1. BITX20@groups.io
   Date   
Re: Fw: uBitx delivery

Gary Shriver
 

Great question..  what TDA 2820s are they shipping in the current batch?

73 - Gary

 

From: BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> On Behalf Of Noel f6bgc
Sent: Friday, March 9, 2018 8:53 AM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Fw: uBitx delivery

 

Hi uBITX group,

 

who knows if March 9th delivery batch has good or tested  TDA 2822 ?

 

73 - noel f6bgc

 

2018-03-09 17:47 GMT+01:00 Nelson <ngtdlt@...>:

Hoowdy All,

 

I ordered my uBITX on January 11th, 2018 and was notified by PayPal that my order shipped today (March 9th, 2018).  I had it shipped by India Post so expect another month for it to arrive...

 

Nelson

 

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 1:38 PM, John KG9DK <jab3739@...> wrote:

Nick,
I ordered mine on Jan. 8th,got a heads up from PayPal yesterday that it has been shipped.  Based on that I would say about 2 months from the day you order to ship date.  

john kg9dk



 

--

I always thought the Universe was a wonderfully strange place until I studied Particle Physics - I now know the Universe is, in fact, profoundly odd in nature

 
Re: Raduino oscilators. 33mhz and 57mhz " . Documentation says one thing, but this is what I measured.

Michael Shreeve
 

Yes, 2000 is pretty much unbelievable. I'll try a couple of things,
1 measure with a scope looking at the flutter for more accuracy

2 try to check my counter using wwv ft Collins or wherever it comes from now in the same way,(possibly this should be the first step, I've put it off long enough) 

3 after I've determined a semi warm measurement where its been running continuously (I can actually measure the temp with my little orange non contact for fun, and measure the supply and 5v's just in case) , I'll turn off ONLY the uBITX and measure it in the AM . Also, I'll put a little video on for those who might want to see how I'm doing these things.

Remembering that this is a Raduino that is working quite well. This is an exercise so that I'll be VERY familiar,  for my work with an Raduino that doesn't sound so good when used..  

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Michael Shreeve <shreevester@...> wrote:
Yes, I'll need to hook a scope to hear the 3 or 4 hz flutter when your spot on. Thanks Jerry. Hopefully doing more today, as its raining here finally.

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:32 PM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke@...> wrote:
That's an excellent method to measure the frequency of the 25mhz oscillator.
If the receiver has sufficient low frequency audio response, you could monitor the speaker wires with a scope
and get sub hz accuracy when zero-beating.

I'll check my uBitx (tomorrow?), see how much warmup drift I can detect.
The 2.3khz drift (at 25mhz) you reported seems too large by a couple orders of magnitude. 

Jerry




On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 07:55 pm, Michael Shreeve wrote:
I don't know if I responded to this. I thought I explained but then maybe not. What I have always done when there is no buffered output is 1 use a receiver and an "antenna" if you will, one that is near the raduino but not touching anything. 2 turn on a somewhat stable generator and, in my case right now, measure the generator frequency directly with a counter. I can hear that generator in the same receiver.. Zero beat the generator , which is being measured, with the 25 MHz signal emanating from the raduino. Turns out it did change as I indicated, merely from heating up. No direct coupling at all for this measurement. At least to the raduino. If I had a communications monitor I wouldn't need to measure the freq of the generator. Or some other stable generator source. Also, I need to try to determine just how accurate my counter is. 
 




--
Michael Shreeve N6GRG




--
Michael Shreeve N6GRG
Re: #uBitx - No TX #ubitx

F8BXI
 

Hi All,

Just to let you know that thanks to your help, I confirmed my first QSO yesterday evening with FY5KE in CW (439/439). Cndx: uBitx around 10W, trap dipole in attic.

Bet 73,
Philippe


Le 6 mars 2018 à 22:32, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke@...> a écrit :

Ah, good.   I assume you now hear the sidetone when transmitting CW.

There have been many many discussions about that pop in this forum going back years.
Here's a recent solution from VA7AT, documented by ND6T, looks promising:
    https://groups.io/g/BITX20/message/43322
 

Jerry, KE7ER

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 01:16 pm, F8BXI wrote:

Please, forgive me, I just forgot to open the audio potentiometer ;-) But There is a big pop sound in the speaker. Will see how to correct this.
 
Re: tx pop

PeteWK8S
 

I have implemented Greg W3NW's circuit using the same values BS170, 300K, 1N4148, 440nF and it does eliminate the pops.
However it's also almost completely quieted the sidetone even with R253 shorted. I can hear the sidetone at full volume but that's way, way too loud a setting for received signals.
Any suggestions?

Pete WK8S
Re: uBITX Firmware CEC Version Added WSPR function, I am looking for a beta tester. #ubitx

Carlos E. Wenzel <Ik2yra@...>
 

Ian

The problem has gone. It was a wrong/thin/broken cable. I changet it.
I also found a missing power output if you operate wspr function far away from the original ubitx frequency. I agree with Phillips abt this issue, BPF maybe remains locked on the original band.

"  the display shows 14.097100 MHz which is the frequency I selected in uBITX manager, but the RF being transmitted is in fact 14.099330 MHz..  " 

cero beat on 14.099330 mHz when ubitx displays 14.097100 mHz (is not right?.... 2.2kHz)

Carlos



2018-03-09 15:33 GMT+01:00 Ian Lee <kd8cec@...>:

Philip

Thank you very much
Your feedback is a great help to me because I am not in an environment where I can test now.
I will update the program within a day or two and upload it again and announce it through the group.
Note that the BPF selection uses some tricks as a constraint on program memory.
I will check that again.
Once again, I sincerely appreciate your test.

Ian KD8CEC

2018-03-09 22:36 GMT+09:00 Philip <philip.g7jur@...>:
Hi Ian.
I would like to be a beta tester for the WSPR firmware. Just been playing with V1.05W, noticed a couple of problems.
For the uBITX to TX in WSPR mode the band your going to TX in needs to be selected first, maybe in WSPR mode the BPF selection is incorrect.
The other one is to do with the TX frequency. the display shows 14.097100 MHz which is the frequency I selected in uBITX manager, but the RF being transmitted is in fact 14.099330 MHz.. 
I have attached my BTX file from uBITX manager.
Best 73 Philip g7jur.



--
Best 73
KD8CEC / Ph.D ian lee
kd8cec@...
www.hamskey.com (my blog)




--
Carlos Wenzel
ik2yra@...
+39-3284684518
Skype: IK2YRA
Re: Fw: uBitx delivery

ON7HC
 

Hi,

Ordered µBitx on december 26 ($ 109)
Shipped on february 26  (India Post).
Received on march 8.  

It only took 10 days with India Post !

But ...  before I could even see the package, had to pay additional $ 55  (€ 43,87), Belgian taxes and handling !
Robbery ...  :)

By the way,  U1 is WX.  I will replace it.

73
Herman
Re: Fw: uBitx delivery

Rod Clifton <rclifton@...>
 

I ordered mine Dec 19 and had shipped India Post.  Arrived March 6 in VE3 Land.

Rod
Re: uBITX Firmware CEC Version Added WSPR function, I am looking for a beta tester. #ubitx

Carlos E. Wenzel <Ik2yra@...>
 

Hello Phillip,
How can you enter 14.094850 on Band 2 Box???
tks
Carlos

2018-03-09 15:56 GMT+01:00 Philip <philip.g7jur@...>:

Hi Ian.

The frequency error is down to the way uBITX manager calculates the RF frequency. If I enter into the Band 2 box 14094850 Hz, then the audio comes out of my radio at 1.5 KHz, when it is tuned to 14.09560 MHz.
Now my WSPR is going all around the world.
I do find that I get a bit confused by all the calculations, when trying to work out all this stuff.
Anyway thanks for putting WSPR in to the uBITX, a great bonus.

Philip G7JUR 




--
Carlos Wenzel
ik2yra@...
+39-3284684518
Skype: IK2YRA
Re: Pulling Arduino data apart

Dr Fred Hambrecht
 

Anytime knowledge is imparted it cannot be viewed as “wasted bandwidth”. I for one enjoyed the conversation.

 

v/r

Fred W4JLE

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 17:15
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Pulling Arduino data apart

 

Agreed, we've wasted too much time on something not at the top of our priorities here.
Anyone wishing to continue this discussion is welcome to send me a private message.

In parting, I believe that once the data is in the CPU, in this case stored as a 32 bit integer
in a register, endian-ness is not a factor.  This code looks correct to me:

Here's C code for machine A to send a 32 bit integer as a sequence of four bytes in little endian order::
    sendbyte(data32);  sendbyte(data32>>8);  sendbyte(data32>>16);  sendbyte(data32>>24);
And code for machine B to receive that 32 bit integer (assumes getbyte() returnes an unsigned 8 bit integer):
    data32=getbyte();  data32|=getbyte()<<8;  data32|=getbyte()<<16; data32|=getbyte<<24;
This C code doesn't care if the machine it is on is big endian or little endian.

 
An as I understand it, Jack disagrees, here's his argument:

My comment about putting bits on the floor meant that you had to know something about
the byte order, otherwise why are you interested only in the high byte. Your code:

    sendbyte((data32>>24)&0xff);

to send a byte works great if the data is big endian: 

        01010101 00000000 00000000 00000000.         // Yellow is the byte of interest

However, if you don't know the byte order and it is: 

        00000000 00000000 00000000 01010101

Your code would throw the relevant data on the floor. Your code is only safe if you know
the order. A union is a simple way to determine that order.


Jerry, KE7ER

 

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 12:53 pm, Jack Purdum wrote:

We've wasted enough bandwidth on this. I think unions are a great way to learn how data are organized for a given compiler and are well-worth knowing about. Anyone who doesn't think so can easily ignore them.

 
Re: uBITX Firmware CEC Version Added WSPR function, I am looking for a beta tester. #ubitx

Philip
 

Carlos.
Just enter it in the box, it is in hz. Not Mhz, so no decimal point.
Philip.
Re: uBITX Firmware CEC Version Added WSPR function, I am looking for a beta tester. #ubitx

Carlos E. Wenzel <Ik2yra@...>
 

So simple.... TKS Philip
Carlos

2018-03-09 21:01 GMT+01:00 Philip <philip.g7jur@...>:

Carlos.
Just enter it in the box, it is in hz. Not Mhz, so no decimal point.
Philip.




--
Carlos Wenzel
ik2yra@...
+39-3284684518
Skype: IK2YRA
Re: uBITX Firmware CEC Version Added WSPR function, I am looking for a beta tester. #ubitx

Carlos E. Wenzel <Ik2yra@...>
 

uBiTx on air....Tks Ian / Philip

Carlos

2018-03-09 21:12 GMT+01:00 Carlos E. Wenzel <ik2yra@...>:

So simple.... TKS Philip
Carlos

2018-03-09 21:01 GMT+01:00 Philip <philip.g7jur@...>:
Carlos.
Just enter it in the box, it is in hz. Not Mhz, so no decimal point.
Philip.




--
Carlos Wenzel
ik2yra@...
+39-3284684518
Skype: IK2YRA



--
Carlos Wenzel
ik2yra@...
+39-3284684518
Skype: IK2YRA
Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

Nick VK4PP
 

Mods so far, in tested. 
Re: tx pop

John Pieper
 

I found a much better place to connect the drain of the MOSFET. First I replaced R70 with a 510 ohm resistor that I happened to have in the same footprint.

Then I connected the MOSFET drain to the relay side of that resistor, i.e. to the point M2 on the schematic. This setup still shorts the incoming audio to ground and kills the pops, but leaves a voltage divider of R253 and R70 connecting the sidetone to the volume control. Depending on your value of R253, this may be perfect as is. My R253 was 220 k and I needed more volume, so I put a 50 k trimpot across R253. It is just about right for me at maximum resistance, but I can adjust it downward if I should want more volume still. If your R253 is a smaller value and the sidetone is too loud, just replace it with something of higher resistance.

The volume control will now have final control over the level and can be tweaked in operation if needed.

73,
John AD0RW
Re: Pulling Arduino data apart

Jerry Gaffke
 

Here's a starting point on web resources regarding this big/little endian stuff in case you're curious.
    https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13994674/how-to-write-endian-agnostic-c-c-code

But for most of us this is a non-issue, and you needn't worry about it.
And you certainly don't have to suffer anybody arguing about it.

Code on the Nano (and likely in most any Arduino environment) is little endian.
Though on an 8 bit machine like the Nano, endian-ness is mostly a matter of what the compiler wants to do.
    https://www.avrfreaks.net/forum/endian-issue
    https://www.avrfreaks.net/forum/big-endian-or-little-endian-0

Jerry, KE7ER


On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:46 am, Dr Fred Hambrecht wrote:

Anytime knowledge is imparted it cannot be viewed as “wasted bandwidth”. I for one enjoyed the conversation.

 
ubitx LCD display

Richard E Neese
 

whats the latest on the new w8tee lcd vfo for the ubitx ?
Re: uBITX Mic Wireup

Tim Gorman
 

Jerry,

Having a live mic with a separate, unassociated PTT switch can lead to
inadvertent transmissions if the PTT gets operated accidentally. If the
mic is not live all the time then all you transmit on an accidental PTT
operation is a suppressed carrier which hopefully won't bother anyone.

It doesn't happen a lot but it *does* happen. Someone accidentally
pushes his foot switch with a live mic and sends out a discussion with
the wife (spouse) over the air.

Admittedly you can butt transmit with a PTT CB mic or 2-meter ham mic
if you sit on it. It happens also.

For me, the switch is there in the mic and I don't see any reason not
to use it. If you tear a lot of communication mics apart you will see
that the mic element is wired through the PTT switch on most of them.
Apparently someone thinks its a good idea!

tim ab0wr

On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 07:54:26 -0800
"Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io" <jgaffke=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

How is this an advantage?

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 07:23 am, Tim Gorman wrote:


The mic is only actually connected when the PTT switch is
pushed. ....   This is why I recommend using a communications mike
instead of a standalone mic with a separate PTT switch.
Re: Variable power control

Tim Gorman
 

Walter,

What voltage are you feeding this with? I assume it is more than
24v in order for you to have a 24v position.

If you are running in the 10 volt position, for instance, that would be
drop of at least 24v - 10v = 14v. Fourteen volts at .5amp is 7W being
dropped into that transistor. That's a pretty fair amount of heat.

tim ab0wr

On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 06:17:16 -0800
"Walter" <@whuyckjr> wrote:

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 06:23 pm, LKNDAVE wrote:


i did the hokie pokie and this jpg came out

Based on this design I built this attached circuit.

It controls voltage nicely.  Really helps limit output power while
working digital.

However the TIP 142 really generates some heat.  I have a heat sink
on it but it will need to be much larger.  it is only drawing
about .5 amp (1/2 amp) while transmitting.

Does that seem normal?  it the heat something I should be concerned
about?  Or just provide a better heat sink and run it?

Thanks for the circuit idea and plan.
 
--
73, W9KJO
Walter
Re: uBITX Firmware CEC Version Added WSPR function, I am looking for a beta tester. #ubitx

Philip
 

Thanks Ian. For a great updated to include WSPR, It was a surprise.

Philip G7JUR.
Re: tx pop

PeteWK8S
 

Thank John, moving the Drain to R70 (changed to 510) helped restore my volume. However, I am getting the pop going key down RX to TX but no pop going from TX to RX.
So the MOSFET is not muting quite fast enough. 

How did you determine the value you used for R70? 

Pete WK8S