Date   
RadI2Cino boards temporarily sold out! #ubitx

Jim Sheldon
 

Ladies & Gentlemen, the response to this offering has been overwhelming.  The initial run of boards, both bare boards and the option 2 boards with the SMD semiconductors already installed from this initial offering are SOLD OUT.  More boards are on order but due to the Chinese New Year they won't be shipping until around the end of the month.

We ask that you please hold all inquiries and orders until I re-announce the availability of the next batch.  We have decided NOT to allow any pre-ordering to avoid the tremendous overhead involved in keeping track of incoming orders while trying to do other design work. 

Thank you very much for your understanding and we are very sorry for the inconvenience.  The RadI2Cino boards will again be available just not immediately.

Jim Sheldon - W0EB

Re: Blown by nearby transceiver #bitx40help

Jerry Gaffke
 

Good point, if we're worried about magnetic field coupling then tinfoil won't do much good.
I'm not sure exactly how the power to blow 1/4 Watt resistors would be communicated,
was guessing it might be straight magnetic coupling like a transformer, though could be electromagnetic.
I doubt it is straight electrostatic, not enough current with no conductor between unless the air ionizes as in a lightning bolt.
If electromagnetic (radio waves), a Faraday cage around the radio such as that tinfoil is in order,
and this is the sort of shielding usually found in commercial gear.  Such shielding might help
resolve the problem of hearing audio tones from the 16mhz Nano oscillator, or noise from
nearby computers and power supplies.

My rig is stitting out open-faced on a piece of plywood, front and back panels of scrap PC screwed to the plywood,
the main board has the standoffs installed upside down so the 4-40 threads are held in place by holes drilled into the wood.
Works fine, though I have a quiet environment.  Easy to work on, I can just pick the board up and pop the connectors off.

When posting that original tinfoil hat comment my thought was:
    "If it can do that to 1/4 Watt resistors, what can it do to my brain?"
Perhaps we will learn that there was a cabled connection, and this is all moot.

I spent about 6 hours with cell phone at my ear a couple days ago trying to sort out 
some issues with our Verizon cellphone account.   I really should have been using a headset.
I have heard occasional reports like Raj's though am not aware of a definitive study.
Am thinking a 4 Watt transmitter 1/4" from my brain for long periods is best avoided.

Jerry, KE7ER


On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:57 am, Arv Evans wrote:
While tinfoil (even the tinfoil hat) can lessen exposure to static charges, how
much effect does it have on electro-magnetic energy.  Seems that a thick steel
chassis (or hat)  might be better for limiting both ES and EM signal levels.

Re: Si5351 Programming Flowchart

Jerry Gaffke
 

Calculations within the si5351bx routines are much better than than 1ppm accurate, perhaps more like 0.01ppm.
As I recall, the math was accurate within 0.2hz when doing calculations for a high side vfo on the Bitx40 of 19mhz. 


On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 09:48 am, Jerry Gaffke wrote:
The accuracy of the calculations is down around 1ppm, considerably better than the stability of the 25mhz reference oscillator.

Re: wrong frequency after software change. #ubitx

Mike Woods
 

Michael

The uBITx and the BITx40 have different circuitry.  In particular the uBITx has 2 IF stages (45MHz and 12MHz) whereas the BITx40 only has one at 12 MHz.  Some changes would be required to the software before the uBITx software will work on the BITx40.  Also some rewriting would be required as different pin outs are used (particularly if the BITx40 has been modified with Allard mods.

I am working on changing over one of my BITx40s to run on uBITx.  I will report on progress to the group.

There is no difference between Raduino devices except the header confuguration.  You should use either the HF Signals BITx4o sketch or the improved sketch from Allard, at least in the short term.

Mike ZL1AXG



On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 at 6:27 AM, Michael Shreeve <shreevester@...> wrote:
Another strange twist which may be related. I changed a BITX40 rad to uBITX Raduino. Hardware change, you remove the 5 pin plug and put a header in its place. I really looked hard for any other differences in Hardware. Saw none. So, I programed with original software. Crazy, but LSB is USB on 80 and 40 (up to 10mhz) and other than that, seems stable and might be on freq. So, I tried Ians latest 1.01 and LSB is correct, USB is correct, have control also, but freq is off about 400khz. So, found an EEPROM WIPE routine, says it works for all size eproms, and did the wipe. No luck. Still off, I re-loaded the original Ashhar software stil backwards. Thinking I would need to use memory manager but not sure I have the skills. Any ideas ? 

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:01 AM, at91r40008 <yvon@...> wrote:
Thank you Jack, the problem is that it shows all the same name because it takes the project
name uBitx20. Every project I downloaded has a new folder name but inside
Arduino it shows uBitx20.
That is why I am going to rename them each time I download one.
--
73, Yvon NU6I




--
Michael Shreeve N6GRG
15901 Cloverdale Road
Anderson, CA 96007
530-410-8678
"Don't worry about a thing, 'Cause every little thing gonna be all right!" -Bob Marley



Re: Si5351 Programming Flowchart

Pavel Milanes Costa <pavelmc@...>
 

El 12/02/18 a las 15:35, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io escribió:
Calculations within the si5351bx routines are much better than than 1ppm accurate, perhaps more like 0.01ppm.
As I recall, the math was accurate within 0.2hz when doing calculations for a high side vfo on the Bitx40 of 19mhz.
If the math/hardware has a better accuracy than the Xtal itself then you have at the output just the stability of the Xtal... right?

73 Pavel CO7WT

Re: wrong frequency after software change. #ubitx

Mike Woods
 

That should read ‘rewiring’ Not rewriting!


On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 at 9:54 AM, Mike Woods <mhwoods@...> wrote:
Michael

The uBITx and the BITx40 have different circuitry.  In particular the uBITx has 2 IF stages (45MHz and 12MHz) whereas the BITx40 only has one at 12 MHz.  Some changes would be required to the software before the uBITx software will work on the BITx40.  Also some rewriting would be required as different pin outs are used (particularly if the BITx40 has been modified with Allard mods.

I am working on changing over one of my BITx40s to run on uBITx.  I will report on progress to the group.

There is no difference between Raduino devices except the header confuguration.  You should use either the HF Signals BITx4o sketch or the improved sketch from Allard, at least in the short term.

Mike ZL1AXG



On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 at 6:27 AM, Michael Shreeve <shreevester@...> wrote:
Another strange twist which may be related. I changed a BITX40 rad to uBITX Raduino. Hardware change, you remove the 5 pin plug and put a header in its place. I really looked hard for any other differences in Hardware. Saw none. So, I programed with original software. Crazy, but LSB is USB on 80 and 40 (up to 10mhz) and other than that, seems stable and might be on freq. So, I tried Ians latest 1.01 and LSB is correct, USB is correct, have control also, but freq is off about 400khz. So, found an EEPROM WIPE routine, says it works for all size eproms, and did the wipe. No luck. Still off, I re-loaded the original Ashhar software stil backwards. Thinking I would need to use memory manager but not sure I have the skills. Any ideas ? 

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:01 AM, at91r40008 <yvon@...> wrote:
Thank you Jack, the problem is that it shows all the same name because it takes the project
name uBitx20. Every project I downloaded has a new folder name but inside
Arduino it shows uBitx20.
That is why I am going to rename them each time I download one.
--
73, Yvon NU6I




--
Michael Shreeve N6GRG
15901 Cloverdale Road
Anderson, CA 96007
530-410-8678
"Don't worry about a thing, 'Cause every little thing gonna be all right!" -Bob Marley



Re: Blown by nearby transceiver #bitx40help

AA7GW
 

Try “mu metal” shielding found on Amazon

AA7GW

On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke@...> wrote:

Good point, if we're worried about magnetic field coupling then tinfoil won't do much good.
I'm not sure exactly how the power to blow 1/4 Watt resistors would be communicated,
was guessing it might be straight magnetic coupling like a transformer, though could be electromagnetic.
I doubt it is straight electrostatic, not enough current with no conductor between unless the air ionizes as in a lightning bolt.
If electromagnetic (radio waves), a Faraday cage around the radio such as that tinfoil is in order,
and this is the sort of shielding usually found in commercial gear.  Such shielding might help
resolve the problem of hearing audio tones from the 16mhz Nano oscillator, or noise from
nearby computers and power supplies.

My rig is stitting out open-faced on a piece of plywood, front and back panels of scrap PC screwed to the plywood,
the main board has the standoffs installed upside down so the 4-40 threads are held in place by holes drilled into the wood.
Works fine, though I have a quiet environment.  Easy to work on, I can just pick the board up and pop the connectors off.

When posting that original tinfoil hat comment my thought was:
    "If it can do that to 1/4 Watt resistors, what can it do to my brain?"
Perhaps we will learn that there was a cabled connection, and this is all moot.

I spent about 6 hours with cell phone at my ear a couple days ago trying to sort out 
some issues with our Verizon cellphone account.   I really should have been using a headset.
I have heard occasional reports like Raj's though am not aware of a definitive study.
Am thinking a 4 Watt transmitter 1/4" from my brain for long periods is best avoided.

Jerry, KE7ER


On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:57 am, Arv Evans wrote:
While tinfoil (even the tinfoil hat) can lessen exposure to static charges, how
much effect does it have on electro-magnetic energy.  Seems that a thick steel
chassis (or hat)  might be better for limiting both ES and EM signal levels.

Re: Si5351 Programming Flowchart

Jerry Gaffke
 

Yup, not much point in getting too carried away in creating a VFO for the Bitx40.
Initial accuracy of the si5351bx routines can be calibrated to be quite good by adjusting si5351bx_vcoa
But a slight change in temperature and the 25mhz reference will drift a few hz,
so stability will be an issue

If an application comes up where greater stability is required,
the 25mhz (or 27mhz) reference could come from an ocxo or tcxo, or be GPS disciplined,
or perhaps you constantly adjust a knob for zero-beat with a known accurate radio station such as wwv.

Jerry, KE7ER


On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 12:56 pm, Pavel Milanes Costa wrote:
El 12/02/18 a las 15:35, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io escribió:
Calculations within the si5351bx routines are much better than than 1ppm accurate, perhaps more like 0.01ppm.
As I recall, the math was accurate within 0.2hz when doing calculations for a high side vfo on the Bitx40 of 19mhz.
If the math/hardware has a better accuracy than the Xtal itself then you have at the output just the stability of the Xtal... right?

Re: uBITx For Sale

q q
 

I would like to buy your uBitx.

Please send remittance details.

Bob N1ETS

Re: uBITx For Sale

Stephen Johnson
 

I can use everything except the DSP filter if still available.

Steve, N2FT

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:09 PM, Glenn AE0Q <ae0q@...> wrote:
I just today received my uBITx (ordered on 19 Dec) but things have changed and I don't have time for the project.

I've collected some things I was going to use to build it, all is for sale.

uBITx  unopened except for photos   $109

Adafruit 10k Log pot (with 1/4" dia shaft) and 2 black knobs (blue stripe)  $5.00

SOTABeams CW DSP Audio Filter  $42

Beautiful aluminum enclosure (2.4" x 6.22" x 7.2" inside dimensions)  $20
See the ebay link for assembled photos of the box.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/122879292126

Photos of all attached.

Would like to sell all together but not necessary.

Glenn AE0Q


Re: Mailbox metal case 3x6x9 inch #ubitx

KC9SGV <kc9sgv@...>
 

Funny as hell 😀!!
But a good, solution.

KC9SGV


On Feb 12, 2018, at 2:33 PM, Doug W <dougwilner@...> wrote:

so do you call QC or just put the flag up and wait...

Re: Si5351 Programming Flowchart

Pavel Milanes Costa <pavelmc@...>
 

Hi to all.

The flowchat is a instructive guide for the curious of how to doit without float point math and an expression of the KISS principle.

It's just a cheat sheet to learn from.

The trick is to understand the way he (like Gerry) find a, b and c not needing floating point math. (for the PLL/VCO Msynths case is)

a = int(Fvco/xtal)

b = Fvco % xtal (module, aka: rest of the division)

c = xtal

For example Gerry do a do..while to find a value of b/c that match the allowed size of c, he need it because he is working with the output Msynth dividers not the PLL/VCO Msynth, in his case c = fout and is variable.

In the later case (moving the PLL/VCO Msynth, output Msynth dividers are fixed) c is fixed and equal to the Xtal and we know it already then we can do a simple x >> 5 to both b/c to retain maximum accuracy and make it fit on the register. If we do that just set the output Msynth divider to a integer & even value to minimize jitter or phase noise.

In Gerry routines he fixes the VCO and moves the output divider Msynth and that make some jitter or phase noise (almost negligible in real applications, I know) and makes 3 outs from just one fixed VCO and does not handles the R values or the DIV_BY4 feature limiting the full range of output frequencies (not needed on his target application, I know).

This is just another way of doing things, a way that can be better understood because it uses a simple and elegant image (flowchart), to make life (& code) easier (& smaller)...

BTW I found a possible bug that can haunt more than one in the routines of computing MSx_P2. A tip for the "math" experts... and a common fault.

As per the data:

MSx_P2 = 128 * b - c * floor (128 * b / c)

Right?

It's very tempting to reduce it but the floor functions is in there... let see... floor is the lower integer for that float number, hum...

Floor is on the C of Gcc the compiler used by the arduino project but it implies the use of floating point math hence bigger code, just eliminate it and do the math, let try to reduce it...

MSx_P2 = (128 * b) - (c * 128 * b / c)
MSx_P2 = (128 * b) - (128 * b) ---> (c is eliminated as it's * and /  in the expression)
MSx_P2 = 128 * (b - b) ---> ( hum....)
MSx_P2 = 128 * 0 ---> (HUMMMM!!!)
MSx_P2 = 0 ---> (WTF !!!!)

Doing some math and wall head-hiting you can conclude that the floor function is instructing you to IGNORE the use of fractions and then you get a value in MSx_P2 that it related to the amount of error or rest of division of doing things (math) with integers... hence the floor function... forcing you to use just integers... nice.

For example Gerry users in his code this:

msxp2 = 128 * msb - 128 * msb / msc * msc;

If you play that same function with human and integer rules it play well and result is different from zero, but if you use floating point math it always equals to ZERO!

Let's play it with me in full integer math

let's say msb = 900 and msc = 1000

msxp2 = 128 * 900 - 128 * 900 / 1000 * 1000;
msxp2 = 115200 - 115200 / 1000 * 1000;
msxp2 = 115200 - 115 * 1000;   // <<<<=== here is the floor in action (result in float is 115.200 we get it down to 115, all with the magic of integer math)
msxp2 = 115200 - 115000;
msxp2 = 200;

In this case 200 is a relation of the error of using integer math... interesting, mind you how the chip use it internally

For correctness and just to be sure to maintain the best accuracy you must get sure the compiler do the 128*b/c * c in the correct order, that is as per Gerry code fragment:

msxp2 = 128 * msb - 128 * msb / msc * msc;

Must be forced to execute in the correct order by placing some parenthesis to maintain more accuracy.

msxp2 = 128 * msb - ((128 * msb) / msc) * msc;

Firmware size impact is unchanged, compiled code is the same (sha256sum) with and without the parenthesis so GCC compiler is doing he job right, beware of others...

I mentioned this because I have a ham fellow in university (freshman) that hit his head against this wall a few times, "that's impossible, that has no sense.... MSx_P2 is always zero..." he said...

Just my two cents for other that may be in troubles like this understanding the chip.

Cheers, Pavel.

El 12/02/18 a las 12:07, JuanCarlos Berberena Gonzalez escribió:
Hi Guys
A weeks ago Josué Marin-CO7RR- sent me this information to share with my group.
I am only try to be a good 'USER" testing some interesting project I can get on the web and afterward share it with my group.
Now Pavel-CO7WT- sent me this link and I think is a good idea to share with all of you.
 
https://nt7s.com/2018/02/si5351-programming-flowchart/

It is a Josué Marin email address
marinjosue75atgmaildotcom 
Qrv's
73's Jc

Re: Aluminum enclosure

Dave Bottom <ars.kd6az@...>
 

Here is mine in the Hammond 1402DV (V for Vented since the heat sinks are inside.)


​It's tight with the Volume Control mounted in between the display and the extrusion. So the PCB is mounted as close as you can get to the right side extrusion, then mark for the display and pot, with the encoder centered between the display and right side.

I used my own connectors for Mic, Headphones and Paddle plus Power Pole power connection all on the rear panel with the BNC antenna connector.

Room to later mount a USB cable as shown, I would have centered the Power Pole connector with the USB rear panel connection.

Dave WI6R



On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:24 AM, John KC9OJV <greusel@...> wrote:
I ordered one of these: https://www.hammfg.com/part/1402D
I'm hoping I can work with the height of the Raduino OK.

John
KC9OJV




--
73 Dave WI6R

R141/Q15

Michael Davis <maddmd818@...>
 

I too had the now famous R141 getting smokin' hot. At the suggestion of forum members, I replaced Q14 with no success. I read and re-read voltages as well as component values in and around the circuitry. I now have Q14 mounted like a long legged bug vs flush to the board. Although I could see no connection/short from the device case to anywhere on the board, it's the only logical explanation for drawing X amps through R141. Nothing else made sense. 

Sent from Mike's iPad WA1MAD

Re: Case designed for uBITX - #3d_printing

Elliott J Olson
 

Is shielding not usually needed for these radios? Or are you using some metal-bearing plastic that blocks some RF?

Re: Aluminum enclosure

AA7GW
 

Nice looking rig

AA7GW

On Feb 12, 2018, at 3:24 PM, Dave Bottom <ars.kd6az@...> wrote:

Here is mine in the Hammond 1402DV (V for Vented since the heat sinks are inside.)

<Mentor-Knobs.jpg>
<Rear-View.jpg>
​It's tight with the Volume Control mounted in between the display and the extrusion. So the PCB is mounted as close as you can get to the right side extrusion, then mark for the display and pot, with the encoder centered between the display and right side.

I used my own connectors for Mic, Headphones and Paddle plus Power Pole power connection all on the rear panel with the BNC antenna connector.

Room to later mount a USB cable as shown, I would have centered the Power Pole connector with the USB rear panel connection.
<USB-Cable-Interface.jpg>

Dave WI6R



On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:24 AM, John KC9OJV <greusel@...> wrote:
I ordered one of these: https://www.hammfg.com/part/1402D
I'm hoping I can work with the height of the Raduino OK.

John
KC9OJV




--
73 Dave WI6R

Re: RadI2Cino boards temporarily sold out! #ubitx

Hank W6IR
 

Have you sent out email to the lucky ones? I haven't seen anything from you so assume I was too late.

Hank
W6IR

Ubitx delivery suggestion

Bill Robbins
 

I will be gone for an extended time when my DHL ubitx arrives. If a signature is required does anyone have a suggestion to get my hands on it. Neighbors are too remote.

Bill

Re: RadI2Cino boards temporarily sold out! #ubitx

Jim Sheldon
 

Hi Hank,
Was just getting ready to email you when this came in.  You are still in the queue for one with the SMD semiconductors installed.  I ran out of the 5 volt regulators because my last order from Mouser was delayed in shipping.  I ordered Friday but they didn't get it out till today.  UPS won't deliver it until around 5 p.m. tomorrow.  I have the last 5 boards in process and your's will be the next of them up when the SMD 7805's come in.  5 minute to solder it on and I may even be able to make the last pick up at the grocery store tomorrow night if you still want it.  

I'll let you know when it's done.  You can PayPal me the $45 now if you like or wait until I tell you it's finished.  Your choice on that though.

Jim - W0EB

PayPal address is w0eb@...

------ Original Message ------
From: "Hank W6IR via Groups.Io" <w6ir@...>
Sent: 2/12/2018 5:48:40 PM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] RadI2Cino boards temporarily sold out! #ubitx

Have you sent out email to the lucky ones? I haven't seen anything from you so assume I was too late.

Hank
W6IR

Re: Ubitx delivery suggestion

Clark Martin
 

Go to the DHL website, they have a mechanism for dealing with that problem.

Clark Martin
KK6ISP

On Feb 20, 2018, at 6:48 PM, Bill Robbins <wa8cdu@...> wrote:

I will be gone for an extended time when my DHL ubitx arrives. If a signature is required does anyone have a suggestion to get my hands on it.  Neighbors are too remote.