Date   
Re: Raduino for Sale

Bill Lamm
 

Still available? 

Bill
KD9MDL@...

Re: RX of uBITx V3 fried - which components to change? #ubitx

Sascha Bohnet | DL5SMB
 

I just looked at the manual of the MFJ 259B.
The output of it is also declared to be 0.02W.

If the UBITX ist robust enough to cope with that
maybe it is really the AGC.

Or the parts I changed in mine (Q90 and Q10-Q12 are BFR106 in my radio) brake more easily than the 3904s.

And yes, I think I will label my coax in future and will to use every cable only  in a distincive function.

Thanks for your suggestions.

Re: Preliminary results -- W8TEE/AC8GY Mag Loop Testing

Alan de G1FXB
 

Hi Jack,

Sounds like you are on to something special with 90% and even the 40% are impressive figures.
(Noted that they are modelled?? efficiencies at this point in time, here's hoping with can you can achieve something approaching in practical tests.)
To what reference antenna (also at the same modelled height to compare like for like) ?

Interested in your comment the trials of a counterpoise,
Previous papers indicate loop type antennas were considered a free space antenna requiring no ground plane / radials
I guess it's the feed / matching & counterpoise is where the magic happens?

As it's using an auto tuner is the write-up destined for your new book is there an ETA, or another perhaps magazine article release?

(One gotcha about some of the previous, (not your) small "miracle" antenna's.
Check it's actual the antenna doing the radiating and not the feed line, or counterpoise even the mounting pole has being known to be "accidentality" hot with RF.
(However disguised, generally any antenna employing a braid breaker / balun in the coax away from what they make you believe is the feed point or suggested feeder or support lengths perhaps warrants a second look.))


regards Alan

On 31/05/2019 18:45, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io wrote:
We are also trying to assess other factors, too, such as a counterpoise and its affect on performance. We may find that these "other factors" play no significant role in the antenna's performance. Still, learning that something doesn't matter is as helpful as learning what does matter.

Jack, W8TEE

Availability of Mag Loop and other stuff...

Jack, W8TEE
 

Alan:

The results right now are modeled using the usual Pacific66 app. However, we do plan "real" tests in an attempt to get some useful data. Our reference antenna will likely be an 80-10M EFHW which we both use. Al also has a vertical that we might test against. However, the EFHW is always available; not so with the vertical.

We read in a paper that someone added a ground plane and said it "made a difference", whatever the hell that means. Anyway, because of that, we want to try it and see if it does have an impact. We have already noticed that the shape of the feed loop makes a difference, as does its position in the vertical plane. The effect is small, but real.

Al and I have talked about this a lot, and our feeling is to publish the results of the "Double-Double" as a construction article. (I want to call it the "Luggable Double-Double" but Al's not happy with that.) There are controllers out there (Loftur Jonasson) so my feeling is that will be kept for the book only. Also, it will be somewhat unique in that we hope to add a TFT display that shows the SWR in realtime as a plot. We have arranged to have all of the projects' PCB's available at a reasonable price.

Al and I are writing the book in a strange way. We are going to finish it before signing with a publisher. The reason is because I know the time pressures that editors put on authors with respect to deadlines and we want to get this right rather than to market fast. Our TOC has 18 chapters, of which the first 4 are really setting up the software for the Arduino, Teensy, STM32, and ESP32 µC's and giving the beginning reader enough C instruction to read our code (and shoot themselves in the foot a few times?) We see 12 projects in the book, some of which (e.g., the ML) are two chapters--construction and software. Some are "end products" (e.g., the ML, a different antenna tuner, CW messenger, CW decoder, CW Tutor) while others are test equipment (e.g., programmable power supply, AC voltmeter, signal generator). The last chapter is on using what you've built to troubleshoot a receiver. We think it will be a very unusual, but useful, book. Our goal is to have it done by the fall. We currently have 9 chapters done.

Long answer to a short question...


Jack, W8TEE


On Saturday, June 1, 2019, 12:01:46 PM EDT, Alan de G1FXB via Groups.Io <g1fxb@...> wrote:


Hi Jack,

Sounds like you are on to something special with 90% and even the 40% are impressive figures.
(Noted that they are modelled?? efficiencies at this point in time, here's hoping with can you can achieve something approaching in practical tests.)
To what reference antenna (also at the same modelled height to compare like for like) ?

Interested in your comment the trials of a counterpoise,
Previous papers indicate loop type antennas were considered a free space antenna requiring no ground plane / radials
I guess it's the feed / matching & counterpoise is where the magic happens?

As it's using an auto tuner is the write-up destined for your new book is there an ETA, or another perhaps magazine article release?

(One gotcha about some of the previous, (not your) small "miracle" antenna's.
Check it's actual the antenna doing the radiating and not the feed line, or counterpoise even the mounting pole has being known to be "accidentality" hot with RF.
(However disguised, generally any antenna employing a braid breaker / balun in the coax away from what they make you believe is the feed point or suggested feeder or support lengths perhaps warrants a second look.))


regards Alan

On 31/05/2019 18:45, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io wrote:
We are also trying to assess other factors, too, such as a counterpoise and its affect on performance. We may find that these "other factors" play no significant role in the antenna's performance. Still, learning that something doesn't matter is as helpful as learning what does matter.

Jack, W8TEE

Re: ubitx 2.0 - Mic cannot get to TX

Sajid Rahum
 

Ok. Vs the mono plug - i used the stereo 3 pin.
                
                  A     B    C
                ------|---|------------\
                       |   |                \
                ------|---|------------/


From the 2 pin electret: 
   - one goes to ground  A (one that has 3 traces on base of electret.
   - second PTT goes to C

I connected a wire to B.  Now when I close B to PTT TX is getting engaged and i am able to monitor the output.

Now turning to the Baofeng; I cut the lead.  Now  when i trace the board; there are 3 markers on the board.

     M      M-     PTT
 
I assume now, i connect to following.

    M      M-     PTT
      A     B             C

Thoughts?

On 2m it is fairly low output but 40 on whistle i am going to 10w.


PTT------------> Outer

Re: The Selcet button, playing crazy set itself independently if press PTT on additional Mic Zetagi M99.

Martin Potter
 

Hi, Sascha,

I would definitely explore the grounding and shielding aspects of the problem. Make sure that all ground connections share a common ground, not one ground plane for some connections and a separate ground plane somewhere else for other ground connections. In my installation I made sure to use small coax for the RF output of the rig, right from P2 on the board to the front panel connector (no rear panel on mine so everything is on the front). Have had no problem so far. Also, as you suggested, put some by-pass capacitors on the signal leads at the mic connectors. I used 0.01 uF disc ceramics. And "lead dress" is important. If you haven't already, make sure all leads are short, bundled with a ground wire, and routed away from the RF section and as directly as possible to where they are needed to go.

Many difficult-to-solve problems can be avoided by using this sort of "preventative medicine".

Good luck with your project!
Very 73,
... Martin VE3OAT

HFSignals poor business practices

John Cardoso
 

I have been wishing to order a Bitx40 for a while now. Meanwhile, I have been reading the posters of this group from time to time. I kept reading about the problems people were having with the radios but, I think, I had to experience it myself.
Maybe I am just a sucker for punishment. But I did not expect the experience to be this bad.
The order was delivered on time. So far so good. The packaging was well done and strong as if it was expected to go through hell and come out unscathed.
The surprises came after - The quality of the components can't be any worse - very cheap and poor quality pots, a tiny push button for PTT (are you kidding me?), a lousy mic and a 0.1 uF capacitor that I still have no idea where it will go.
There were no instructions of any sort. Not even a link to a website where they could be found. One half-page of an 8X11 sheet of paper with a list of the contents (probably to save on expenses), and an invoice, was all that came with the parts. No even a mention on the version of the board and/or  software. What version is it being sold now, anyway?
The whole thing is crappy. Is this the way they do business in India or is it just a company that doesn't know how to do it?
This post will probably have some replies telling me that I should have known better. Maybe. For hackers they say?

Re: HFSignals poor business practices

Ian Reeve
 

As a owner of two units I was saddened to read of your experience.The capacitor goes directly across the electret element and I can only agree with your observations on the pot switch and volume pot. I changed the pot for a standard sized one but bear in mind the supplied knob should fit the shaft on the pot supplied. I guess you would have version 4 but it will be marked along one edge of the pcb.Having found this group you can still down the posts and umpteen you tube videos but mine came with a multitude A4 sized assembly and test procedures.Ian M0IDR


From: BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> on behalf of John Cardoso <ve9pct@...>
Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2019 8:26:46 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: [BITX20] HFSignals poor business practices
 
I have been wishing to order a Bitx40 for a while now. Meanwhile, I have been reading the posters of this group from time to time. I kept reading about the problems people were having with the radios but, I think, I had to experience it myself.
Maybe I am just a sucker for punishment. But I did not expect the experience to be this bad.
The order was delivered on time. So far so good. The packaging was well done and strong as if it was expected to go through hell and come out unscathed.
The surprises came after - The quality of the components can't be any worse - very cheap and poor quality pots, a tiny push button for PTT (are you kidding me?), a lousy mic and a 0.1 uF capacitor that I still have no idea where it will go.
There were no instructions of any sort. Not even a link to a website where they could be found. One half-page of an 8X11 sheet of paper with a list of the contents (probably to save on expenses), and an invoice, was all that came with the parts. No even a mention on the version of the board and/or  software. What version is it being sold now, anyway?
The whole thing is crappy. Is this the way they do business in India or is it just a company that doesn't know how to do it?
This post will probably have some replies telling me that I should have known better. Maybe. For hackers they say?

Re: HFSignals poor business practices

Skip Davis
 

John, no doubt you we’ll get many responses on your post please don’t be too discouraged. If you go to HFSignals.com then under the BITX40 heading select wireup that will give you instructions on how to wire up the board to the controls and jacks to get you to the point of powering up and operation. There are a few other resources that are linked on the group.io that will help you also. If you have more questions post them to the group and we all will try to guide you in the right direction so you can enjoy your BITX40. 
HFSignal is not a larger company with a large staff of people it is a few hams that have made their ideas for a hf rig available in kit form for others to enjoy. There are hundreds if not thousands of us who are enjoying tinkering/modifying these rigs that have them working right out of the box. If your expectations were that you would open the box and plug it in then I’m sorry it isn’t that kind of rig. But if you were looking for one you could make your own through customizing with enclosures and added features then you came to the right place.
Please enjoy and ask questions many of us will be pleased to answer them and guide you in the right direction.

73,
Skip Davis, NC9O 

On Jun 1, 2019, at 15:26, John Cardoso <ve9pct@...> wrote:

I have been wishing to order a Bitx40 for a while now. Meanwhile, I have been reading the posters of this group from time to time. I kept reading about the problems people were having with the radios but, I think, I had to experience it myself.
Maybe I am just a sucker for punishment. But I did not expect the experience to be this bad.
The order was delivered on time. So far so good. The packaging was well done and strong as if it was expected to go through hell and come out unscathed.
The surprises came after - The quality of the components can't be any worse - very cheap and poor quality pots, a tiny push button for PTT (are you kidding me?), a lousy mic and a 0.1 uF capacitor that I still have no idea where it will go.
There were no instructions of any sort. Not even a link to a website where they could be found. One half-page of an 8X11 sheet of paper with a list of the contents (probably to save on expenses), and an invoice, was all that came with the parts. No even a mention on the version of the board and/or  software. What version is it being sold now, anyway?
The whole thing is crappy. Is this the way they do business in India or is it just a company that doesn't know how to do it?
This post will probably have some replies telling me that I should have known better. Maybe. For hackers they say?

Re: HFSignals poor business practices

Jonas Sanamon
 

Hi John,

I think that much of Your experience is linked to expectations. It looks like You perhaps had too high expectations. 
In my mind the Bitx radios rate real high on value for money, but one should probably not expect to get icom quality for $130.

On the other hand I think that "on a shoestring" HF rig is a thrill in itself, and probably the reason a lot of us do this.
So I am grateful to HF signals for making these radios available to most of the world at an affordable price.

Best Regards,
Jonas - SM4VEY



Den lör 1 juni 2019 kl 21:26 skrev John Cardoso <ve9pct@...>:

I have been wishing to order a Bitx40 for a while now. Meanwhile, I have been reading the posters of this group from time to time. I kept reading about the problems people were having with the radios but, I think, I had to experience it myself.
Maybe I am just a sucker for punishment. But I did not expect the experience to be this bad.
The order was delivered on time. So far so good. The packaging was well done and strong as if it was expected to go through hell and come out unscathed.
The surprises came after - The quality of the components can't be any worse - very cheap and poor quality pots, a tiny push button for PTT (are you kidding me?), a lousy mic and a 0.1 uF capacitor that I still have no idea where it will go.
There were no instructions of any sort. Not even a link to a website where they could be found. One half-page of an 8X11 sheet of paper with a list of the contents (probably to save on expenses), and an invoice, was all that came with the parts. No even a mention on the version of the board and/or  software. What version is it being sold now, anyway?
The whole thing is crappy. Is this the way they do business in India or is it just a company that doesn't know how to do it?
This post will probably have some replies telling me that I should have known better. Maybe. For hackers they say?

Re: Availability of Mag Loop and other stuff...

ajparent1/KB1GMX
 

Jack,

the biggest issue is the 80-10 EFHW has a terrible pattern, broadside at 80m and by 20M
its a 4 lobe pattern with 10m its practically endfire.

That creates issues and questions for comparison as the EFHW is then rarely aimed at
the receiving station and hence you do not have a known comparison.

Generally when testing loops a loop of known performance are used but testing at HF is
never easy as the near field is at least 5 to 10 wavelengths or more and ground quality
dependent.  You want that distance to be able to see the total field.   The easiest rig
for that kind of testing is two fiberglass boats on calm salt water (an almost near
perfect ground plane).  Of course that does not include RF sources and calibrated
receivers and accurate GPS.

Allison

Re: HFSignals poor business practices

Scott McDonald
 

Hi John.
 
I expect you'll be happier with it once you have it put together and working, mine's been running fine for quite some time.
 
If you send me your mailing address off line, I'll be happy to dig out an old mic housing with a PPT switch you can put the electret element in - the element isn't much different from most once it's in a housing.
 
And I'll be happy to toss in a better tuning pot from the junk box as well if it will help you get more enthused about the project.  Yeah, the supplied pots aren't exactly robust, but they work well enough.
 
There are detailed directions on the site where you ordered the BITX40.  As for printed directions, it's not an Indian or poor business practice issue that they aren't provided, virtually all the kit providers these days provide their instructions on-line.
 
You'll find lots of folks here that have had fun tackling the same kit and that are willing to help you get going.
 
73 Scott ka9p
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cardoso <ve9pct@...>
To: BITX20 <BITX20@groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Jun 1, 2019 2:26 pm
Subject: [BITX20] HFSignals poor business practices

I have been wishing to order a Bitx40 for a while now. Meanwhile, I have been reading the posters of this group from time to time. I kept reading about the problems people were having with the radios but, I think, I had to experience it myself.
Maybe I am just a sucker for punishment. But I did not expect the experience to be this bad.
The order was delivered on time. So far so good. The packaging was well done and strong as if it was expected to go through hell and come out unscathed.
The surprises came after - The quality of the components can't be any worse - very cheap and poor quality pots, a tiny push button for PTT (are you kidding me?), a lousy mic and a 0.1 uF capacitor that I still have no idea where it will go.
There were no instructions of any sort. Not even a link to a website where they could be found. One half-page of an 8X11 sheet of paper with a list of the contents (probably to save on expenses), and an invoice, was all that came with the parts. No even a mention on the version of the board and/or  software. What version is it being sold now, anyway?
The whole thing is crappy. Is this the way they do business in India or is it just a company that doesn't know how to do it?
This post will probably have some replies telling me that I should have known better. Maybe. For hackers they say?

Re: Preliminary results -- W8TEE/AC8GY Mag Loop Testing

ajparent1/KB1GMX
 

Alan de G1FXB,

Your correct.  any testing and I've done a lot with small loops you need lots of 
"shield breakers" or choking to remove the COAX shield as a possible secondary
coupling making it an undesired array and often clouding results or minimally
distorting patterns greatly.

If the RF source is small and self contained it can be at or very near the
feed point and make the problem easier.  Same applies for receivers
as well.

Generally Loops, large or small, are considered self contained antennas not
requiring ground planes or counterpoises.  However in the real world those
will exist.  As a result supports or cables and the very existence of the
ground below it do influence the results.

Allison

Re: Availability of Mag Loop and other stuff...

Alan de G1FXB
 

Thanks Jack,

Long answers are good and indicate your willingness for full disclosure.

(Manufactures antenna specifications tend to be BS generators?
Second only to the HiFi industry.??
Remember the kids in the mid 1980's with their "Ghetto Blasters" advertised with 780 Watts of stereo music power, and all from 8X D cell batteries.
In fairness some of the manufactures provided revised figures when used on mains power, nearly a KW.
Man those things must have being efficient, and all through a skinny power cord....)

I couldn't find on the pacciffic66 site what they reference their figures to, on that initial page at least?
hopefully it's something real and not against some theoretical property.
One of which, the proper name escapes me at this time.
(my numbers for instance :-)
6ft of wire whether straight or coiled is a larger percentage nearer a useful wavelength ie: 1/4wave?? at say 28MHz (approx 8ft) than the same 6ft of wire to 14MHz
I interpret this to It's a simple expression of comparison of physical length to wavelength, nothing to do with the antenna efficiency and devoid of losses in the matching networks that are necessary, etc, etc.
Even if it's a real antenna they are referencing it to, it in it's self could be a compromised reference gives great headline numbers.
Check the fine print!

Suggestion:- At least do the theoretical model of what ever you choose to use as the loop reference antenna against a full size centre fed dipole at identical heights, even if not a real world test.
Granted it's monoband & optimally performs mounted half wavelength above the ground but it's a good indicator & reference, and as cheap & simple?? to construct as it gets.
if you don't like what you see in the comparison it's between you and your conscience.
You can cripple it's performance and justifiably conclude an XYZ antenna, is greatly more efficient than?? a halfwave dipole when mounted at 15ft agl for example.... :-)

Saw the reports of doing A/B comparisons, however quick the changeover there is always the element of doubt as to propagation.
the ideal is simultaneous TX to both antennas in the same lot but far enough not to interact is the goal.
In the real world two antennas one each in the same town is good enough. What's a mile over a propagation distance of say 6,000??
everyone has their preferred mode, be it CW, WSPR the latest digimode.???? Reality it doesn't matter?
The requirement is for as many & widespread coverage of receiving stations as possible??
That said, QRP-Labs kits are cheap enough to utilise two, and compare like for like WSPR time slots to each of your and AL's callsigns allocated to each different antenna?


regards Alan

On 01/06/2019 17:27, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Alan:

The results right now are modeled using the usual Pacific66 app. However, we do plan "real" tests in an attempt to get some useful data. Our reference antenna will likely be an 80-10M EFHW which we both use. Al also has a vertical that we might test against. However, the EFHW is always available; not so with the vertical.

We read in a paper that someone added a ground plane and said it "made a difference", whatever the hell that means. Anyway, because of that, we want to try it and see if it does have an impact. We have already noticed that the shape of the feed loop makes a difference, as does its position in the vertical plane. The effect is small, but real.

Al and I have talked about this a lot, and our feeling is to publish the results of the "Double-Double" as a construction article. (I want to call it the "Luggable Double-Double" but Al's not happy with that.) There are controllers out there (Loftur Jonasson) so my feeling is that will be kept for the book only. Also, it will be somewhat unique in that we hope to add a TFT display that shows the SWR in realtime as a plot. We have arranged to have all of the projects' PCB's available at a reasonable price.

Al and I are writing the book in a strange way. We are going to finish it before signing with a publisher. The reason is because I know the time pressures that editors put on authors with respect to deadlines and we want to get this right rather than to market fast. Our TOC has 18 chapters, of which the first 4 are really setting up the software for the Arduino, Teensy, STM32, and ESP32 ??C's and giving the beginning reader enough C instruction to read our code (and shoot themselves in the foot a few times?) We see 12 projects in the book, some of which (e.g., the ML) are two chapters--construction and software. Some are "end products" (e.g., the ML, a different antenna tuner, CW messenger, CW decoder, CW Tutor) while others are test equipment (e.g., programmable power supply, AC voltmeter, signal generator). The last chapter is on using what you've built to troubleshoot a receiver. We think it will be a very unusual, but useful, book. Our goal is to have it done by the fall. We currently have 9 chapters done.

Long answer to a short question...


Jack, W8TEE


On Saturday, June 1, 2019, 12:01:46 PM EDT, Alan de G1FXB via Groups.Io <g1fxb@...> wrote:


Hi Jack,

Sounds like you are on to something special with 90% and even the 40% are impressive figures.
(Noted that they are modelled?? efficiencies at this point in time, here's hoping with can you can achieve something approaching in practical tests.)
To what reference antenna (also at the same modelled height to compare like for like) ?

Interested in your comment the trials of a counterpoise,
Previous papers indicate loop type antennas were considered a free space antenna requiring no ground plane / radials
I guess it's the feed / matching & counterpoise is where the magic happens?

As it's using an auto tuner is the write-up destined for your new book is there an ETA, or another perhaps magazine article release?

(One gotcha about some of the previous, (not your) small "miracle" antenna's.
Check it's actual the antenna doing the radiating and not the feed line, or counterpoise even the mounting pole has being known to be "accidentality" hot with RF.
(However disguised, generally any antenna employing a braid breaker / balun in the coax away from what they make you believe is the feed point or suggested feeder or support lengths perhaps warrants a second look.))


regards Alan

On 31/05/2019 18:45, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io wrote:
We are also trying to assess other factors, too, such as a counterpoise and its affect on performance. We may find that these "other factors" play no significant role in the antenna's performance. Still, learning that something doesn't matter is as helpful as learning what does matter.

Jack, W8TEE

Re: Preliminary results -- W8TEE/AC8GY Mag Loop Testing

Alan de G1FXB
 

Hi Alison,

I recall you done antenna R&D.

RE my comments: feeder radiation?? etc,?? and one of the examples I was eluding to:-

Ever have reason to look at the work of Ted Hart?? W5QJR ? EH antennas in either their or your commercial or hobby capacity?

Perhaps 5, never as many as 10 vearment supporters & no one else in the world could get them to work however "tweaky" the MKII / MKIII designs evolved

Had a massive US Mil. grant for their R&D, nothing. Failed to convince the IEEE with all their techno babble papers as to the theory?

However I bet they have nice retirement homes......


Maybe I'm an old fashioned dinosaur?

Way off topic... but "Do they work?"

a quick yes or no will suffice.?? :-)

--- .???? --- --- ---

regards Alan

??

On 01/06/2019 21:28, ajparent1/KB1GMX wrote:
Alan de G1FXB,

Your correct.?? any testing and I've done a lot with small loops you need lots of??
"shield breakers" or choking to remove the COAX shield as a possible secondary
coupling making it an undesired array and often clouding results or minimally
distorting patterns greatly.

If the RF source is small and self contained it can be at or very near the
feed point and make the problem easier.?? Same applies for receivers
as well.

Generally Loops, large or small, are considered self contained antennas not
requiring ground planes or counterpoises.?? However in the real world those
will exist.?? As a result supports or cables and the very existence of the
ground below it do influence the results.

Allison

Re: HFSignals poor business practices

maximilien971
 

Hi John,

With your expectations mlaybe you have to buy a K1 Elecraft Kit? But remind me how much does it cost?

73
Patrick
F6GWE

Re: Preliminary results -- W8TEE/AC8GY Mag Loop Testing

Alan de G1FXB
 

apologies for the seemingly random inclusion of question marks, some are mine some not......

there is no pattern, some are embedded in by use of tab key, other appear in the interspace, but not everytime.

Not changed any setting but the I don't have-to other than let Win10 update do it....


Lets see if another device does the same?

Alan

On 01/06/2019 22:24, Alan de G1FXB via Groups.Io wrote:

Hi Alison,

I recall you done antenna R&D.

RE my comments: feeder radiation?? etc,?? and one of the examples I was eluding to:-

Ever have reason to look at the work of Ted Hart?? W5QJR ? EH antennas in either their or your commercial or hobby capacity?

Perhaps 5, never as many as 10 vearment supporters & no one else in the world could get them to work however "tweaky" the MKII / MKIII designs evolved

Had a massive US Mil. grant for their R&D, nothing. Failed to convince the IEEE with all their techno babble papers as to the theory?

However I bet they have nice retirement homes......


Maybe I'm an old fashioned dinosaur?

Way off topic... but "Do they work?"

a quick yes or no will suffice.?? :-)

--- .???? --- --- ---

regards Alan

??

On 01/06/2019 21:28, ajparent1/KB1GMX wrote:
Alan de G1FXB,

Your correct.?? any testing and I've done a lot with small loops you need lots of??
"shield breakers" or choking to remove the COAX shield as a possible secondary
coupling making it an undesired array and often clouding results or minimally
distorting patterns greatly.

If the RF source is small and self contained it can be at or very near the
feed point and make the problem easier.?? Same applies for receivers
as well.

Generally Loops, large or small, are considered self contained antennas not
requiring ground planes or counterpoises.?? However in the real world those
will exist.?? As a result supports or cables and the very existence of the
ground below it do influence the results.

Allison

Re: HFSignals poor business practices

Arv Evans
 

John

The day is long gone when we used large ceramic wafer rotary switches, 1/4 inch phone jacks,
5 inch skirted phenolic knobs, and 500 volt power supplies.  It is easy to look at the diminutive
size of today's components and disparage them, but without those small components you would
not have cell phones, network routers and hubs, personal computers, and automotive system
computers.  Support for Heathkit and similar systems used to involve a commercial printing group
just to print and mail the manuals.  Today support is via on-line groups and documentation is
on web sites.  It is called progress. 

As has been stated many times before, this website is the support system for HF Signals products.
There is a website for HF Signals that has schematics and assembly instructions.  There are
several ancillary web sites which host collections of modifications and additions for HF Signals
products.  There are many on this web site that are willing to help you through the learning
process necessary to come up to speed with today's technology. 

The SMT components used by HF Signals are not the smallest available.  It is possible to trace
circuits and signals just like we did back in the 50's and 60's.  The electronics have not changed...
well, not quite true.  Now we are presented with several technological tools that are made possible
by small components and new knowledge that arose from using those components.  Today's ham
radio operator has almost instant access to on-line help and on-line helpers, as well as to
manufacturer's data sheets for all the individual components.  Today we have free circuit simulation
software and PCB layout editors.  Once a PCB has been designed we can click on a manufacturer's
URL and have that board made for us and delivered within a few days. 

Many of the functions of today's ham radio equipment is computer assisted.  Small microprocessors
have matured significantly over the past 20 years and prices are now so low as to make them very
advantageous for our homebrew projects.  For this reason a significant portion of today's ham radio
operators have educated themselves in programming skills and are writing their own subroutines
for interface with their hardware creations.  IDE (Integrated Development Environments) are freely
available for those who want to write their own software.  Again, there are many on this discussion
group who are willing help you if you need assistance with software design and implementation. 

When you purchase a radio or test equipment system today you should not expect it to be filled
with 12AU7s, 6V6s, and 6146 tubes.  We left those behind 25 years ago.  Today transmitting
amplifiers are usually relatively inexpensive MOSFETs or expensive RF transistors.  Variable
frequency tuned circuits are adjusted by changing DC bias on reverse biased diodes.  It has
become rare to see a modern project that uses an air-variable capacitor.  Instead of VFOs
(Variable Frequency Oscillators) we now mostly use Digital Frequency Synthesizers.  Even the
old PLL (Phase Locked Loop) circuits have become unpopular for all but microwave work,
although internally the DDS or Synthesizers do contain PLL-like circuitry.   

In the bad-old-days the only resource we had for technical support was printed manuals, the
technical section in a local library, and a few ARRL or RSGB publications.  Today the amount
of technical reference material has increased exponentially and is mostly available with only a
few clicks of the computer mouse or by typing a line on the keyboard. 

So, bite the bullet, pull your britches up, and start on the journey toward learning and using
modern electronics components and circuit designs.  There are people on this group that will
help if you get lost.  Just ask nicely and carefully explain your problem(s).  They may ask you
questions in return but that is just the process to refine knowledge of the problem and help lead
you to resolution if the issue. 

Having said all that...this group is not a social group.  Facebook and Twitter are for general
socializing.  This group is focused on technical topics related to BITX designs, BITX products,
and the support of these systems.  We do stray off-topic from time to time, but most discussions
stay on, or close to, the objective of the group. 

Because of the "I Need Help" nature of the group it sometimes sounds like a particular design
or product may be faulty.  That is usually far from reality.  Most of the units discussed here have
been built and are in operation by several thousand hams worldwide.  You only hear from those
who are having problems and that sometimes gives the impression that these are general
situations when truth is that what we hear about are those few who have wired something wrong,
applied wrong polarity power, or just did not understand how to build a circuit or connect a
pre-assembled circuit board. 

Hams, and non-hams, on this group run the full range from total newbies to engineers who have
designed large and expensive commercial systems.  We all had to start somewhere and this is
a good place to start...or to upgrade one's skills. 

The BITX design series started as a simple design to allow hams with limited access to parts
to build their own working transceivers and to get on the air with those units.  As a result the
BITX builders usually develop a significant base of knowledge regarding the circuit design and
are well prepared to make their own modifications and upgrades.  This is part of the discussion
and also apparently leads some to believe that the basic design is not viable as a working rig.

The BITX20 organization is an international group with over 7000 members located in almost every
country of the world.  This includes many cultures, and sensitivities.  For this reason it is a good
idea to read over what you have written before you post it to avoid offending someone else or
causing mis-information to be sent. 

Arv
_._



On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:26 PM John Cardoso <ve9pct@...> wrote:
I have been wishing to order a Bitx40 for a while now. Meanwhile, I have been reading the posters of this group from time to time. I kept reading about the problems people were having with the radios but, I think, I had to experience it myself.
Maybe I am just a sucker for punishment. But I did not expect the experience to be this bad.
The order was delivered on time. So far so good. The packaging was well done and strong as if it was expected to go through hell and come out unscathed.
The surprises came after - The quality of the components can't be any worse - very cheap and poor quality pots, a tiny push button for PTT (are you kidding me?), a lousy mic and a 0.1 uF capacitor that I still have no idea where it will go.
There were no instructions of any sort. Not even a link to a website where they could be found. One half-page of an 8X11 sheet of paper with a list of the contents (probably to save on expenses), and an invoice, was all that came with the parts. No even a mention on the version of the board and/or  software. What version is it being sold now, anyway?
The whole thing is crappy. Is this the way they do business in India or is it just a company that doesn't know how to do it?
This post will probably have some replies telling me that I should have known better. Maybe. For hackers they say?

Re: Raduino for Sale

PeteWK8S
 

Yes - sorry on slow response but I don't subscribe to daily emails so I have to check here.

Send me an email and I send you payment address or Paypal or MO.

Pete WK8S

Re: HFSignals poor butiosiness practices

Don - KM4UDX
 

John -- I too was surprised by the quality of parts...the mini audio jacks, PPT switch and the encoder are examples of "value engineering" at its finest (worst!).  But what we have here, in its totality, is a very clever bit of kit -- and an astounding value for $130. 

While I could buy any modern professional commercial radio with lovely knobs, high quality enclosure, professional jacks (!), ample volume, AGC, S-meter, and a thousand other features, I just had no interest.   You have to want to build, solve, create, experiment, tinker  a bit, and communicate with others for help.  And provide a few of your own parts from the junk box when you break the el-cheapo kit parts, or if you just can't stand the way they feel or look. 

Example: A buddy of mine couldn't stomach the inexpensive feel and look of the rotary encoder (he may have "accidentally" stepped on it as well..hahah).  So he purchased a really nice version, in a lot of 5.  He gave me one.  It feels soooo good compared to the included kit encoder. And it just looks sturdy and well made, as it is. So I have tossing out the cheap included encoder and replacing it with the sexy sturdy version, on my "round-to-it" list.  But I will never get "round-to-it". Why? The included cheap encoder works fine, and I never really turn the knob anyway.  Rig control and digital modes from my laptop take care of all the frequency changes.  And I put in a Nextion screen (dreamy!!), so I use the touch interface to do most of the freq changes.  But the encoder works anytime I need it.  The poor cheap encoder, made from tinfoil, will last a thousand years as is. 

Ditto with the little PPT surface mount switch.  When I figured out what it was, I thought it was the most ridiculous thing I had ever seen.  But then I built the mic in a pill bottle, and the stupid cheap surface mount PPT switch fit just fine on the side of the pill bottle mic.  It too will last for a thousand years. 

This kit radio can not be brought into the world without a fair amount of "you" added to it. If you like this process, you will love this 80-10 band 20-2 watt transceiver. 

And asking for help in this community is also an extraordinary experience.  After I built my radio, it would receive great, but no TX.  I was sooo frustrated.  A fellow in this IO community said,  "look, put it in a box, send it to me, and let me look at it.  If it takes any new parts, you pay for them, but I'll do the labor, no problem".  So I put my kit radio  in a box and mailed it off to a complete stranger a long way away.  

Turns out, as is often the case with me, I had screwed up a drive pot.  My angel of mercy just twisted it to the right setting, put it in the box, and set it back to me.   You could make the argument that as good as a value as the kit is, the value of the community of builders here is 100 times more valuable.  

If you want to see my uBITX in its current glory, and the goofy pill bottle mic, see my www.qrz.com page. I found it very very helpful to keep looking at the work of others to encourage me. If you want to see  some uBITX performance, wait a week and see my results on WSPRnet under KM4UDX  This little radio, and a multi-band compromise antenna, gets to the farthest reaches of the planet. Pretty good value for you money.

(*) I'm in the middle of a computer change over.  But when using the old computer last month, my uBITX was in the top 20 world wide for 2 way WSPRnet spots. This is competing with wicked professional gear, with their great quality components(!)  And this little uBIX kit, with the cheapest jacks and encoder in the world, is running ahead of almost all of them. 

If I can help, just ask.

Don
km4udx