Date   

Re: Typo in ubitx_v6.1_code.ino?

Reed N
 

Hi Mark,

The EEPROM storage addresses have histories. KD8CEC's software for v5 has a bunch of other features and settings, so the location of the keyer config made sense when it was added, but was left in place when ported for compatibility.

The master cal value could probably be limited, but since that value depends on the oscillator feeding the clock generator, unless you know the tolerance of that part, it's hard to say what the min/max should be. Especially since some home brew folks source different speeds.

Reed


Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

Bob Lunsford
 

Thanks Curt for your encouragement. I will try it soon and report to the group.

Bob — KK5R

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020, 8:30:24 PM EST, Curt via groups.io <wb8yyy@...> wrote:


Bob

I have seen that method used -- so give it a try if you have a pair of diodes handy.  I am trying to recall which rig I saw this used with.  silicon may work - but maybe some folk may use germanium or schottky - try what you have. 

At least with my v4, I am not hearing signals that would blast me out of the chair.  Its just a matter of 'enjoying tuning across the band.  If you have a photoresistor handy, then find an LED and a couple NPNs to try the circuit I recommend.  Otherwise, who knows see what the diodes will do. 

cool thing about the ubitx - 'have it your way' -- no reason not to be counter-culture.  forgive me for liking the dancing LED inside my ubitx case.  enjoy your listening and radiations. 

Curt


Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

Curt
 

Bob

I have seen that method used -- so give it a try if you have a pair of diodes handy.  I am trying to recall which rig I saw this used with.  silicon may work - but maybe some folk may use germanium or schottky - try what you have. 

At least with my v4, I am not hearing signals that would blast me out of the chair.  Its just a matter of 'enjoying tuning across the band.  If you have a photoresistor handy, then find an LED and a couple NPNs to try the circuit I recommend.  Otherwise, who knows see what the diodes will do. 

cool thing about the ubitx - 'have it your way' -- no reason not to be counter-culture.  forgive me for liking the dancing LED inside my ubitx case.  enjoy your listening and radiations. 

Curt


Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

Bob Lunsford
 

For headphones, I wonder if two diodes with polarities reversed from each other across the headphone line would provide some hearing protection...? Or a pair of reversed polarity in series if the volume were affected too much. Does this cause severe distortion? (I've read about doing this but never tried it.)

By the way, what is "vogad"???

Bob — KK5R

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020, 7:38:16 PM EST, iz oos <and2oosiz2@...> wrote:


Loris, would you think a vogad at the audio output could be a solution to save both sensitivity and hears to some extent?


Il mer 18 nov 2020 06:10 PM Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> ha scritto:
AAT (Automatic Attenuator Control)?
_._


On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:32 AM Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:
Hi Loris,

There are a lot of newbies here and they just don't know. Don't be
angry. Just help them alomng if they are actually open to help. I
started learning about physics and electronics in the early 1950s and I
still don't everything. I am more and moire aware of how much I don't
know. I usually do know where to look:)

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 11/18/20 7:17 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
> Hi Bill ... I fully agree with you!
> What I am wondering is "why" this forum continues to call AGC a very
> vulgar "ATTENUATOR" even if more or less automatic.
> 73 Loris
>






Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

iz oos
 

Loris, would you think a vogad at the audio output could be a solution to save both sensitivity and hears to some extent?


Il mer 18 nov 2020 06:10 PM Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> ha scritto:
AAT (Automatic Attenuator Control)?
_._


On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:32 AM Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:
Hi Loris,

There are a lot of newbies here and they just don't know. Don't be
angry. Just help them alomng if they are actually open to help. I
started learning about physics and electronics in the early 1950s and I
still don't everything. I am more and moire aware of how much I don't
know. I usually do know where to look:)

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 11/18/20 7:17 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
> Hi Bill ... I fully agree with you!
> What I am wondering is "why" this forum continues to call AGC a very
> vulgar "ATTENUATOR" even if more or less automatic.
> 73 Loris
>






Re: #For Sale A Few QRP Goodies #for

Bob Lunsford
 

Tambem falo portugues. Era liinguist em ASA.

Bob — KK5R

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020, 3:15:15 PM EST, N8DAH <dherron@...> wrote:


Rubens,

Simplesmente não tenho tempo para brincar com tudo como pensei que faria. Também estou reduzindo um pouco o barraco e adoro construir coisas.

73
--
David

 N8DAH


Re: Typo in ubitx_v6.1_code.ino?

Mark Erbaugh
 

As a follow up, as I read the code, it appears the parameters for LSB_CAL and SIDE_TONE stored in the EEPROM are not used in the version 6 code. SIDE_TONE is at location 12. There is a CW_SIDETONE at location 24 that is used.

Also, in the code, I see that there are range checks for most of the parameters to check if the EEPROM has reasonable values, but I can't find a range check for the MASTER_CAL. What is an appropriate range of values for MASTER_CAL?

73,
Mark


Re: No Rx from my V4.3

Patrick Peter Rosney
 

Will do , Evan  and Thanks Again for all the help and useful information you gave me . 

73 and stay safe 

Ei2if   dah de dah 



On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 11:53 PM Evan Hand <elhandjr@...> wrote:
Patrick,
I am very happy that you were able to get your uBITX working.  The knowledge of helping someone really makes my day.

Have fun and feel free to post any questions that may come up.

Enjoy the uBITX!
73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: No Rx from my V4.3

Evan Hand
 

Patrick,
I am very happy that you were able to get your uBITX working.  The knowledge of helping someone really makes my day.

Have fun and feel free to post any questions that may come up.

Enjoy the uBITX!
73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: No Rx from my V4.3

Patrick Peter Rosney
 

AC9TU ..EVAN 

Hi Evan , Thank You so Much for your last reply . I got stuck into this XLoader debacle today . I downloaded an older version of it ( V 1.0 ) and put that onto 
an older Laptop I have here which runs off Windows 8 .  I was downloading  V1.332 on the other Laptops but it wasnt  working . 
The second I downloaded XLoader V 1.00 it worked a treat . I then downloaded the uBitx Firmware , the exact version You sent the link for . Only for You telling me the Exact 
Hex File I would have been totally lost ...again !    Eventually uploaded all onto the Nano Board and when I powered up the Radio ...CW was coming out of the Speaker at full volume !
Success ...I can hear loads of signals now and the Radio seems to work ...I suspect I need to fine tune it a little  but I have something to start with now once I can hear signals .

Thanks Again for Your Help , Evan ...at long last after a lot of  trial and error I have this uBitx V4.3  working and receiving ...this is what I love about Amateur Radio , everybody helps one 
another and there is always somebody out there who can answer a question or solve a problem ...
If You ever come and visit Ireland , I owe  You a Pint ( or maybe 2  )  of Guinness  for your help !
Thanks Evan 
73 and Chat soon 

On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 9:12 AM Evan Hand <elhandjr@...> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 04:58 PM, Patrick Peter Rosney wrote:
I uploaded V5 Firmware but this has made no difference
Patrick,
The v5 firmware uses a different SSB filter frequency.  That software will not work with a v4 board.  Here is a link to the KD8CEC software that has both the v4 and v5 board software. 
https://github.com/phdlee/ubitx/releases/tag/v1.20

You want to use the uBITXV234 folder selecting the file that matches your display.  If it is the stock v4 1602 display then the file is UBITX_CEC_V1.200_16P.hex. The hex files are loaded into the Nano with Xloader.

If you want to go back to the stock v4 software, here is the link:
https://github.com/afarhan/ubitx4

I would suggest the KD8CEC software, as that has more features and options for CW operation that the stock does not.

Once you have the correct software I would then start the troubleshooting as Jerry suggested.

Have fun with the rig.
73
Evan
AC9TU


Typo in ubitx_v6.1_code.ino?

Mark Erbaugh
 

Around line 177 in the ubitx_v6.1_code.ino, the address of the CW_KEY_TYPE parameter in EEPROM is set at 358. The previous parameters (VFO_A_MODE and VFO_B_MODE) are  at 256 and 257 respectively. Should CW_KEY_TYPE be at 258 instead of 358? I guess it doesn't matter, except that the data is not continuous with the previous data. I understand the reason for the gap from CW_DELAYTIME at 48 and VFO_A_MODE at 256.

Mark


Re: #For Sale A Few QRP Goodies #for

 

Rubens,

Simplesmente não tenho tempo para brincar com tudo como pensei que faria. Também estou reduzindo um pouco o barraco e adoro construir coisas.

73
--
David

 N8DAH


Re: Interesting QST article

Dave AA6RE
 

Link to group is:



Dave, AA6RE


On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 3:15 AM Bob Benedict, KD8CGH <rkayakr@...> wrote:
The uSDX is a development effort that has several evolving designs, it's not a single product like the uBITX V6. One cool aspect of it is that it uses a highly efficient class E amp not only for CW, but for other modes too. It pulls off this wizardry by pulse width modulating the power to the amp. It's a uses direct conversion SDR receiver with the rest of the signal processing done computationally. The amazing thing is that all of this, including A/D and D/A, is all done by an Arduino so there is a very low discrete parts count.
It started single band as a modification of QRP Labs QCX class E amp CW transceiver. The two main design streams now have multiband filter boards. 
Check out the uSDX group.io WIKI for an overview.

I built a uBITX V4, a WB2CBA uSDX and I'm slowly building a DL2MAN version uSDX (I'm not so good with SMD). In my opinion, compared to the uBITX, the uSDX has more features like AGC and variable filters. It's better at CW since it's QSK and has filters you can narrow, but the SSB transmission is not as good. The uSDX firmware is evolving rapidly, like in the early uBITX days,  so we'll see how it progresses.

BTW Farahan often participates in uSDX discussions. I wouldn't be surprised to see a new transceiver from HF Signals.

--
  73
    Bob  KD8CGH


Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

Arv Evans
 

AAT (Automatic Attenuator Control)?
_._


On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:32 AM Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:
Hi Loris,

There are a lot of newbies here and they just don't know. Don't be
angry. Just help them alomng if they are actually open to help. I
started learning about physics and electronics in the early 1950s and I
still don't everything. I am more and moire aware of how much I don't
know. I usually do know where to look:)

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 11/18/20 7:17 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
> Hi Bill ... I fully agree with you!
> What I am wondering is "why" this forum continues to call AGC a very
> vulgar "ATTENUATOR" even if more or less automatic.
> 73 Loris
>






WARNING: Promotional material

Jack, W8TEE
 

All:

I just finished another pass through my Beginning C for Microcontrollers book. The narrative of the book is virtually the same as previous printings, but this one increases the font size from what appeared to be an 8-point font to a 12-point font. I have also added a pretty comprehensive book index with over 800 entries to make it more useful as a reference book. Because of the larger font and the addition of a 14-page index, the page count has increased from 375 pages to about 475 pages, so the book's a little "fatter" now. I could post the index, but since those pages numbers would be "way off" between this version and earlier version, I'm not sure that does anyone much good. Anyway, the bad news is that, evidently, I crossed some "printing threshold" as there was a significant increase in the cost of producing the book. The good news is that the price remains unchanged. If there are any questions, please use my SoftwareControlledHamRadio site to avoid using more bandwidth here.

Also, to those who wrote a review even with the crappy font...Thank you!

Jack, W8TEE


--
Jack, W8TEE


Re: Interesting QST article

Bob Benedict, KD8CGH
 

Simon

  Full circle. This all started with people modifying a QCX. It's great to see Hans supporting the hardware mod. Although, as he carefully notes, you will need firmware and support from the group.

You can also buy uSDX boards and parts from https://shop.offline.systems/.
--
  73
    Bob  KD8CGH


Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

IW4AJR Loris <lorisbollina@...>
 

Hi Curt and hi Gary ...
to be honest I'm not even a little angry, on the contrary I'm stimulated to try to learn something more (as Bill rightly says, the more I study the more I realize that I still need to learn something else!).
I agree with Curt for the excellent judgment he gives to the µBITX, I own Version 6, but I believe that the judgment is applicable to all versions, especially I agree on the BF limiter that uses an LED and a photoresistor, it reminds me of a very old dynamic compressor circuit that I used 40/50 years ago on my HiFi to compress the dynamics of the Vinyl being recorded on magnetic tape.
I'm going crazy looking for the scheme among the old paperwork, there was a beautiful hardware solution that used an LED and a photostransistor (replaceable with a more convenient and less expensive photoresistor) stuck in a black plastic tube, if I find it again I scan it and I publish it, I will certainly remove the attenuator from the µBITX and insert this solution !!!
For Gary, I conducted my experiments in 40m (band on which I love to do portable QSO) and the data collected refer to old HP and TEK instruments and perhaps they are a bit too penalizing, I used an HP8454B generator with HP11710B downconverter , an HP436A Bolometer with HP8481D head, a TEK2535 oscilloscope and a TEK2465B oscilloscope ... obviously, since the bolometer head is characterized only starting from 10MHz, it may be that it gave a slightly worse result than the real one, but not by a lot (half a point S counts for little against 2 or 3 points S) ... and to conclude I would say that to not blow the eardrums Curt's solution is definitely better than any other.
Finally, I feel like finding a way to realize a real good AGC to be inserted in the µBITX, for example with an input amplifier MOSFET (perhaps with variable gain) driven by an AGC signal taken from the MF immediately after the quartz filter, I'm studying on ... if they are roses they will bloom.
a dear greeting ... IW4AJR Loris


Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

Gary Rindfuss <rindfussg@...>
 

Ok agree its not an agc. But it addresses the problem of having  your eardrums blown out with a sudden strong signal when you are wearing headphones. Plus it is easy to bypass. Just place a tiny reed relay across the board with nc contacts bridging the entire circuit. Relay off no "agc" relay on AGC
Does anyone have an easy way to implement an actual AGC ? 
One that can be managed by old eyes and old hands?

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 7:32 AM Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:
Hi Loris,

There are a lot of newbies here and they just don't know. Don't be
angry. Just help them alomng if they are actually open to help. I
started learning about physics and electronics in the early 1950s and I
still don't everything. I am more and moire aware of how much I don't
know. I usually do know where to look:)

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 11/18/20 7:17 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
> Hi Bill ... I fully agree with you!
> What I am wondering is "why" this forum continues to call AGC a very
> vulgar "ATTENUATOR" even if more or less automatic.
> 73 Loris
>






Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

Curt
 

Loris

Interesting viewpoint, as I agree it is unusual to place AGC attenuation at the very front. I had not seen any loss measurements, and I imagine they vary with frequency. Perhaps they are not as high as you cite at HF.

The designer had a good motivation seeking to enhance dynamic range, but the ubitx already seems to have its gain conservatively distributed. My antennas are mere dipole, verticals and 2 element compact yagi. The ubitx is not swamped even with many big amateur stations here in Maryland.

On low HF atmospheric and man made noise dominate more than receiver noise figure, but up on 28 MHz this added loss, whatever it is, will have impact in not hearing as well.

As the designer, who left out agc to keep ubitx simple and affordable around the globe, suggests an IF agc such as w7zoi hybrid cascode would be ideal (I have one here not in use yet). In the ubitx design it can be integrated but with directional amplifiers that do TR switching it may not easily patch in.

Rigs do work without agc, it just means operator must regularly use the audio gain control knob. I find only that loud signals are uncomfortable when tuning across the band. The simple, novel circuit using an LED and photoresistor does this wonderfully.

Curt


Re: Question: Why do you call "AGC" a simple automatic antenna "attenuator" in this forum? #ubitx #ubitxv6

Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Loris,

There are a lot of newbies here and they just don't know. Don't be angry. Just help them alomng if they are actually open to help. I started learning about physics and electronics in the early 1950s and I still don't everything. I am more and moire aware of how much I don't know. I usually do know where to look:)

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 11/18/20 7:17 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
Hi Bill ... I fully agree with you!
What I am wondering is "why" this forum continues to call AGC a very vulgar "ATTENUATOR" even if more or less automatic.
73 Loris

15561 - 15580 of 98398