Date   
Re: RX BCI filters

Curt
 

Interesting for those close to big medium wave transmitters. But it seems to me there is a larger market to kit something to remedy v3 and v4 ubitx transmit spurious. What am I missing in our greater interest in only improving what we hear?

Curt

Re: question about current after building the DC connector

nomadg360@...
 

Thanks everyone for your responses. I went ahead and put together the various parts and connected them up. When I did that and turned on the power, it looked like everything was working. That is, the display lights up and there are values in the display fields. I played with the turner and the frequency displayed changed.

 

I am not sure what I did wrong, but in the process of doing the other steps, I "fixed" something :) I suspect I had a wire wrong I had to make a couple of changes when I went back and reviewed each. step and did continuity checks on the wiring that I did.

Thanks again. Now I need to figure out how to do the initial testing and how to change the color on the display so I can see the writing, that yellow is hard on the eyes .....

Re: uBitX reduced power option

Jack Brabham - KZ5A
 

RV1 is useful to reduce power which is already low above 40M.   Good feature if you would prefer a 1 watt rig.  Increasing power boils down to running higher Vcc on the PA and upgrading the PA cooling. 

I am building a V5 with front panel variable PA voltage, I expect to have to interconnect the variable Vcc with the PA bias circuit so that it tracks as required.

Getting rid of the power fall off above 40 involves replacing most of the transistors in the TX chain, all of which have reduced gain at higher frequencies (20M and above).   I really wish Farhan would raise the price a few bucks and put decent transistors in it in the first place.

73 Jack KZ5A



On 7/13/2019 3:59 PM, N8DAH wrote:

Mark RV1 will adjust the drive power this can be remote mounted with use of a good shielded cable. RV2 and RV3 are bias control of the two IRF510's.

When I had a V4 I had adjusted it to 5w on the lowest bad (80m) so I could drive an amp as well as save the finals while doing full duty cycle modes.

73
--
David

 N8DAH
Kit-Projects.com

Shop is open!


RX BCI filters

 

We will have BCI kits out in the next week or so for the bitx radios as well as other direct conversion receivers that suffer from close AM stations.

The drop off is right at about 3Mhz and will cost 5$+ shipping. 3x toroids and 4x caps will be used, this would be a good kit to learn about wrapping toroids for those that have not had a chance to try.

They are RX ONLY! and should not be placed in the TX path, we will have detailed specs and instructions for both the Bitx40 and uBitx radios.

73
--
David

 N8DAH
Kit-Projects.com

Shop is open!

Re: uBitX reduced power option

 

Mark RV1 will adjust the drive power this can be remote mounted with use of a good shielded cable. RV2 and RV3 are bias control of the two IRF510's.

When I had a V4 I had adjusted it to 5w on the lowest bad (80m) so I could drive an amp as well as save the finals while doing full duty cycle modes.

73
--
David

 N8DAH
Kit-Projects.com

Shop is open!

Re: uBitX reduced power option

MadRadioModder
 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of marks@...
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2019 4:08 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: [BITX20] uBitX reduced power option

 

Considering a uBitx purchase.  Wondering if the RF output is user adjustable and, if yes, how accomplished.

thx
mark in MN


Virus-free. www.avg.com

--

…_. _._

uBitX reduced power option

marks@...
 

Considering a uBitx purchase.  Wondering if the RF output is user adjustable and, if yes, how accomplished.

thx
mark in MN

Re: Antuino 2.0

WoodJRx@...
 

Still working on the code, but I was able to borrow a 72db step attenuator from a fellow ham.  With Bruce Hall's (bhall66)'s improved code, my Antuino is showing pretty good linearity (in my opinion).  I'm pretty sure I'm having more issues with the attenuator (as it is a slide switch design) providing consistent attenuation than issues with the Antuino.

Linearity.png

Still tinkering...

~Josh
W0ODJ

Re: On the air with the "Fish Soup 7" QRP Rig

KD2QMZ
 

A competitor is building and testing a similar product based in modules. What input we got on this and as far as any improvements on the foot print of the UBITX?

I do have a case. So, would like to re-use in a newer version, as my V4 doesn't seems to react to VFO adjustments in a way that improves that much.

The kit isn't that expensive, so I can buy a new more up to date UBITX.

Great kit and same for the case.

Thanks for any input.



On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 8:20 AM ronmhauser via Groups.Io <ronmhauser=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Farhan, do you know the idiom in English "The cobbler's children have no shoes."  : )

Very much enjoying my v5 uBitx.

73
--Ron
K0EIA

Re: On the air with the "Fish Soup 7" QRP Rig

ronmhauser@...
 

Farhan, do you know the idiom in English "The cobbler's children have no shoes."  : )

Very much enjoying my v5 uBitx.

73
--Ron
K0EIA

Re: question about current after building the DC connector

Evan Hand
 

sorry, did not read your reply before answering with the prior response.  The schematic provided as a pdf on the HFSignals web site is the best tool to figure out where to test.

After I checked the schematic, I noted I was one pin off on the 12v supply to the Raduino.  mIt is actually pin 2 of that connector.

Here is a link to the pdf schematic:
http://www.hfsignals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ubitx_v5.png


There have been threads on Group.io that have documented the values that can be found on the test points. though some are for RF testing with either a scope, frequency counter,  or spectrum analyzer.

So do you have all of the wiring complete including the Raduino installed?

73
Evan
AC9TU

Re: question about current after building the DC connector

Evan Hand
 

Is the Raduino installed, and does it power up? By that I mean does the display light up?  If you are testing prior to installing the Raduino (I believe that the current test is suggested prior to inserting the Raduino) then do not install it down.  Instead test on pin one of the connector (the end closest to the power connector) for 12 volts there (should be the same as the supply voltage to the rig).

I really believe that there is a wiring error, or a bad trace/solder joint on the board.  This would be possible, however all boards are tested an "calibrated" prior to shipping, so not likely.

I will try to make time to run some measurements on my v5 board.  Please verify that it is a v5.  I also have a v4 board, so can test it as well.

73
Evan
AC9TU

Re: question about current after building the DC connector

nomadg360@...
 

I think it is V5. (I've had it about 4-5 months,just getting around to working on it.) On the board, (in the right rear corner), there is an embossing that says UBITX V5.)

All the connections I did are soldered. As noted in reply to Evan -- I see 13.5 up to the connector that mates to the board. (For now, I am using just the parts that come with the board and trying to follow the "Wire-UP" document.)

I see test points on the board, but haven't found any documentation as to what I might expect to see at those points if I used a meter on them?

 

I just did another voltage test. Between the red/brown pin on the power connector and the chassis mounting points (where you install the stand-offs, which I take to be board ground), I also see 13.5 volts.

 

Finally, on the main connector for the Arduino I see 13.5 volts on the socket flagged as +12 on the wiring diagram.

Re: question about current after building the DC connector

nomadg360@...
 

Building from scratch. (I do have a case kit, but for now I just want to get it hooked up as per "out-of-the-box." That is, using the parts that come with the board and following the instructions in the "HF Signals, MBITX -- WIRE UP" document.)

For power, I am connecting to my Alinco power supply set for 13.5 volts. (Using alligator clips for now to connect to the plug that came with the board.)

I am seeing 13.5 volts at the DC connector, i.e., between the positive pin (red-brown wires) and ground pin (black wire.) Not sure if there are other test points that I could hit that will tell me what the voltage is at other points on the board. (Also, unplugged the power cable and tested the voltage at the connector that plugs into the board -- also showing 13.5 volts between red and black, or brown and black.)

I am pretty confident that I have 13.5 volts up to the board.

Re: V5 uBitx CW issues

Roman
 

Regarding ferrites, this is only for the desperate: If you have old VGA or DVI cables laying around you can sometimes harvest the ferrite beads from them, though it does involve larger cutters and sharp bigger size box cutter blade. Cut the cable 1" (2cm) from each end with the pliers, slice down through the plastic about 2mm from the end towards the cable from all sides without hitting the ferrite (it can crack) but try to expose the face end of the ferrite possibly with multiple cuts, and go all the way around until you cut through the cable shield but not the cable, do on both ends. Using pliers, pull the remaining wires out. Slice down the length of the ferrite jacket until you barely touch the ferrite, pull the jacket off. Carefully using pliers pull the jacket out of the center of the ferrite. Most of these will fit RG58 cable. Don't lose part of a finger doing this! I think it is smarter to purchase what you need and get the right size/material.

Re: 2m under threat for Thales

iz oos
 

I am happy Yaesu would sell a ton of 2m radio. Maybe to Thales. Look, consumers will take into account the fact that they might eventually loose the 2m band in 2023. There is a risk, there will be a premium. I expect the prices for 2m ham radio will significantly fall until the situation is clarified. The same for the 23cm band. It will be interesting to see the evolution of the IC-9700, in the used market as well. That's economics, surely not an exact science but closed to be.


Il 12/lug/2019 20:48, "Ken Hansen" <ken@...> ha scritto:
Noting your tin foil hat, I would just point out that in 2023 is when the parties involved will begin *discussing* re-assigning certain bands within ITU Region 1, and the requesters have already said - in their request for the discussion in 4 years - that they do not want to impact any currently active allocations for other services.

In many people's minds this is a parallel to the US 1.25 Meter band changes a few years ago, but there are many, many differences - primarily the 1.25m (220 MHz) band was for all intents and purposes a USA-only allocation, 144-146 MHz is a global allocation.

I suspect Manufacturers will wait until regulations change before contemplating dropping bands from their offerings. Yaesu will sell a ton of 2m radios before the regulators even meet in 2023.

Ken, N2VIP

> On Jul 12, 2019, at 1:13 PM, Brent D <kn4uqa@...> wrote:
>
> *puts on tinfoil hat* - In four years, Yaesu, ICOM, and Kenwood will have ceased incorporating 2m into radios, giving justification to the idea that no one uses it anymore. They'll say "Look, the top guys don't even include 2m in their radios anymore".




Re: 2m under threat for Thales

Ken Hansen
 

Noting your tin foil hat, I would just point out that in 2023 is when the parties involved will begin *discussing* re-assigning certain bands within ITU Region 1, and the requesters have already said - in their request for the discussion in 4 years - that they do not want to impact any currently active allocations for other services.

In many people's minds this is a parallel to the US 1.25 Meter band changes a few years ago, but there are many, many differences - primarily the 1.25m (220 MHz) band was for all intents and purposes a USA-only allocation, 144-146 MHz is a global allocation.

I suspect Manufacturers will wait until regulations change before contemplating dropping bands from their offerings. Yaesu will sell a ton of 2m radios before the regulators even meet in 2023.

Ken, N2VIP

On Jul 12, 2019, at 1:13 PM, Brent D <kn4uqa@...> wrote:

*puts on tinfoil hat* - In four years, Yaesu, ICOM, and Kenwood will have ceased incorporating 2m into radios, giving justification to the idea that no one uses it anymore. They'll say "Look, the top guys don't even include 2m in their radios anymore".

Re: 2m under threat for Thales

Brent D
 

I believe we are all encouraging patience and observation here. The sky is never falling, until it is, but by then it's too late. No one is saying to form a militent group and go protest, only that we need to be aware of the possibility that changes may be on the horizon. A lot can happen in 4 years, both good and bad. What if the top manufacturers are convinced that 2m will go away for hams and stop making radios supporting 2m? 

*puts on tinfoil hat* - In four years, Yaesu, ICOM, and Kenwood will have ceased incorporating 2m into radios, giving justification to the idea that no one uses it anymore. They'll say "Look, the top guys don't even include 2m in their radios anymore". 

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019, 1:57 PM Ken Hansen <ken@...> wrote:
Please, the sky is not falling. This is a proposal to consider at WRC-23, which is four years from now, the possibility of reconsidering a number of frequency allocations above 144 MHz, including specifically the primarily Amateur Radio 144-146 MHz allocation among others.

Vigilance is called for, but these "they're trying to take 2m from us!" Posts are getting to be a bit much.

It was, as I understand, a last minute update to the proposed WRC-23 agenda. Our representative organizations are on top of this and will, as the discussion progresses, remain engaged.

If you want to keep 2m, then use 2m. High levels of activity and usage will be the best ammunition for our representative organizations. I personally live in an area (Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas) where there are essentially NO AVAILABLE 2m repeater pairs to be gotten, all are allocated, but I can scan the 2m repeater frequencies for several hours and hear no more than handful of 2m QSOs and countless repeater self-ids from otherwise silent repeaters. Two Meters is the lowest common denominator band, let's work towards keeping it active.

Please, if you haven't yet, click the ARRL note below and read what they say. It's nothing more than a request to consider a proposal in 2023, nothing is imminent, we don't need to 'go to the mattresses' [0], let's work through our respective representational organizations (ARRL, JARL, RSGB, etc.) and let's keep 2m active.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

Re: 2m under threat for Thales

Ken Hansen
 

Please, the sky is not falling. This is a proposal to consider at WRC-23, which is four years from now, the possibility of reconsidering a number of frequency allocations above 144 MHz, including specifically the primarily Amateur Radio 144-146 MHz allocation among others.

Vigilance is called for, but these "they're trying to take 2m from us!" Posts are getting to be a bit much.

It was, as I understand, a last minute update to the proposed WRC-23 agenda. Our representative organizations are on top of this and will, as the discussion progresses, remain engaged.

If you want to keep 2m, then use 2m. High levels of activity and usage will be the best ammunition for our representative organizations. I personally live in an area (Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas) where there are essentially NO AVAILABLE 2m repeater pairs to be gotten, all are allocated, but I can scan the 2m repeater frequencies for several hours and hear no more than handful of 2m QSOs and countless repeater self-ids from otherwise silent repeaters. Two Meters is the lowest common denominator band, let's work towards keeping it active.

Please, if you haven't yet, click the ARRL note below and read what they say. It's nothing more than a request to consider a proposal in 2023, nothing is imminent, we don't need to 'go to the mattresses' [0], let's work through our respective representational organizations (ARRL, JARL, RSGB, etc.) and let's keep 2m active.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

Re: 2m under threat for Thales

Brent D
 

2m is heavily used locally for ares/races as well as for local nets. I'd bet 2m is used around me twice as much as any other band. 

To reiterate my point from earlier: never let them take anything without a fight, even if you're not currently using it. It'll be much tougher to get back, and will open the doors for justification to take more later on. 

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019, 1:28 PM Michael Walker <va3mw@...> wrote:
The big comment here is ...

What is every active ham today doing to reinforce how import 2M (144-146) to us?   

I bet the percentage of active ham's today use 2M much less then in the 90's.

Are you mentoring new hams and bringing them in?  Or, are you sitting in the sidelines saying it isn't my problem.

Some of you may be, but I bet  most aren't doing a thing?

When was the last time you had a 2M qso on FM?

Based on current usage Metrics I bet we don't have a leg to stand on.  Rest assured they did their homework on activity.  All you have to do is capture the IQ stream from an SDR receiver and write some scripts to watch for activity.  They could do this with a $25 RTL dongle.


Mike va3mw


On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 1:16 PM Dennis Beverage <Sodypop@...> wrote:
So it would appear that ARRL and the IARU are both paying close attention to this band allocation issue and that both favor retention of the band use for amature operators.  Since these two organizations are the pipeline for band allocation here in the USA I feel we ought to follow their lead.  I’m not sure about support organization in the EU, but it would appear that those bases are covered also.   Leadership in both zones is asking that we as individual operators funnel our support for 2m band retention through them, rather than creating our own special interest petitions.  JMO

sodypop
kj6vgb