WMB 

 

 

 

 


Virus-free. www.avg.com

--

…_. _._

Re: CW OPERATION

Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
 

Ron

Where do I go to look for your group software? 

Now that I got my harmonic somewhat more under control, I’m going to want to pick out good software modify it if needed and have it ready for our local group.  

Thanks!

Gordon




On Sep 3, 2018, at 09:54, W2CTX <w2ctx@...> wrote:

Well maybe no one is paying attention but our software has CAT control, S-meter display, Pass Band Tuning, and

we build "memory manager" into the software so, you do not need a pc to change things. We also have a

companion Remote Control Program that allows control of the uBITX from a PC.  We also include keyboard control and

keyboard CW sending.


We are not in competition with Ian, we are just a few guys trying to make the best uBITX possible.  We make our

efforts available if people want to try them.


rOn


On September 3, 2018 at 9:00 AM MadRadioModder <madradiomodder@...> wrote:

Jim… I think you may have missed many of the positive features of the Nextion display… and in particular BECAUSE of that editor, anyone can move those, how did you call it… clutter?, things around… add and subtract easily to fit their needs without understanding and writing hundreds of lines of code like others implementations?.  That is a real BIG plus.  And… if the popularity of the Nextion keeps up, it will be no time before, feeling left out of the game, the “competition” follows suit with their own clone-ish display.  Now Ian’s code isn’t perfect, but it has brought us a lot of positive things… decent CAT control, usable “S” meter circuitry, IF shift for attenuation… etc.  And the memory manager.  Yeah at some point it makes sense for some real programmers to do a rewrite…

 

Dumping on Ian isn’t a good sales tactic given his base…



Virus-free. www.avg.com

 

--

…_. _._

 

Re: CW OPERATION

Jim Sheldon
 

Gordon and all,  His software is on our group website in the "Files" section.

Jim, W0EB

http://www.w0eb.com     we do not use github

------ Original Message ------
From: "Gordon Gibby" <ggibby@...>
To: "BITX20@groups.io" <BITX20@groups.io>
Sent: 9/3/2018 10:23:01 AM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] CW OPERATION

Ron

Where do I go to look for your group software? 

Now that I got my harmonic somewhat more under control, I’m going to want to pick out good software modify it if needed and have it ready for our local group.  

Thanks!

Gordon




On Sep 3, 2018, at 09:54, W2CTX <w2ctx@...> wrote:

Well maybe no one is paying attention but our software has CAT control, S-meter display, Pass Band Tuning, and

we build "memory manager" into the software so, you do not need a pc to change things. We also have a

companion Remote Control Program that allows control of the uBITX from a PC.  We also include keyboard control and

keyboard CW sending.


We are not in competition with Ian, we are just a few guys trying to make the best uBITX possible.  We make our

efforts available if people want to try them.


rOn


On September 3, 2018 at 9:00 AM MadRadioModder <madradiomodder@...> wrote:

Jim… I think you may have missed many of the positive features of the Nextion display… and in particular BECAUSE of that editor, anyone can move those, how did you call it… clutter?, things around… add and subtract easily to fit their needs without understanding and writing hundreds of lines of code like others implementations?.  That is a real BIG plus.  And… if the popularity of the Nextion keeps up, it will be no time before, feeling left out of the game, the “competition” follows suit with their own clone-ish display.  Now Ian’s code isn’t perfect, but it has brought us a lot of positive things… decent CAT control, usable “S” meter circuitry, IF shift for attenuation… etc.  And the memory manager.  Yeah at some point it makes sense for some real programmers to do a rewrite…

 

Dumping on Ian isn’t a good sales tactic given his base…



Virus-free. www.avg.com

 

--

…_. _._

 

Re: raduino 1.27 upgrade

giuseppe.cavarretta@...
 

Hello Allard,
I am a CW-only ham, so your 1.27.7 sketch made me love the BITX40.
Today I tried to upload the 1.28 upgrade but, surprisingly, it does not sense the key and transmit CW any more.
Moreover, the command-driven menus are not working as before.
I came back to the 1.27.7 version and now all is working as it should.
Did I miss something?
Thank you so much, best 72
Joe, IZ0WIT

Re: CW OPERATION

Vince Vielhaber
 

Gordon. we have people with their extra that can't figure out how to connect the key to their radio (not just bitx radios, commercial too). How do you figure they're able to detect their band edges on USB and LSB? Yeah, it was on the test, but so many people cram for a test and forget everything the second they finish taking it.

Vince - K8ZW.

On 09/03/2018 09:07 AM, Gordon Gibby wrote:
9h1avlaw​


of course you risk outof band transmissions if you aren't at least able
to recognize which WAY your sideband is going, and how close to the band
edge you are.....exactly the same is true of upper side band and lower
sideband voice opeeration.


We expect people with the General class or higher license class to
understand those sideband type pesky issues...in fact, it is a question
or two in the exam packet! and if you were to use FM...or AM....then
you have sidebands on BOTH sides.....so if you're going to be a RADIO
amateur you need to understand just a bit about MODULATION.....


Cheers, my friend!


gordon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> on behalf of Lawrence Galea
<9h1avlaw@...>
*Sent:* Monday, September 3, 2018 8:57 AM
*To:* BITX20@groups.io
*Subject:* Re: [BITX20] CW OPERATION

If you are near the band edge you risk out of band transmissions

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 4:35 AM Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...
<mailto:ggibby@...>> wrote:

You can do it the other way around, with the transmitter upset, but
then you have to be absolutely certain that the user knows that
their transmissions are offset from the dial number.

That’s not terrible, that’s exactly what happens when you’re doing
upper or lower sideband, and certainly when you’re doing pseudo CW
by injecting an pure audio sinewave signal into a single side band
system. FLDIGI will do that, and you can even rig it so your
computer shows your correct transmitting frequency


On Sep 2, 2018, at 22:31, Jim Tibbits <ab7vf1@...
<mailto:ab7vf1@...>> wrote:

Gotta offset, can't hear em on the carrier

On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 7:01 PM W2CTX <w2ctx@...
<mailto:w2ctx@...>> wrote:

__

Found this video explaining CW Zero-beating. So based on this
explanation the following is illustrated

for 7.040.000: Dial displays 07.040.000, you transmit on
07.040.000, and the receive is offset by the

sidetone value.


Of course this is based on the video being correct.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrC7JmNw1eY
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DCrC7JmNw1eY&d=DwMFaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=3ELgZgmTnPzGsfvQxkd1S_2NGLYM8sHTxVCQKFxhVXQ&m=wutQLbqUypKEwTZtPoqsR2c1uYOB2W1T82eBdqp_rW4&s=xkoCsoSDg_NeY_8HEYP-eD9p6qVd-te_uodlU96Tfm0&e=>


rOb

Re: CW OPERATION

 

There is also the outstanding, yet related, issue with switching sidebands on CW (i.e. CWU to CWL or vice versa) with KD8CEC's code which I had 
previously documented. 

Try this on any commercial rig ....

Properly tune in a CW station and then switch to CWR or whatever the "other" CW sideband is called on your
rig ... you can still hear the station. That is the whole point. Switching back and forth doesn't alter your TX frequency it only changes the BFO/offset
so that you are listening on the other side of true Zero-beat (i.e. the other side of his carrier frequency).  This is a "trick" used by CW operators to avoid QRM as often
you can manage to avoid a loud station QRMing your QSO by just listening to your intended station on the opposite sideband. You should always be able to switch
back and forth without touching the tuning knob, assuming that you have the station tuned in properly. 

Currently when you switch sidebands on CW on the KD8CEC software both your TX and RX frequencies change so not only can you not hear the other
station you were working, he can't hear you anymore either !  

I would be nice if it was possible to submit bug requests again the KD8CEC software within GITHUB itself. GITHUB supports this but it seems that this
option is somehow not enabled for https://github.com/phdlee/ubitx

There seems to be no "official" channels for reporting real bugs against this software so getting things fixed is a bit "hit or miss". 

Not to be totally negative, Ian has done some great stuff and he has responded to many of my suggestions and implemented features and fixes
that I suggested. The problem is that it seems that this list has way too much traffic for any one person to stay on top of everything discussed. 

Cheers

Michael VE3WMB 

Re: Arduino/Clock question/resolution

Howard Fidel
 

I solved the root cause, an open wire. But, now the Arduino does strange things, it locks up, sometimes I get very distorted CW xmit waveforms. The mystery continues.

On 9/2/2018 3:10 PM, Howard Fidel wrote:

I replaced the Arduino Nano and the SI clock chip and got the uBitx running. I then noticed a short on 2 data lines to the relays. I cleared the short, but after that the i2c bus always is sending data to the SI chip, and I usually get no clocks out, although sometimes I get one or two but not three. I don't think the i2c bus should have data on it unless something changes, ie the band or tuning after initialization. My question is what could keep it in this mode continually outputting data? I don't understand the code well enough to figure this out. I see two locations on ubitx_si5351 that cause data to be sent, but I don't follow what initiates them. The tuning works, updating the display, which means the Arduino is running the main loop. I fear the Ardunio has again gone south, but I don't want to pull it out again unless i am sure.

Thanks,

Howard


Re: UBITX TX level diagramme

ajparent1/KB1GMX <kb1gmx@...>
 

MRM,

The not so funny part Is I've been saying that for over two years and especially the last two months.

The whole idea of minimally filter 3-30 mhz radio is wishful thinking.  When I first said that
it was "you need to think outside the old box", when I mentioned it will not behave well I was told 
"you don't know what your talking about".  So I shut up for a while and waited for the stuff to
hit the fan.  

I for one would like the concept to work save for over 50 years of radio engineering... it never does.


Allison

Re: CW OPERATION

Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
 

That’s funny! Best little joke today!! Even a novice in my day knew that kind of stuff.

Oh how times change !!

On Sep 3, 2018, at 12:20, Vince Vielhaber <vev@...> wrote:

Gordon. we have people with their extra that can't figure out how to connect the key to their radio (not just bitx radios, commercial too). How do you figure they're able to detect their band edges on USB and LSB? Yeah, it was on the test, but so many people cram for a test and forget everything the second they finish taking it.

Vince - K8ZW.



On 09/03/2018 09:07 AM, Gordon Gibby wrote:
9h1avlaw​


of course you risk outof band transmissions if you aren't at least able
to recognize which WAY your sideband is going, and how close to the band
edge you are.....exactly the same is true of upper side band and lower
sideband voice opeeration.


We expect people with the General class or higher license class to
understand those sideband type pesky issues...in fact, it is a question
or two in the exam packet! and if you were to use FM...or AM....then
you have sidebands on BOTH sides.....so if you're going to be a RADIO
amateur you need to understand just a bit about MODULATION.....


Cheers, my friend!


gordon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> on behalf of Lawrence Galea
<9h1avlaw@...>
*Sent:* Monday, September 3, 2018 8:57 AM
*To:* BITX20@groups.io
*Subject:* Re: [BITX20] CW OPERATION

If you are near the band edge you risk out of band transmissions

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 4:35 AM Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...
<mailto:ggibby@...>> wrote:

You can do it the other way around, with the transmitter upset, but
then you have to be absolutely certain that the user knows that
their transmissions are offset from the dial number.

That’s not terrible, that’s exactly what happens when you’re doing
upper or lower sideband, and certainly when you’re doing pseudo CW
by injecting an pure audio sinewave signal into a single side band
system. FLDIGI will do that, and you can even rig it so your
computer shows your correct transmitting frequency


On Sep 2, 2018, at 22:31, Jim Tibbits <ab7vf1@...
<mailto:ab7vf1@...>> wrote:

Gotta offset, can't hear em on the carrier

On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 7:01 PM W2CTX <w2ctx@...
<mailto:w2ctx@...>> wrote:

__

Found this video explaining CW Zero-beating. So based on this
explanation the following is illustrated

for 7.040.000: Dial displays 07.040.000, you transmit on
07.040.000, and the receive is offset by the

sidetone value.


Of course this is based on the video being correct.


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DCrC7JmNw1eY&d=DwIDaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=3ELgZgmTnPzGsfvQxkd1S_2NGLYM8sHTxVCQKFxhVXQ&m=npaSmT3y0oYYiz2iEQpA2UUgFinOaMT9ySVWLD1Bzcg&s=gUvkgOCxbe9ab1cOT5cHbrv3gHMhpaU4wXb9nb88PfQ&e=
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DCrC7JmNw1eY&d=DwMFaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=3ELgZgmTnPzGsfvQxkd1S_2NGLYM8sHTxVCQKFxhVXQ&m=wutQLbqUypKEwTZtPoqsR2c1uYOB2W1T82eBdqp_rW4&s=xkoCsoSDg_NeY_8HEYP-eD9p6qVd-te_uodlU96Tfm0&e=>


rOb
--
Michigan VHF Corp. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.nobucks.net_&d=DwIDaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=3ELgZgmTnPzGsfvQxkd1S_2NGLYM8sHTxVCQKFxhVXQ&m=npaSmT3y0oYYiz2iEQpA2UUgFinOaMT9ySVWLD1Bzcg&s=e7uLz9T_S9uLQyK5sB-vg85vdbq6q_zg6xvyBonFa-g&e= https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.CDupe.com_&d=DwIDaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=3ELgZgmTnPzGsfvQxkd1S_2NGLYM8sHTxVCQKFxhVXQ&m=npaSmT3y0oYYiz2iEQpA2UUgFinOaMT9ySVWLD1Bzcg&s=R4EzkukzEh7g2tPUZqEgs1MeDkg3U-1QuUCHSKgejWo&e=
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.metalworkingfun.com&d=DwIDaQ&c=pZJPUDQ3SB9JplYbifm4nt2lEVG5pWx2KikqINpWlZM&r=3ELgZgmTnPzGsfvQxkd1S_2NGLYM8sHTxVCQKFxhVXQ&m=npaSmT3y0oYYiz2iEQpA2UUgFinOaMT9ySVWLD1Bzcg&s=1rV5mzIl9OLg4h9GTkqW7Mu9CQ68iecy4N1B182WAsM&e=


Re: UBITX TX level diagramme

ajparent1/KB1GMX <kb1gmx@...>
 

Lawrence G.,

I tried a few things along that path.  made matters worse and that was also tried with
external level 7 mixer and level 17 external mixers.   It was then a rock fell on me
and I realized the output of the 45mhz amp with the TX producing power was filthy.
Add a filter module it got better but by then I had so many outboard modules
its was almost a breadboard radio.  Everything is talking to everything by sneak
paths.  

Allison
We need only one magik part.

Re: UBITX TX level diagramme

ajparent1/KB1GMX <kb1gmx@...>
 

Henning,

There are errors in the diagram and the levels are really different than shown.

Looked at your diagram and its assumptions are wrong.  If the final mixer can accept -1dbm without
producing spurs then why start with -16dbm at the very first (balanced modulator)?

The input to the balanced modulator would be around -10dbm(audio) an that bumps up the levels 6db.
The problem with the pad at the output is that and the filter (about 8db total) reduce the carrier to signal
ratio by that amount (not allowing for bad layout causing blow by).  Excess gain makes it worse.

Having input to the final mixer  of more than -10dbm causes great amounts of distortion and spurs.
So at that point you are showing about 9db of excess gain.  Also the assumption is the mixers have
enough drive.  When I tested the 5351 was set to 1,1,1 or 4ma (factory code) and at 3,3,3 or 8ma I
did get the stated 13dbm but exceeded to the total current for three outputs if I understand the spec. 
That is only part of that story, for the moment.

So we are both under driving one and over driving mixers and hoping for a good result.  
The output of the last mixer should be around -17dbm (+-2db) for a 7dbm input, about
7db loss and a -10 dbm input.

the two TIA amps the 12mhz nearly hits the 20db mark (actual on 2 were 19) and at
45mhz not even close maybe 14db mine measured 13db.  Good thing too or the
over drive would be worse.

I The filter is before Q90! that means Q90 is part of the power amp chain.  Than means
there is a gain block before the pre-driver and driver missing in the drawing.

Also the design gain of the amp is 3 stages (Q90 through q97) of 16++ db per stage and
1 stage of  about 13db my match says that is 61db and most seem  to do that at 3.5 and
maybe 7mhz.  After that the gain falls by easily 11db to 10M.  So the diagram does not
match the actual.

FYI the second bidirectional amp is not shown (post 45mhz fitler and before last mixer)

The line up should be 45mhz fitler, 45mhz bidirectional amp, mixer, 33mhz low pass fitler, then Q90 tx preamp.

Allison
Being PDF I cannot edit the drawing it does have errors.