Date   
Re: Stone Soup

ajparent1/kb1gmx
 

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Lev likely copied:

4. RF transistors (BFS17P)
Yes, we could use something better than 2n3904's in places.
Though using buckets of $0.02 2n3904's/mmbt3904's (at lower gain where
appropriate) has a cost and stocking advantage.

If used right but they are not good at high currents.

The BFS17P  is a really weak device.  Max collector current of 25ma,
FT of 1.4ghz, 15V mac collector voltage.  Good enough for q90 only!

I suspect very few have an idea of how amplifiers in RF power chains work.

What missed is RF from the power amp has a path into the IF and that should
not be so tuned or filters are a bandaid.

If it were simple...

Allison

Re: Right-sided relay harmonic attempted fix for v3/4 ubitx

Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
 

​Oh my!!!!  Kees....ya wanna take over this one??????


I ordered 25 more boards.   Apparently their 10-board price is a very nice one....to do anywhere close to that I had to jump up to 25 board, but probaby eventually that many will wish to work on the harmonics.    Or else someone will have an even better solution.   I just wanted the LEAST WORK POSSIBLE.


cheers!

gordon



From: BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> on behalf of Kees T <windy10605@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 2:04 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Right-sided relay harmonic attempted fix for v3/4 ubitx
 
Gordon,

I think that's great (especially if the 45MHz spur problem is fixed by Raj) and I figured you would sell out quickly. Those "non machinable" stamps worked out well. Just beware.....it can REALLY take off due to the uBITX popularity and I sold 896 of those AGC and Click kits before I called it quits. 

73 Kees K5BCQ

Re: Personal Best Distance, SSB Phone #ubitx

 

Don:

Your AGC circuit calls for RF-out to go to K1 pin 12, and RF-in to K3 pin 14. I have scanned the version 4 schematic, and I cannot find anything labeled as K1 or K3. I could guess, but I don’t want to make a mistake and cause any damage. Can you please clarify?

David A Posthuma, WD8PUO

1 (616) 283-7703

 

From: BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> On Behalf Of Don, ND6T via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 11:53 AM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Personal Best Distance, SSB Phone #ubitx

 

First SSB contact with new uBITX was with JE6EHP on 20m with an end-fed random wire. Nice long chat. Well over 8,000 Km. -Don

Re: Right-sided relay harmonic attempted fix for v3/4 ubitx

Kees T
 

By the way....those blue butterfly "Non Machinable" $0.72 stamps, while no upside down Jenny airmail stamp, say Non Machin..e..able". 

73 Kees K5BCQ 

Re: Stone Soup

Lev <leventelist@...>
 

On Wed, 05 Sep 2018 09:55:42 -0700
"Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io" <jgaffke=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Nothing logical about building a new one-off homebrew HF transceiver.
But it can be fun!

None of these are necessarily bad ideas, but here's my yeah-but's:
:-)

1. Tuned IFs
Both IF's are tuned by crystal filters already.
Yes, but if we didn't amplify unwanted signals, the XTAL filter has easier task. :-)

2. Filter the output of the LOs
Diode ring mixers are commutating switches, not exactly the same as the
true multipliers of a Gilbert cell. So work best with a square wave as
the local oscillator, not a sine wave. We could use higher levels at the
local oscillator port of the mixers, perhaps just need changes to those
resistors. 
Okay, but the harmonics can cause unwanted products.

3. Push-pull preamplifier ( https://www.sv1afn.com/j310preamp.html )

More gain in front of the first serious crystal filter on RX is not
necessarily a good thing for a wideband HF receiver, just makes it
easier to overload on some local AM broadcast transmitter.

4. RF transistors (BFS17P)
Yes, we could use something better than 2n3904's in places.
Though using buckets of $0.02 2n3904's/mmbt3904's (at lower gain where
appropriate) has a cost and stocking advantage.
I guess the BFS17P is also cheep... but whatever.

5. PA redesign (normal push pull design, two stage of IRF530 ) use
BFQ19S for drivers I plan to look very hard at the G0UPL linear, sounds
like it will be clean and flat and robust and cheap.

6. More filters on the output

If we're talking transmit LPF's, the only failing on the uBitx is
routing there, not the filters themselves.
Ok.

7. Maybe change of the mixers to JFET mixers
Perhaps, but what are we trying to solve?
To be honest, nothing! I just want to build a JFET based mixer. You can
balance JFET based mixer easily. Or we shall use DBMs.

Raj's result suggests the spurs are not caused by the mixers, but rather
by harmonics entering the mixers also stuff getting coupled into the IF
amps from the nearby power amp due to board layout.
Okay. So that is why we shall filter the signals of the LOs.


73s de HA5OGL

--
Levente Kovacs
Senior Electronic Engineer

W: http://levente.logonex.eu

Re: Highest quality uBitx Case ever!

Nigel
 

Huge smile from sunny South Africa re LPF comment! Had to scroll up to check and only when returning to the post did I read the 'real' purpose (40M dipole wire) :-)

73 de ZS6RN 

Nigel R ex G8DEV l-o-n-g time ago...

Re: Right-sided relay harmonic attempted fix for v3/4 ubitx

Kees T
 

Gordon,

I think that's great (especially if the 45MHz spur problem is fixed by Raj) and I figured you would sell out quickly. Those "non machinable" stamps worked out well. Just beware.....it can REALLY take off due to the uBITX popularity and I sold 896 of those AGC and Click kits before I called it quits. 

73 Kees K5BCQ

Re: stone soup ingredient list, what bands and modes are usable

jim
 


On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, 8:50:30 AM PDT, Tim Gorman <tgorman2@...> wrote:


Jim,

There is no easy way to check for splatter on an oscilloscope.

Google "two-tone test" maybe old news or not

Jim

Re: Which xmit transistor is blown?

Sean W7SKD
 

ok, today's update...I replaced the finals (IRF510) and no difference - they were not bad.

Will be making some other changes this week...next suspect is the q90.

Re: Stone Soup

Lev <leventelist@...>
 

On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 16:04:14 +0200
"Henning Weddig via Groups.Io" <hweddig=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

Lev,

I am also thinking heavily on a new design!

But what has t be done beforehand is to specify what we want!  I already
posted this requirement but only got minimal response. I know for EE´s
to write a spec is a task which is not welcome...
Yes... yes. Basically, I want to have a cheap radio, that have a reasonable good receiver, and its transmitter meets the FCC and European standards. I want to use the RIG mainly on digital modes, like PSK. It should be open source, and designed by KiCAD.

So some yo Your ideas stated below can be used as a first spec. I want
to include some more thoughts:

use diplexers especially on the IF port of mixers-- bandpass typ (sereis
resonator + parallel resonator) with a relative low loaded Q (about 3).

I know there is an old paper "reactive loads the big mixer meanace" 
published in the 70´s . Unfortunately I do not have this paper.

For the first mixer one more thought: in transmit mode the other
sideband (LO + 45 MHz) which has the same amplitude as the wanted
sideband is not terminated properly. So my idea is to put a lowpass -
high pass diplexer the hp side to be terminated into 50 ohms on the RF
port of the mixer.
So the diplexers are there to load the mixers equally at all frequencies? Why not then just load it with a resistor, and insert a follower? Sorry my RF knowledge ends here.

For the frist mixer: the configurattion should look like this:

RF port with LP- HP diplexer

IF port with BP diplexer but then a 90 deg hybrid with two xtal filter
branches summing up into a second 90 deg hybrid. In order to get a good
match both fitler branches should have equeal amplitude (S21) and
transmisson phase (Phi21) characteristics.
What do we gain by the hybrids? Sorry, I don't want to challenge you, I just simply want to understand your motivations.

Then a first bidi amp (low noise would preferrable) but our normal bidis
with 6 dB NF could also work. We do not need a super low overall NF! 
For these bidis we should use appropriiate high ft transistors as
Allison already stated!
Yes. I think this is the point where everybody agrees. We shell dump the 2N3904s. However, I'm thinking about not having bi directional amplifiers. What if we create separate TX and RX circuit? All we loose is two mixers and the XTAL filter. Also, why the transmitter shall be double conversion?

In order to avoid  the still existing problem of the spur genratoed
within the mixer I chose a IF of 70 MHz. XTAL filters were ordered.
Could you write the exact device you ordered?

So please have a look on my block diagrammes and total noise calc.

Before a new pcb is routed (preferrably 100 * 100 mm) the new sub
modules should be characterized. I do have a good equipped home lab with
spectrum analyser, signa l gerator VNA ---).
That's good. I only have Oscilloscope. So may I ask you to publish your test results if you have the thing up and running?


Thank you very much for your thoughts.

73s de HA5OGL

--
Levente Kovacs
Senior Electronic Engineer

W: http://levente.logonex.eu

Re: Stone Soup

Mark M
 

I believe he lives in Sweden. I doubt he cares much about FCC regulations.

On 9/5/18 8:20 AM, RICHARD wrote:
So it’s OK to violate FCC regulations , if you do not annoy anybody? How do you know?

Re: Next bitx?

Marc Jones
 

QRP labs has an HF SDR kit radio coming out soon .... I'm  waiting on one of those .


On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 18:38, Barrett O
<ogebarrett@...> wrote:
I have not yet purchased a ubitx. Sense I am so late in the game is there something right around the corner like another bitx or another board revision that I should hold out for ? 
--  
Barrett
K5SSO

Next bitx?

Barrett O
 

I have not yet purchased a ubitx. Sense I am so late in the game is there something right around the corner like another bitx or another board revision that I should hold out for ? 
--  
Barrett
K5SSO

Re: Stone Soup

Ken Hansen
 

He didn't say "it'sOK to violate FCC regulations, if you do not annoy anybody," he reasonably said:

1) the conversation on spurious emissions went over his head

2) he's only using the radio when the band seems quiet, so if he is spewing spurious emissions he isn't likely to bother anyone

Amateur transceivers are not held to the same signal purity standards as say a broadcast transmitter, and it is unreasonable to expect every ham to invest in sophisticated testing apparatus to constantly monitor their radio's emissions in real-time.

The vast majority of hams buy their radios from major manufacturers and rely on them to build s quality, properly designed radio that meets all spectral purity requirements.

A smaller, but not insignificant, number of hams refurbish older radios and put them on the air and make good faith efforts to ensure the radios operate within present regulations to the best of their inherent design limitations.

And then there are a number of hams that take a pile of parts and solder and conjure up a radio that they believe complied with all applicable regulations, but most lack the training/resources to prove their creations comply with all regulations.

The one thing all three broad groups have in common, is that if made aware of a spectral issue with their equipment, they make every effort to correct the issue. Every ham I know, and I feel I know a pretty wide cross section of hams, take pride in their radios and wants them to perform to the best of their abilities - I've never heard anyone say, for example, "I don't care about the second and third harmonics of my Chinese HT - as long as I can hit the local repeater I'm happy!"

The OP said nothing wrong, and shame on you for distorting what he said to give you an excuse to question him.

Ken, N2VIP

On Sep 5, 2018, at 10:20 AM, RICHARD <k6kwq@...> wrote:

So it’s OK to violate FCC regulations , if you do not annoy anybody? How do you know?

Re: Right-sided relay harmonic attempted fix for v3/4 ubitx

Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
 

Well, THAT didn't take long--  to sell out the five boards I had left over and 1 board already committed to someone mailing me a money order.......!


So I am putting in an order for 25 boards (big risk-taker here!) and they should be here in a week or so and I can refresh the Ebay item to provide some more.


With the SPUR fix being worked on successfully, this is starting to look more and more like a big success!   


Cheers,


gordon



From: BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> on behalf of Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 11:46 AM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Right-sided relay harmonic attempted fix for v3/4 ubitx
 
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5575378759&campid=5338273189&customid=&icep_item=263919047114&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg&toolid=11111

I have managed to create an Ebay listing for the external daughterboards for the right sided relays.   The above link may be some direct access that saves me a few pennies.   Other wise, the ebay item listing is here:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/263919047114

I am listing FIVE at the moment (another person has already indicated they are sending me a money order for a 6th) --- if you purchase multiple ones and I can figure that out I may be able to send you a check for a dollar or two refund since my costs will be lower.   If there is significant interest, I'll order more boards from China.   Again, all the construction, parts ordering and installation instructions are in the FILES section here and on github and I revised them today to improve them slightly.

https://groups.io/g/BITX20/files/External%20%20LPF%20Relay%20Daughterboard%20Solution 
and 
https://github.com/ggibby1/uBitxExternalRelays

Good luck!   I'm delighted to see some possible solutions for the 'spur' issue also beginning to take shape.   

My next day 'off work" will probably be Friday at which point I can mail out any initial orders.   

Re: Grounding shematic for a Metal Chassis, which is the right way to wire up?

sdr freak
 

Hello again!

First thanks, i'm anytime be glad for answer! And these kind of answer is still hepl me. So thanks.

ok, sorry but what is the word "Finals" ,in your post, mean for? Do you mean the IRF510? The heatsink and the metal case doesn't have contact but when this was corectly built up, so is there more insulation at anypoint a must be? like the board screw holes when mounted on bottom alumium plate, like other conections there?? For real its only the concact between the heatsink of both IRF510 to the back plate and when it's securly built up, then it should be all fine, or does i missed up anything?

The ventilation in my case is on bottom many little holes and on back plate are ventilation lines milled, in the hight of the 2 heatsinks. I work on the idea to install a little processor fan.
But in my workshop room it's caos.. (When you look at my profile pic, and make bit larger you can see the workshop room a little bit, ok not much you can see on it, but the milling machine should be able to see. I have in times before come to HAM, learned Metal-Worker Job and it was a interest to make little things from metal with mill and lathe or other machine.. But now when then ubitx works anyday i want to build a few Antenna and Variable Capacitor for Mag Loop with the mill, so i was lucky to bought these machine and hasn't do waste the money for party or so, in years ago, when have the job and was able to bought this things for look at future. Now i'm proud about that i was think so and see a chance for work with this things on HAM homebrew build things...) Just a story about this..

ok back to topic..

These things like Ground Loops and Grounding a was better understand if i see a shematic which descripe this.
The modes i want do, is SSB mainly and CW in next time when learned this better... But a important thing for me is to make WSPR in next time..This was very nice for me to do it self one day..

ok i hope you can descripe the insulation of the heatsink to the metal case, a little more information for this from your mind was nice.


regards Fabian

Re: stone soup ingredient list, what bands and modes are usable

Arv Evans
 

Dave K8WPE

This might be a starting place: 


On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 2:58 AM David Wilcox via Groups.Io <Djwilcox01=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Does anyone have a simple method to take off the RF output from these rigs and safely input it to a scope to check the splatter?  I have a 60 MHz scope but don't know how to use it correctly.  That might help some of us reduce the spurs until we can learn how to do other mods. There are a lot of scopes out there to beg or borrow, mostly just sitting there in a shack or at a radio club.  There are two sitting at our club but few know what to do with them.  Sad story.

Dave K8WPE

On Sep 4, 2018, at 3:13 PM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke@...> wrote:

We should have some way to indicate when too much mike gain is applied.
A diode, cap and resistor watching either audio or IF or RF peak signal levels, sending that to
a Nano analog pin should be sufficient.  Firmware shows a warning in the LCD if level exceeded.
I'd go with that, and a pot for mike gain.

If you insist on ALC:  https://groups.io/g/BITX20/message/56796 

Jerry


On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Warren Allgyer wrote:

Your analysis is true so long as the tones, or the voice if that is your mode, do not overmodulate either the audio or the RF chain. In the case of the uBitx running 10 watts of SSB, whether it is voice or tones, one or both of those stages are significantly over-modulated to the extent they put splatter into the adjacent channels on either side. This splatter will not affect anyone listening to the SSB channel but will dramatically affect those 3 KHz up and down from that channel. The effect is far worse than on a full-featured SSB transceiver in that there is no ALC or compression to control the level.

My unit, a sample of one, over-modulates at any power level greater than 1.5 watts. Most do not care as you can hear most days on 7200 KHz..... but for those who do, you are on notice.

Re: W0EB/W2CTX Firmware Source Code Sketches #ubitx

Dr. Flywheel
 

Excellent choice about releasing the source code to the public domain. This is keeping with the true spirit of "open source" and open contribution sharing.

The caveat -- I am getting "404 page not found" upon clicking on the link in your email message.

--Ron    N7FTZ 

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:06 AM Jim Sheldon <w0eb@...> wrote:
Due to the fact many people were having a bit of a problem compiling some program sketches after the TSW group changed over to using the Teensy 3.6 for the MPU, we chose to publicly release only the HEX files for each subsequent release. The source code was still available to anyone on request with the caveat that if you modify it, you are on your own (still applies here as well) as we can't know your hardware configuration and don't really have the time to go through your source code as well as ours to see what you did. If it doesn't work when you modify it, you will have to figure out why and fix it yourself. All our source code is well documented and commented to the point the routines should be easily understood by anyone familiar with the C language and the Arduino/Teensy programming IDE's capabilities.
 
Today we decided that providing the source code only on request wasn't really in keeping with the true "Open Source" concept of software and so the source code files to all of our recent and ongoing uBITX software will now be in an openly available "Latest Source Code sketches" directory in the "Files" section of the TSW website (www.w0eb.com)
 
Feel free to download and try any of them. All the programs are complete with PDF files containing the necessary instructions for use (and wiring mods if they are needed).
 
Also, because of the necessary modifications to the Arduino's "TeensyDuino" portion of the IDE to allow our Teensy 3.6 based versions to be compiled, please read the following carefully. This information is also contained on the main page of the www.w0eb.com website and again in the MANDATORY LIBRARIES directory in the "Files" section of the webpage as a README file.
_________________________________________________________________
 
Because we moved the I2C bus from "Wire" (SDA0/SCL0) to "Wire2" (SDA2/SCL2) on the Teensy for more efficient circuit board trace routing on our Teensy 3.6 based "BITeensio" card, more than a few programming headaches were encountered. It appears that nobody has an I2C library for the displays that uses other than SDA0/SCL0 since the Arduino family only has one I2C port. The Teensy 3.6 has four I2C ports but the currently available libraries don't have the other ports (Wire 1,2 and 3) well defined. This makes it difficult to use anything other than "Wire" (SDA0/SCL0) to communicate with and control the Si5351 clock chip and the I2C display(s). (Yes,multiple displays ARE possible.)
 
Since we were already committed to using "Wire2" for all the I2C stuff (Si5351 clock and the displays), our chief programmer W2CTX bravely undertook the monumental task of re-writing one of the libraries to make it all work. We are happy to report that went well and software compiled for the BITeensio is working nicely with the new hardware.
 
The reworked library is now available in the "MANDATORY_LIBRARIES" directory of this website and in order to use it, the Arduino IDE (with "Teensyduino" additions) will have to be modified a bit to keep things compatible.
 
First, you have to remove the library named "Wire" from the Arduino/hardware/Teensy/avr/libraries directory. Next, run the IDE and under the "Sketch" pull down menu, click on "Include Library" and then under the list that opens, click on "Add ZIP Library". Point it to where you have the "Newliquidcrystal_Wire2_1.3.5.zip" file saved, select that file and click "Open". The new library will be saved to the proper place.
 
In order for this library to work properly the "Wire" library in the Teensy's hardware libraries directory (see above) MUST be deleted. Don't delete the one in the "Arduino" hardware libraries directory though or you won't be able to compile a lot of Arduino programs. (This "How to use the library" information has been included in the MANDATORY_LIBRARIES directory as a "README" file.)
 
Jim Sheldon
for the TSW team
09/05/2018

Re: uBitx v3 #ubitx #ubitx-help

ARNAB SEN VU2CMV
 

Dear OM Sharmaji,
                         Thanks for your reply. Yes, Farhan has not published the PCB overlay. It's difficult to find the tracks in a SMD populated board. If you are using it, can you tell me how the audio IC 's pin 2( VCC) is connected to 12 V on the PCB?

ARNAB SEN ( VU2CMV )
6/35 JM SENGUPTA ROAD.
B-ZONE.
DURGAPUR-713205.
MOB:9434833047


On Wed 5 Sep, 2018, 20:09 Mvs Sarma, <mvssarma@...> wrote:
I suppose, such overlay has never been published by Ashar farhan vu2ese

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:07 PM ARNAB SEN VU2CMV <vu2cmv@...> wrote:
Can anybody please provide PCB overlay of uBitx v3? Thanks and 73s
VU2CMV

Re: Stone Soup

Jerry Gaffke
 

 

Nothing logical about building a new one-off homebrew HF transceiver.
But it can be fun!

None of these are necessarily bad ideas, but here's my yeah-but's:

> 1. Tuned IFs
Both IF's are tuned by crystal filters already.

> 2. Filter the output of the LOs

Diode ring mixers are commutating switches, not exactly the same as the true multipliers of a Gilbert cell.
So work best with a square wave as the local oscillator, not a sine wave.
We could use higher levels at the local oscillator port of the mixers, perhaps just need changes to those resistors. 

3. Push-pull preamplifier (https://www.sv1afn.com/j310preamp.html)

More gain in front of the first serious crystal filter on RX is not necessarily a good thing
for a wideband HF receiver, just makes it easier to overload on some local AM broadcast transmitter.

4. RF transistors (BFS17P)
Yes, we could use something better than 2n3904's in places.
Though using buckets of $0.02 2n3904's/mmbt3904's (at lower gain where appropriate) has a cost and stocking advantage.

5. PA redesign (normal push pull design, two stage of IRF530 ) use BFQ19S for drivers
I plan to look very hard at the G0UPL linear, sounds like it will be clean and flat and robust and cheap.

6. More filters on the output

If we're talking transmit LPF's, the only failing on the uBitx is routing there, not the filters themselves.

7. Maybe change of the mixers to JFET mixers
Perhaps, but what are we trying to solve?
Raj's result suggests the spurs are not caused by the mixers, but rather by harmonics entering the mixers
also stuff getting coupled into the IF amps from the nearby power amp due to board layout. 

Jerry, KE7ER



On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 09:12 AM, MadRadioModder wrote:

Don’t be so obvious and logical with this group!

 

 

toggle quoted message. . .

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Lev
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 8:00 AM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Stone Soup

 

So why don't we create a new design? Slightly more expensive, but a good one. My thoughts:

1. Tuned IFs

2. Filter the output of the LOs

3. Push-pull preamplifier (https://www.sv1afn.com/j310preamp.html)

4. RF transistors (BFS17P)

5. PA redesign (normal push pull design, two stage of IRF530 ) use BFQ19S for drivers

6. More filters on the output

7. Maybe change of the mixers to JFET mixers

 

I started to put together my own design, so I have some sketches. I can share if you interested.