Date   
Re: #uBITX Firmware KD8CEC - IF-Shift etc. #ubitx

Tim Gorman
 

I wonder if we need to define some terms here. Passband tuning and IF
Shift typically move the *filter*, not the carrier. The carrier will
remained tuned to the same frequency when adjusting this. For instance,
if you use IF Shift when listening to a CW signal the tone of the CW
signal should not change. You can move the filter bandwidth up or down
to eliminate an interfering carrier that is close to the desired
frequency.

What you are describing is more like an Incremental Tuning, e.g. RIT or
XIT. When you move the BFO you move the carrier frequency, not the
filter bandwidth.

Ideally the BFO would be set to replicate the suppressed carrier
frequency. The filter then determines what is heard.

The ubitx uses a 12Mhz crystal filter. I don't know its bandwidth or
what the actual absolute frequencies are. I haven't had a chance to run
a spectrum analyzer against mine. Let's assume it has a 2400hz
bandwidth and goes from 12,000,300hz to 12,002,700hz.

If you want to listen to a signal at 10Mhz then CLK2 should be tuned to
55Mhz to generate the 45Mhz signal the first IF needs.

CLK1 should then be set to generate a 12Mhz signal, i.e. 33Mhz. For an
USB signal we should then see frequencies of 12Mhz to 12.003Mhz (or
whatever the transmitted bandwidth is, e.g. 0-3000hz). You will then see
frequencies of 12.0003Mhz to 12.0027Mhz out of the filter.

This is how an ideal receiver would work.

When you are talking about adjusting the BFO I assume you are talking
about adjusting CLK1. If you adjust CLK1 to move the actual suppressed
carrier frequency somewhere else in the filter bandwidth then your
frequency indication is going to be off. What should be a 10Mhz signal
is going to look like something else.

This will cause an asymmetric USB and LSB response and frequency
indication.

If you want to change the BFO frequency on the fly then it should be
understood as being an incremental tuning so you can remember what the
base frequency should be.

Now each filter is probably going to have a different actual physical,
absolute bandpass. The BFO will have to be adjusted to allow for this
but the frequency indication needs to be adjusted as well to match. It
should be a fixed reference, not a variable one.

Your transmitted frequency has to be offset from the CW-tone if it is
to be zero beat with the received signal. If it isn't then you'll never
be zero beat. I'm assuming that the CWL and CWU frequencies are
indicating a frequency CW-tone away from the actual transmitting
frequency. That may be because your receive BFO frequency isn't set to
indicate actual carrier frequency.

I didn't mean for this to get so complicated but it isn't an easy
subject.

tim ab0wr


On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 01:08:55 +0100
"ge_clipboard" <clipboard@...> wrote:

Hi All

Many thanks for all the response concerning the BFO adjustement and
about using the IF-shift. I have been playing around with the BFO
setting while monitoring myself on another transceiver but as I’m not
getting there where I really would like to, I returned to the factory
settings. Leastening to the transmitted LSB and USB on another
transceiver was never symetric, maybe the steps to set the bfo are
not fine enough to do this or I am making something wrong.

Yes, the IF-shift is often a very helpfull feature within crowded
bands and as Mike pointed out, it is also nice to be able to adjust
the sound of a ssb signal on receive. So, if this could be corrected
in the software would be very fine.

Another point I’ve noticed today while using CW, dx-cluster and CAT
to jump to a anounced station... When the CWL-, CWU-feature is
enabled, then the frequency is not spot on but offset by the amount
of the CW-Tone.

Nevertheless, this little rig is a joy to play with, especially with
all the added features by Ian‘s software.

Vy 73, Gerald - HB9CEY

Re: #uBITX Firmware KD8CEC - IF-Shift etc. #ubitx

W2CTX
 

Yes I was confused a while back when Ian announced his IF shift.  The code
looked just like our RIT.  Our RIT displays the freq on bottom line and the
line above displays the plus/minus offset as you move the encoder.

rOn




From: Tim Gorman <tgorman2@...>
To: BITX20@groups.io
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] #uBITX Firmware KD8CEC - IF-Shift etc.

I wonder if we need to define some terms here. Passband tuning and IF
Shift typically move the *filter*, not the carrier. The carrier will
remained tuned to the same frequency when adjusting this. For instance,
if you use IF Shift when listening to a CW signal the tone of the CW
signal should not change. You can move the filter bandwidth up or down
to eliminate an interfering carrier that is close to the desired
frequency.

What you are describing is more like an Incremental Tuning, e.g. RIT or
XIT. When you move the BFO you move the carrier frequency, not the
filter bandwidth.

Ideally the BFO would be set to replicate the suppressed carrier
frequency. The filter then determines what is heard.

The ubitx uses a 12Mhz crystal filter. I don't know its bandwidth or
what the actual absolute frequencies are. I haven't had a chance to run
a spectrum analyzer against mine. Let's assume it has a 2400hz
bandwidth and goes from 12,000,300hz to 12,002,700hz.

If you want to listen to a signal at 10Mhz then CLK2 should be tuned to
55Mhz to generate the 45Mhz signal the first IF needs.

CLK1 should then be set to generate a 12Mhz signal, i.e. 33Mhz. For an
USB signal we should then see frequencies of 12Mhz to 12.003Mhz (or
whatever the transmitted bandwidth is, e.g. 0-3000hz). You will then see
frequencies of 12.0003Mhz to 12.0027Mhz out of the filter.

This is how an ideal receiver would work.

When you are talking about adjusting the BFO I assume you are talking
about adjusting CLK1. If you adjust CLK1 to move the actual suppressed
carrier frequency somewhere else in the filter bandwidth then your
frequency indication is going to be off. What should be a 10Mhz signal
is going to look like something else.

This will cause an asymmetric USB and LSB response and frequency
indication.

If you want to change the BFO frequency on the fly then it should be
understood as being an incremental tuning so you can remember what the
base frequency should be.

Now each filter is probably going to have a different actual physical,
absolute bandpass. The BFO will have to be adjusted to allow for this
but the frequency indication needs to be adjusted as well to match. It
should be a fixed reference, not a variable one.

Your transmitted frequency has to be offset from the CW-tone if it is
to be zero beat with the received signal. If it isn't then you'll never
be zero beat. I'm assuming that the CWL and CWU frequencies are
indicating a frequency CW-tone away from the actual transmitting
frequency. That may be because your receive BFO frequency isn't set to
indicate actual carrier frequency.

I didn't mean for this to get so complicated but it isn't an easy
subject.

tim ab0wr


On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 01:08:55 +0100
"ge_clipboard" <clipboard@...> wrote:

> Hi All
>
> Many thanks for all the response concerning the BFO adjustement and
> about using the IF-shift. I have been playing around with the BFO
> setting while monitoring myself on another transceiver but as I’m not
> getting there where I really would like to, I returned to the factory
> settings. Leastening to the transmitted LSB and USB on another
> transceiver was never symetric, maybe the steps to set the bfo are
> not fine enough to do this or I am making something wrong.
>
> Yes, the IF-shift is often a very helpfull feature within crowded
> bands and as Mike pointed out, it is also nice to be able to adjust
> the sound of a ssb signal on receive. So, if this could be corrected
> in the software would be very fine.
>
> Another point I’ve noticed today while using CW, dx-cluster and CAT
> to jump to a anounced station... When the CWL-, CWU-feature is
> enabled, then the frequency is not spot on but offset by the amount
> of the CW-Tone.
>
> Nevertheless, this little rig is a joy to play with, especially with
> all the added features by Ian‘s software.
>
> Vy 73, Gerald - HB9CEY
>





W0EB/W2CTX/N5IB RadI2Cino board is again available #ubitx

Jim Sheldon
 

Because another member chose to trash my previous post, belittling my offering to blatantly advertise his own sales offering, I reported him to the moderators for this, deleted the previous post and am reposting it again here.

I'm happy to announce that the W0EB/W2CTX/N5IB “RadI2Cino” (pronounced rad ee too CEE no) I2C replacement for the Micro BITX (uBITX) Raduino card is again available for purchase.  NOTE: these are only for the uBITX, not the BITX40 and other earlier models.

This board is designed to utilize either a 2 x 16 or 4 x 20 I2C LCD Display (not included) instead of the parallel display originally included with the uBITX so that the digital I/O lines formerly used by the display can be used to run the CW keyer and a few other functions in a much more efficient manner.

Prices have lowered a little since the first offering.

Partial kits with the IC’s soldered in place are no longer being offered.


Current options are:

1.  Bare Board (you supply the parts & you build it).  $10 US shipping included. .  International $15 US shipped.

2.  Complete Kit of Parts (less the Arduino NANO, LCD display and display I2C controller) - you build it. (All parts except the NANO, display and display controller are included in the kit.)  $30 US shipping included.   International, $45 US shipped.  All customs duties and VAT will be the responsibility of the purchaser.

3.  Completely assembled and tested RadI2Cino Including the Arduino NANO  but less the display and I2C display controller.

Assembled and tested RadI2Cino boards will be available by Special Order Only. They will require up-front payment by PayPal and up to a 1 week lead time to build and properly test)  $75, shipping included in the U.S. 

No international orders will be accepted for assembled and tested boards at this time.

All orders will receive the complete assembly manual which includes a full bill of materials, full board layout diagrams and full schematics in PDF form via email.  This manual has also been attached here as a PDF file so you can read through it and decide if it's something you'd like to build.  The same manual will be included with the order by Email.

The bill of materials listed in the manual has ordering information for the parts.  Parts suppliers are Tayda, Digi-Key and Mouser.

Please, don't post orders or info requests here as I don’t always get the posts from this reflector.

Email w0eb (at) cox dot net for ordering or further information. 

Jim Sheldon, W0EB
Park City, KS

Re: #uBITX Firmware KD8CEC - IF-Shift etc. #ubitx

Vince Vielhaber
 

IF Shift is supposed to shift the signal thru the passband without changing the frequency. So if you're listening to 3930 and there are signals on 3928 (it happens daily) at the same time, you can use the IF Shift to move the signals on 3928 out of the passband. If affects the sound of the desired signal like a tone control but that's a side effect of the action.

Vince.

On 03/10/2018 09:02 PM, Ronald Pfeiffer via Groups.Io wrote:
Yes I was confused a while back when Ian announced his IF shift. The code
looked just like our RIT. Our RIT displays the freq on bottom line and the
line above displays the plus/minus offset as you move the encoder.

rOn



------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Tim Gorman <tgorman2@...>
*To:* BITX20@groups.io
*Sent:* Saturday, March 10, 2018 8:24 PM
*Subject:* Re: [BITX20] #uBITX Firmware KD8CEC - IF-Shift etc.

I wonder if we need to define some terms here. Passband tuning and IF
Shift typically move the *filter*, not the carrier. The carrier will
remained tuned to the same frequency when adjusting this. For instance,
if you use IF Shift when listening to a CW signal the tone of the CW
signal should not change. You can move the filter bandwidth up or down
to eliminate an interfering carrier that is close to the desired
frequency.

What you are describing is more like an Incremental Tuning, e.g. RIT or
XIT. When you move the BFO you move the carrier frequency, not the
filter bandwidth.

Ideally the BFO would be set to replicate the suppressed carrier
frequency. The filter then determines what is heard.

The ubitx uses a 12Mhz crystal filter. I don't know its bandwidth or
what the actual absolute frequencies are. I haven't had a chance to run
a spectrum analyzer against mine. Let's assume it has a 2400hz
bandwidth and goes from 12,000,300hz to 12,002,700hz.

If you want to listen to a signal at 10Mhz then CLK2 should be tuned to
55Mhz to generate the 45Mhz signal the first IF needs.

CLK1 should then be set to generate a 12Mhz signal, i.e. 33Mhz. For an
USB signal we should then see frequencies of 12Mhz to 12.003Mhz (or
whatever the transmitted bandwidth is, e.g. 0-3000hz). You will then see
frequencies of 12.0003Mhz to 12.0027Mhz out of the filter.

This is how an ideal receiver would work.

When you are talking about adjusting the BFO I assume you are talking
about adjusting CLK1. If you adjust CLK1 to move the actual suppressed
carrier frequency somewhere else in the filter bandwidth then your
frequency indication is going to be off. What should be a 10Mhz signal
is going to look like something else.

This will cause an asymmetric USB and LSB response and frequency
indication.

If you want to change the BFO frequency on the fly then it should be
understood as being an incremental tuning so you can remember what the
base frequency should be.

Now each filter is probably going to have a different actual physical,
absolute bandpass. The BFO will have to be adjusted to allow for this
but the frequency indication needs to be adjusted as well to match. It
should be a fixed reference, not a variable one.

Your transmitted frequency has to be offset from the CW-tone if it is
to be zero beat with the received signal. If it isn't then you'll never
be zero beat. I'm assuming that the CWL and CWU frequencies are
indicating a frequency CW-tone away from the actual transmitting
frequency. That may be because your receive BFO frequency isn't set to
indicate actual carrier frequency.

I didn't mean for this to get so complicated but it isn't an easy
subject.

tim ab0wr


On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 01:08:55 +0100
"ge_clipboard" <clipboard@... <mailto:clipboard@...>> wrote:

Hi All

Many thanks for all the response concerning the BFO adjustement and
about using the IF-shift. I have been playing around with the BFO
setting while monitoring myself on another transceiver but as I’m not
getting there where I really would like to, I returned to the factory
settings. Leastening to the transmitted LSB and USB on another
transceiver was never symetric, maybe the steps to set the bfo are
not fine enough to do this or I am making something wrong.

Yes, the IF-shift is often a very helpfull feature within crowded
bands and as Mike pointed out, it is also nice to be able to adjust
the sound of a ssb signal on receive. So, if this could be corrected
in the software would be very fine.

Another point I’ve noticed today while using CW, dx-cluster and CAT
to jump to a anounced station... When the CWL-, CWU-feature is
enabled, then the frequency is not spot on but offset by the amount
of the CW-Tone.

Nevertheless, this little rig is a joy to play with, especially with
all the added features by Ian‘s software.

Vy 73, Gerald - HB9CEY




Re: #uBITX Firmware KD8CEC - IF-Shift etc. #ubitx

Jim Sheldon
 

Tim the only problem I have with your explanation is on the CW offset. The transmitted CW signal MUST be exactly on the frequency shown on the LCD and the RECEIVER must be offset by the sidetone value to properly zerobeat the other signal. If you shift the transmitter frequency, when you have the other station tuned on your receiver to the same tone as your sidetone frequency, but offset your transmitter, you will be transmitting either lower or higher than his signal depending on whether you are receiving that signal in USB or LSB (CW or CWR).

Do not shift the transmitter, shift the receiver and leave the transmitted CW carrier on the display frequency if you want the offset to be proper. You might accidentally be transmitting out of band if you were tuned to a station almost on the band edge and your transmitter was offset by the sidetone value.

Ran into this problem ourselves when Ron, W2CTX and I were hashing out how CW was supposed to work a while back.

Jim Sheldon, W0EB

------ Original Message ------
From: "Tim Gorman" <tgorman2@...>
To: BITX20@groups.io
Sent: 3/10/2018 7:24:00 PM
Subject: Re: [BITX20] #uBITX Firmware KD8CEC - IF-Shift etc.



Your transmitted frequency has to be offset from the CW-tone if it is
to be zero beat with the received signal. If it isn't then you'll never
be zero beat. I'm assuming that the CWL and CWU frequencies are
indicating a frequency CW-tone away from the actual transmitting
frequency. That may be because your receive BFO frequency isn't set to
indicate actual carrier frequency.

I didn't mean for this to get so complicated but it isn't an easy
subject.

tim ab0wr

Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

Glenn
 

I have been experimenting on a different tack. Imnproving the response of the PA driver stages.

I used MPSH10's in my test board build and FT37-43 toroids wound as either trifilar or bifilar according to stage needs, of 10 turns.

Comparing the original uBITX driver which has a ~7db less gain at 10M end, this version has ~2dB drop.

I don't have any spare output FETS or I would check that out also, driven by the this test board.

glenn
vk3pe

Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

K9HZ <bill@...>
 

Glenn this is a very good idea… 

 

There are a number of ways the existing driver stages could be cleaned up. 

 

A little compensation at higher frequency should get that 2dB back.  Also I’ve implemented an electronic attenuator at the first stage (fixed parameter driven off the band selection of course) to make the gain exactly flat over the entire frequency range.   Myself, I’m interested in going up to 54 MHz but that should not be too much of a problem for that type 43 material. 

 

 

Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ

 

Owner - Operator

Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC

Staunton, Illinois

 

Owner – Operator

Villa Grand Piton – J68HZ

Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.

Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com

Like us on Facebook! facebook icon

 

Moderator – North American QRO Yahoo Group.

 

email:  bill@...

 

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 8:26 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

 

I have been experimenting on a different tack. Imnproving the response of the PA driver stages.

I used MPSH10's in my test board build and FT37-43 toroids wound as either trifilar or bifilar according to stage needs, of 10 turns.

Comparing the original uBITX driver which has a ~7db less gain at 10M end, this version has ~2dB drop.

I don't have any spare output FETS or I would check that out also, driven by the this test board.

glenn
vk3pe


Virus-free. www.avg.com

Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

Glenn
 

Hi Bill, yes  a bit more work should get the 2dB back also. Just needs 'time'. I didn't know what spec toroids were used in the original, but had the FT37-43 on hand. The MPSH10 was on hand also, a better FT than the 2N3904's.  I did very briefly play with the bias also but  no real gains there.

Once it's all flattened out it would simplify fitting of some sort of power control immensely.

glenn

My uBitX build.

Graham W
 

Well. Got my uBitX built up and made a couple of contacts on 40 meter SSB. Good reports and
they are looking into getting them also. I am powering the radio with a 21 volt LiOn battery pack I
built.I have a CV/CC regulator built into the power supply set to 12.1 volts 2.5 amp max. All is stock in the radio.
No mods yet... Well one little one .. I added a 78L05 regulator to send 5 volts to the mic as I have placed a MAX9814
AGC board in the mic.  My heat sink is from an old marine VHF radio. Doesn't even get warm.

Here are a few pictures of the project.
Graham VE3WGW
-73-

Re: My uBitX build.

Dale Brooks KG7SSB <kg7ssb@...>
 

Nice looking rig! Good job on the build.
Dale kg7ssb

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 8:37 PM, Graham W <gram.warrington@...> wrote:
Well. Got my uBitX built up and made a couple of contacts on 40 meter SSB. Good reports and
they are looking into getting them also. I am powering the radio with a 21 volt LiOn battery pack I
built.I have a CV/CC regulator built into the power supply set to 12.1 volts 2.5 amp max. All is stock in the radio.
No mods yet... Well one little one .. I added a 78L05 regulator to send 5 volts to the mic as I have placed a MAX9814
AGC board in the mic.  My heat sink is from an old marine VHF radio. Doesn't even get warm.

Here are a few pictures of the project.
Graham VE3WGW
-73-


Re: Dirt cheap uBitx case #ubitx

N1AFF - formerly KB1JPW
 

Getting there slowly. I went ahead and decided to cut new end panels. The front panel still has a few additions and different knobs to find. The rear panel has a USB port missing still.

Re: Dirt cheap uBitx case #ubitx

N1AFF - formerly KB1JPW
 

Things are getting tight in the case. Holding off on the RJ45 jack until I can make sure it's all working happily. I've removed the 16 pin connector and will be soldering leads directly to the board due to space constraints.

Re: Dirt cheap uBitx case #ubitx

Mike Woods
 

Did you mean USB port rather tha RJ45?  You could mount this on the side of the top cover.

Mike ZL1AXG


On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 at 5:56 PM, KB1JPW <a.fairaizl@...> wrote:
Things are getting tight in the case. Holding off on the RJ45 jack until I can make sure it's all working happily. I've removed the 16 pin connector and will be soldering leads directly to the board due to space constraints.

LCD Bumper

Ben Piecora
 

Hello, I’m working on building my uBITX, but my cutout for my LCD in my metal case is a little rough. I know a while back someone had 3D printed a little bumper that went around it to cover up the cutout. Does anyone have the STL?

K2CPU
--
Ben
K2CPU

Re: Dirt cheap uBitx case #ubitx

K9HZ <bill@...>
 

You are gonna want to keep those leads as short as possible since they carry RF (the oscillator frequencies) to the motherboard…

 

 

Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ

 

Owner - Operator

Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC

Staunton, Illinois

 

Owner – Operator

Villa Grand Piton – J68HZ

Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.

Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com

Like us on Facebook! facebook icon

 

Moderator – North American QRO Yahoo Group.

 

email:  bill@...

 

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of KB1JPW
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 10:56 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Dirt cheap uBitx case #ubitx

 

Things are getting tight in the case. Holding off on the RJ45 jack until I can make sure it's all working happily. I've removed the 16 pin connector and will be soldering leads directly to the board due to space constraints.


Virus-free. www.avg.com

Re: Endian issues...final chapter

Ashhar Farhan
 

ietf solved this by insisting that internet protocos SHOULD be in plain text. it makes debuggera out our eyeballs and prevents testing of friendships.

On 11 Mar 2018 12:27 am, "Michael Hagen" <motdog@...> wrote:

If Push comes to Stack, who wins Big Injun or Little Injun?


On 3/10/2018 10:48 AM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io wrote:
We agree that  "Endianness is a problem when a binary file created on a computer is read on another computer with different endianness."

Where we seem to disagree is that I am convinced this code will always prints a value of "4"
regardless of whether the machine is big or little endian:

  long data32;    int  data8;
  data32 = 0x04030201;
  data8 = data32>>24;
  printf("%d \n", data8);

From this, we can create the endian agnostic code at the top of post 44018.  
Arv is correct, this is not something most of you need to worry about.
I'm totally done here.
Unless you want to talk about Gulliver's Travels.

Jerry


On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 08:42 am, Jack Purdum wrote:
   Endianness is a problem when a binary file created on a computer is read on another computer with different endianness.
 

-- 
Mike Hagen, WA6ISP
10917 Bryant Street
Yucaipa, Ca. 92399
(909) 918-0058
PayPal ID  "MotDog@..."
Mike@...

Re: My uBitX build.

Skip Davis
 

Good idea Graham on the heat sink source, I have a few here I’ll have to check them out.

Skip Davis, NC9O

OT: RE: out of specification operation with Si4721 for use on 4 Meters #parts

freefuel@...
 

I found this data sheet while reading up on the Silicon Labs SI4721 FM Broadcast transceiver chip, I have to ask if it can be tuned outside of it's specified range into maybe the 4 Meters band or maybe even up into the 2 meters band as well. the data sheet indicates that the stereo pilot and inputs can be disabled along with an easy way to specify the deviation of the transmitter. so far this looks like a nice little part to build a Handie Talkie around for fun. https://cdn-shop.adafruit.com/datasheets/SiLabs+Programming+guide+AN332.pdf

-Justin N2TOH 

Re: RD16HHF1 power curve flattening...some

M Garza <mgarza896@...>
 

Nice Work, Glenn.

It looks like the MPSH10 is obsolete.  Doing some searching and comparing, the KSP10 is an exact replacement.   
It is in stock at Tayda, Mouser, and Digikey.  I only checked these three vendors.

What size wire did you use for your toroids?

Thanks.

Marco- KG5PRT



On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 8:52 PM, Glenn <glennp@...> wrote:
Hi Bill, yes  a bit more work should get the 2dB back also. Just needs 'time'. I didn't know what spec toroids were used in the original, but had the FT37-43 on hand. The MPSH10 was on hand also, a better FT than the 2N3904's.  I did very briefly play with the bias also but  no real gains there.

Once it's all flattened out it would simplify fitting of some sort of power control immensely.

glenn


Re: The issues of the TDA2822

Ashhar Farhan
 

sajid,
i am working on an audio amp. i am testing it live. i always personally use circuits in the air before recommending them. i hope that my tuesday i will have something you can use. in the meantime, just about 100 out of 4000 boards have had this problem. and about less than 20 of them have reported the blow out.
- f

On 11 Mar 2018 5:46 am, "Sajid Rahum via Groups.Io" <zs735=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Farhan

Where can one order the good replacement TDA2822?  There are all sorts of makers but unsure where to get replacement.

My ubitx was sent 2 weeks back; most likely with the older TDA.

Thanks
Sajid/va3qy.