Date   

Seeed Xiao microcontroller--Opps, wrong button

Christopher Miller
 

Neat

KF4FTR


Re: Possible S-Meter circuit

Doug W
 

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 05:27 PM, Bob Lunsford wrote:
I wish there were a way to have the comments relate back to the previous comment by a thread link or merely posting the previous comment with the posting comment as is done here.
If you are on the website, all you need to do is highlight part of the post you are replying to before clicking reply and it will show in your post as a quote like I have done here.
 
--
www.bitxmap.com


Re: Possible S-Meter circuit

Bob Lunsford
 

I found out later that Carlo was addressing his question to another Bob. So my comment was indeed out of order.

I wish there were a way to have the comments relate back to the previous comment by a thread link or merely posting the previous comment with the posting comment as is done here. Then the pertinence of a reply could be refreshed in the mind of the reader.

Thanks much for your view on this.

Bob — KK5R

On Tuesday, August 11, 2020, 4:37:36 PM EDT, hardrain <hardrain@...> wrote:


Bob,

I don't think anybody felt you were pushing or recommending anything. I think that if people ask you if you have tested a circuit, they just mean that, because they like to know if and how it works. 
Sometimes sentences from non-native speakers lend themselves to misunderstandings.
LM 39xx s-meters are just as good as any other, performance and accuracy may be different, but we're here to get ideas, test them and share the results according with the Ham spirit I think. So I mentioned my circuit as a contribution related to the topic of the thread.
I definitely encourage you to present ideas to the group again.
By the way, I prefer connecting diodes in series with the positive supply, too ;) 

73
IZ1HNY

On 10/08/20 23:54, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
I presented it as something I found in an old CQ magazine. I DID NOT try to imply that I was pushing it or recommending it. In fact, when a built several QRP radios and found a diode across the power leads to short out the power lines if they were connected in reverse, I immediately changed them to be in series with the positive line.

I will not present any new ideas to the group since it encourages thoughts that they are being dragged down, somehow, when at least it causes people to think about it, at least.

Arrivederci, colega.

KK5R

On Monday, August 10, 2020, 1:06:24 PM EDT, IZ4SJP Carlo <carlo@...> wrote:


Bob, did you try it?



Re: Sketch µBITX-V6 version 6.3.1 Arduino-IDE error in the complication on the NANO EVERY board. #v6 #nano #ubitxv6

Gary Anderson
 

David,
Loris was trying to get the code compiled with a Mac for a different processor, not the Nano. I was too lazy to install the 8.1.13 IDE, but willing to give it a go on a PC with the IDE I had installed. (known library issues for the Encoder at some point in time w.r.t. the "Every" board)  Loris got an Error during compile.  You just got Warnings.  (Had you gotten an Error, the code would have not compiled) BTW, I had a lot of Warnings with 8.1.12 IDE. Jack gave an example of how to correct the code, for lack of better words, to the syntax the compiler wants to handle string constants.  Glad you were able to push through your problems, and will keep an eye out for Loris' questions.
Rgds,
Gary


Re: Possible S-Meter circuit

hardrain
 

Bob,

I don't think anybody felt you were pushing or recommending anything. I think that if people ask you if you have tested a circuit, they just mean that, because they like to know if and how it works. 
Sometimes sentences from non-native speakers lend themselves to misunderstandings.
LM 39xx s-meters are just as good as any other, performance and accuracy may be different, but we're here to get ideas, test them and share the results according with the Ham spirit I think. So I mentioned my circuit as a contribution related to the topic of the thread.
I definitely encourage you to present ideas to the group again.
By the way, I prefer connecting diodes in series with the positive supply, too ;) 

73
IZ1HNY

On 10/08/20 23:54, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
I presented it as something I found in an old CQ magazine. I DID NOT try to imply that I was pushing it or recommending it. In fact, when a built several QRP radios and found a diode across the power leads to short out the power lines if they were connected in reverse, I immediately changed them to be in series with the positive line.

I will not present any new ideas to the group since it encourages thoughts that they are being dragged down, somehow, when at least it causes people to think about it, at least.

Arrivederci, colega.

KK5R

On Monday, August 10, 2020, 1:06:24 PM EDT, IZ4SJP Carlo <carlo@...> wrote:


Bob, did you try it?



Re: Sketch µBITX-V6 version 6.3.1 Arduino-IDE error in the complication on the NANO EVERY board. #v6 #nano #ubitxv6

modestly confused
 

Using Arduino 8.1.13 on Windows 10
uBitX V6

I am very much a clueless noob but searching for the errors I was seeing brought me to this message.

Fooling around with X Loader I managed to whack my ubitx v6.1 and take myself to a white screen stage, or as I called it the white screen of stupid.  Trying to restore it from the Sketch posted by Afarhan on github https://github.com/afarhan/ubitxv6 , I got all of the errors listed in the earlier post.  I know very little about Arduino and was following the example posted by Afarhan on YouTube to update or restore when I hit that snag.  The posting by Gary Anderson about an earlier IDE version as well as the tips in this thread made me wonder about the boot loader.  There is an ATmega328P marked as an Old Bootloader in the list of processors in on 8.1.13 and I tried that and it worked.  I was able to compile and upload successfully.

I have no idea if that helps but thought I would pass it on.

David KG7ZMX
modestly confused


Re: Proposed Band plan and uBitx

Dean Souleles
 

One more training resource -

Hamstudy.org provides license test prep, sample test and and links to resources - and it is free.   I used it for all three tests.  I kept studying until I was able to pass a sample test at 90% correct consistently.  I passed all three test first time out.

Dean
KK4DAS


Seeed Xiao microcontroller--Opps, wrong button

Jack, W8TEE
 


All:

I just got the Seeed Xiao microcontroller and was anxious to try it out. Unfortunately, I did not have a type C USB cable, which it uses, so off to Walmart. I installed a small library that's available for it, plug it into the Arduino IDE and loaded Blink and it worked perfectly. I also compiled and ran the ASCII table example, no problem. The reason I mention it is because it runs on 3.3V, and has these features:
  • ARM® Cortex®-M0+ 32bit 48MHz microcontroller(SAMD21G18) with 256KB Flash,32KB SRAM
  • Flexible compatibility: Compatible with Arduino IDE
  • Easy project operation: Breadboard-friendly
  • Small size: As small as a thumb(20x17.5mm) for wearable devices and small projects.
  • Multiple development interfaces: 11 digital/analog pins, 10 PWM Pins, 1 DAC output, 1 SWD Bonding pad interface, 1 I2C interface, 1 UART interface, 1 SPI interface.
This is a picture of mine:

Inline image

The cost is about $5. I think it might be very useful for portable stuff. I think I read somewhere that, of the 32k of SRAM, the Arduino IDE can only use 8K. Still, it's 4x as fast as the Nano with 4x the SRAM and clock speed. Looks interesting.

Jack, W8TEE


--
Jack, W8TEE


Seeed Xiao microcontroller

Jack, W8TEE
 

All:

I just got the Seeed Xiao microcontroller and was anxious to try it out. Unfortunately, I did not have a type C USB cable, which it uses, so off to Walmart. I installed a small library that's available for it, plug it into the Arduino IDE and loaded Blink and it worked perfectly. I also compiled and ran the ASCII table example, no problem. The reason I mention it is because it runs on 3.3V, and has these features:


--
Jack, W8TEE


Re: Antuino

dennett Norman
 

Thank you all for your most interesting comments, just what I was looking for. Following up some of the suggestions has been a fascinating experience, I had no idea the BiTx  "movement" was so large and so well organised. I thought I had followed quite closely from the very early days when I was intrigued with the idea of winding a coil on a tap washer! 
My order will soon be on it's way.

73's
Norman
ZS6CVF


Re: Problem: PTT on Bitx-40 Transmits CW (Audio/Phone not possible) #bitx40help

Allard PE1NWL
 

Hi again Brian,

Nice video! I very much like this kind of experimentation as it provides a very learnful experience to understand the fundamentals of SSB radio.

1. You can probably test it even better when you disconnect the antenna from the receiving rig (NOT the transmiting rig!).This way you reduce the chance of overdriving the receiver. Even without antenna it will probably pick up sufficient signal to detect the audio.

2. In your latest video you can still hear the carrier tone with a pitch of about 1000 Hz. Try to fine-tune the radios so that the pitch becomes very low so that it can no longer be heard. At that point both radios are tuned at exactly the same frequency (zero-beat). When the radio's are at zero-beat the detected audio will sound most natural.

Good luck and happy BitX-ing!

73 Allard PE1NWL


Re: BFO calibrate (AGAIN!)

Rene
 

Did you also recallibrate the BFO after Freq??
Regards
Rene


Re: Problem: PTT on Bitx-40 Transmits CW (Audio/Phone not possible) #bitx40help

Brian Jester
 

Allard,

Good point!  I did a 2nd & 3rd test like this and did hear rough unintelligible audio both directions:

video of sound quality:

- https://youtu.be/dcjvl6f939U

Notes:

- Bitx-40 with an MFJ-2010 (above the roof)
- uBitx v6 with an MFJ 40m Mobile Antenna w mag mount (in the kitchen)
- they were approx 20 feet apart
- test 1: xmit from Bitx-40 
- I heard tough overdriven audio and loud tone on the uBit v6
- test 2: xmit from uBit v6
- I heard tough overdriven audio on the Bitx-40



Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

Slurm
 

Commendable indeed.  


Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

Arv Evans
 

Doug

We try to help!  8-)

Arv
_._


On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 5:14 PM Doug W <dougwilner@...> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 01:56 PM, Ashhar Farhan wrote:
We encourage that and hope that the evolution continues.
Darn it Ash and Arv.  I love a good conspiracy theory and you just ruined this one with facts.
 
--
www.bitxmap.com


Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

Doug W
 

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 01:56 PM, Ashhar Farhan wrote:
We encourage that and hope that the evolution continues.
Darn it Ash and Arv.  I love a good conspiracy theory and you just ruined this one with facts.
 
--
www.bitxmap.com


Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

Gordon Gibby
 

Well stated, Farhan


On Aug 10, 2020, at 14:57, Ashhar Farhan <farhanbox@...> wrote:


i have always reached out to everyone. however, this is an open source project. everyone is free to pick and choose. many of allison's mods have made it to ubitx. the new relay switching system was her brain child.
on group and off group, i have always reached out to her. 
there are many on this group who don't contribute. their contribution is immense. we are honoured to have some of the most brilliant radio minds on the planet in this group. i have always sought their advice and mentorship. for instance, the latest round of antuino is firmly the work of raj and hans (for sorting out the si5351 programming for me).
here, i must confess, that many of the mods suggested don't actually work. any mod must be backed up with a plausible theory and repeatable data. For instance, many reported various cures for the spurious outputs that plagued the early versions. If i had accepted every mod, we would have gone no place. i replicated each and every suggested mod and reported back to the group with the results and then, finally, and by sheer luck in discovered that it was the second order distortion of the 45 MHz IF amplifier that was causing the problem. we then tested on tens of systems before recommending it as a fix. Not just that, but also had to ship the patch-up kit to those who wanted to apply it to their own radios. 
for the mods to make it to the next build, they have to confirm to certain guidelines:
1. the mod should solve an important problem. For instance, a mod to add VOX or AGC, doesn't solve a problem, it extends the functionality.
2. it should be backed up by analysis. If someone suggests, "use a 2N5109" without actually showing why it is working, it won't make it.
3. it should be repeatable. a mod that is recommended should work with everyone who has tried it. the mileage shouldn't vary.
4. it shou;d be simple. A mod that essentially builds a new radio in place of the old one, or involves extensive rewiring or desoldering won't work for everyone.,
5. it should be inexpensive. we are building a general coverage HF transceiver with a bill of materials under $100. our creeping features and cost escalations have already pushed it to $200 mark. For a hundred dollar more, you could buy an old TS-520S off the ebay. 

Finally, this is a hobby project of mine. My day job involves being hands on as a technical advisor to all our investee companies. I have to exercise my discretion of what appeals to me and what doesn't. people are free to build and sell their own version and even promote it on this group. HF Signals started selling these radios a few years ago. However, the BITX design is almost 20 years old and various other people have sold many of these radios as kits and some continue to do it even now. We encourage that and hope that the evolution continues.
- f

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 12:06 AM Slurm <42irongazelle@...> wrote:
I promise you I'm not bickering.  I'm trying to understand why the Allison and Nick/John/Dr. mods haven't been combined and even incorporated. There's no rule that says I have to understand everything.  It's all good. :-)


Re: Problem: PTT on Bitx-40 Transmits CW (Audio/Phone not possible) #bitx40help

Allard PE1NWL
 

From the video it can be seen that the transmitting and receiving rigs are right on top of each other.
Even when the carrier suppression of the transmiting rig is at -50 dB it is absolutely normal that the receiving rig will still become overloaded at such a short distance,

When you tune both rigs at zero beat (received carrier tone is zero hertz), and you speak into the mic, you might still be able to hear your own voice properly through the receiving radio though.

73 Allard PE1NWL


Re: Possible S-Meter circuit

Bob Lunsford
 

I presented it as something I found in an old CQ magazine. I DID NOT try to imply that I was pushing it or recommending it. In fact, when a built several QRP radios and found a diode across the power leads to short out the power lines if they were connected in reverse, I immediately changed them to be in series with the positive line.

I will not present any new ideas to the group since it encourages thoughts that they are being dragged down, somehow, when at least it causes people to think about it, at least.

Arrivederci, colega.

KK5R

On Monday, August 10, 2020, 1:06:24 PM EDT, IZ4SJP Carlo <carlo@...> wrote:


Bob, did you try it?


Re: Proposed Band plan and uBitx

Bob Lunsford
 

I believe some topics may not seem directly related to QRP or uBITX but they may encourage some, new and old, to see a new way our radios can be used. They are ham radio related and the uBITX brand is linked to ham radio or should be. I do not see our hobby here as a cult and will entertain any new topic or idea that may possibly be related to our hobby. However, there is a point where some topic can be worn out when enough is said on it to satisfy most here. (I speak from experience.)

Bob — KK5R


On Monday, August 10, 2020, 12:15:57 PM EDT, Jack, W8TEE via groups.io <jjpurdum@...> wrote:


Ultimately this is a technical forum...

"Ultimately", yes, but to preclude non-technical topics seems overly-restrictive. Increasing the number of US operators in the HF spectrum slice might be of interest to those non-US operators who have a µBITX to work DX. Personally, I enjoy the "stories" some posters tell about things that happened to them, perhaps on a SOTA activation or "reviews" of hardware/software. If I tire about reading a given thread, I stop reading it. If it's a one-post-and-done, I don't think that's going to hurt me much.

I think things here are pretty good as is. If it wasn't, I don't think we'd have 8000 members.

Jack, W8TEE

On Monday, August 10, 2020, 11:35:55 AM EDT, Ken Hansen <ken@...> wrote:


We're now a week into discussing a regulatory issue in one country on an international forum about a particular line of radios.

The BITX20 group has just under 8,000 members, I dare say a good portion of them are outside the influence of the FCC and the ARRL.

I understand the connection between increasing privileges and an affordable radio option like the uBitx, but I have to believe there's a more US-centric place for this discussion to continue.

Ultimately this is a technical forum, and the expansion of Technician privileges in the US is not a technical discussion.

I'm not a moderator, I'm not telling anyone what to do, I'm just pointing out the international nature of the group for consideration.

Ken, N2VIP

> On Aug 2, 2020, at 8:34 PM, Jeffrey Benedict <raoul@...> wrote:
>
> ARRL has proposed an upgrade in privileges for Tech hams  Techs will get a chunk of 80SSB, chunk of 40SSB and a chunk of 15SSB. There are other changes in the data portions of the bands but, instead of describing everything, I will attach a link to the ARRL site and you can read it for yourself.




--
Jack, W8TEE