Date   
Re: Software for uBITX

Ian Lee
 

Ted

The firmware for V5 is almost done. I am going to experiment and release some more. If you have V5, you can download the beta now.

I am still looking for someone to help me with the experiment because I do not have V5 yet.

Ian KD8CEC


On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 1:09 AM Ted via Groups.Io <k3rta=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
I look forward to Dr Lee's really cool software being modified for the V5 uBitx kit.  Do we know if he's entertaining an upgrade for this, or is someone else considering playing with it for the changed IF, etc?


Ted
K3RTA


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

Re: ubitx

MVS Sarma
 

If the system is same, I fear, it may not accept when sent by others either. 


On Thu, 21 Feb 2019, 12:53 am William Hill <w3wh@... wrote:

My malware program won't allow me to download the operating manual from Amateurradiokits.IN. Can someone please send me a copy? 


My specific concern is that my radio lights up but the tuning is completely erratic and I imagine there is a procedure to follow to "set up " the radio but I don't know what it is. Help would be appreciated.


73,


Bill/W3WH

Re: ubitx

MVS Sarma
 

Which of the manuals you need, .i can send as , zipped file.
Tell me , specific file.

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019, 8:33 am MVS Sarma via Groups.Io <mvssarma=gmail.com@groups.io wrote:
If the system is same, I fear, it may not accept when sent by others either. 

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019, 12:53 am William Hill <w3wh@... wrote:

My malware program won't allow me to download the operating manual from Amateurradiokits.IN. Can someone please send me a copy? 


My specific concern is that my radio lights up but the tuning is completely erratic and I imagine there is a procedure to follow to "set up " the radio but I don't know what it is. Help would be appreciated.


73,


Bill/W3WH

Re: Software for uBITX

Ted
 

Hi, Dr Lee.

My V5 should arrive any day now, and I'll be happy to fiddle around with the basic program. I may not do much in modifications of the hardware at first but it'll get a workout at least.

Thank you for your work & your contributions to the hobby.


Ted
K3RTA



Re: ubitx

Curt
 

Bill

The stock firmware behaves relative to how fast you turn the knob. Try tuning very slow to see how it behaves. As I tuned I would get a bit excited and speed up to tune in a signal, no this does not work. Stay steady exceot when you are trying to move to the other end of a band. If this doesn't solve it, then check encoder connections as suggested.

Curt

Re: No TX #ubitx

Ted
 



Yes, I have a "junkbox". Some would say it's that 2 X 3 X 3 metre radio room I use for expressing cuss words from the blemish above my shoulders.

Anyway - After working on this again today, I verified readings with a dead mike key, not CW, and find Q90 voltages right about where the popular V3 voltage chart says things should be. That is, I'm getting 2.94v on the emitter, 3.7v on the base,and 11.6 the collector.  Please note that the surface mount 2n3094 was replaced with a can-type 2n2222a.

I'll grab some parts and make the diode/capacitor probe mentioned, tomorrow, and report back.

73,
Ted

Re: No TX #ubitx

 

3.8V Base should have 3.2 on Emitter or something is wrong if there is 1Vbe.

At 21-02-19, you wrote:


Well, I removed the parallel so it's back to stock resistance. Three separate 2n2222's measure 2.8v on the emitter, 3.8 on the base, and 11.8 on the collector. The (now same as stock) 100ohm resistor at the emitter apparently goes to earth as it should, and no errant solder blobs seen in the area. I'm starting to think iI'm just not supposed to have a working radio.

Ted

Re: No TX #ubitx

MVS Sarma
 

I suspect base to emitter Junction break.


On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 9:17 AM Raj vu2zap <rajendrakumargg@...> wrote:
3.8V Base should have 3.2 on Emitter or something is wrong if there is 1Vbe.

At 21-02-19, you wrote:


>Well, I removed the parallel so it's back to stock resistance. Three separate 2n2222's measure 2.8v on the emitter, 3.8 on the base, and 11.8 on the collector. The (now same as stock) 100ohm resistor at the emitter apparently goes to earth as it should, and no errant solder blobs seen in the area.  I'm starting to think iI'm just not supposed to have a working radio.
>
>Ted




Re: No TX #ubitx

MVS Sarma
 

He could directly measure across base and emitter and tell the reading ?


On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:10 AM Mvs Sarma <mvssarma@...> wrote:
I suspect base to emitter Junction break.


On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 9:17 AM Raj vu2zap <rajendrakumargg@...> wrote:
3.8V Base should have 3.2 on Emitter or something is wrong if there is 1Vbe.

At 21-02-19, you wrote:


>Well, I removed the parallel so it's back to stock resistance. Three separate 2n2222's measure 2.8v on the emitter, 3.8 on the base, and 11.8 on the collector. The (now same as stock) 100ohm resistor at the emitter apparently goes to earth as it should, and no errant solder blobs seen in the area.  I'm starting to think iI'm just not supposed to have a working radio.
>
>Ted




Re: A Little Concerned! #bitx40

Wayne Leake
 

  Quote "Limit the power supply to 12 volts,
anything more than 12v and Q13 and R141 will run too hot and can burn out." unquote.
 looking at the schematic, it looks like you may mean Q14 and not Q13.
 Q14 is the driver to the IRF510 final.
 Easy sometimes to post a wrong number and/or letter/or word...

 Wayne WA2YNE

Re: Latest firmwares for 7" Nextion Resistive Displays

Alex "B2"
 

Excellent! Thank you so much, Dr. Ian. Would you be OK with me submitting a file to the repository here for others, compiled for the 7" Enhanced?

Re: has anyone built this kit AGC from Amateur Radio Kits?

thomas.donoghue@...
 

I too was hoping to find answers to this same question.  I have looked through Sunil's documents and I think the question above needs clarification.  We are interested in how/where to connect the plugs/wires from the AGC kit to the Bitx40 board.  Some other models show Bitx20 boards having circuit oard traces cut and pins soldered in to "receive" the plugs from the AGC board.  In bringing this AGC board tothe Bitx40, one does not want to cut or modify the board without some awareness that the process is correct.  Other AGC circuits call for removing wire(s) from the volume pot for audio "in" then runing "out" from the AGC boardack to thevolume pot.  Again, that is for a different circuit, but we recognise the wire-up could be similar.  One just is not interested in finding out by way of smoke, that connections were incorrect.....many thanks for any input to a 2 year old posting...73

Re: A Little Concerned! #bitx40

Jerry Gaffke
 

I mean what I said.
  https://groups.io/g/BITX20/message/26492

A search in the group webpage at   https://groups.io/g/BITX20/messages
will find plenty of hits for both Q13 and R141.

Jerry



On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 02:23 AM, Wayne Leake wrote:
Quote "Limit the power supply to 12 volts,
anything more than 12v and Q13 and R141 will run too hot and can burn out." unquote.
 looking at the schematic, it looks like you may mean Q14 and not Q13.
 Q14 is the driver to the IRF510 final.
 Easy sometimes to post a wrong number and/or letter/or word...
 
 Wayne WA2YNE

Re: has anyone built this kit AGC from Amateur Radio Kits?

Jack, W8TEE
 

The AGC issue is part apples and part oranges. Some AGC circuits work off the volume control while others work off the IF chain. If you're using the IF chain, chances are there's going to be some messing around with the PCB itself. If you're happy with an automatic volume control, working off the volume control is less invasive to the board itself. The IF surgery need not be too invasive, however. The JackAl board (hamradiodesigns.com) provides both IF and audio AGC. The IF surgery requires removing an SMD resistor and moving an on-board cap to that resistor's position and then attaching a cable to the old cap location. There is no audio AGC surgery, since the board has its own 6W audio amp on board. (It preserves the old µBITX audio so you can compare the results.)

Anyway, you need to decide which kind of AGC you want and be prepared to perform some minor surgery for IF AGC and perhaps minor "wire moving" for audio AGC. Always remember that no decision is a decision--thousands are using the µBITX with no AGC. Pick what makes you happy!

Jack, W8TEE

On Thursday, February 21, 2019, 9:44:32 AM EST, thomas.donoghue@... <thomas.donoghue@...> wrote:


I too was hoping to find answers to this same question.  I have looked through Sunil's documents and I think the question above needs clarification.  We are interested in how/where to connect the plugs/wires from the AGC kit to the Bitx40 board.  Some other models show Bitx20 boards having circuit oard traces cut and pins soldered in to "receive" the plugs from the AGC board.  In bringing this AGC board tothe Bitx40, one does not want to cut or modify the board without some awareness that the process is correct.  Other AGC circuits call for removing wire(s) from the volume pot for audio "in" then runing "out" from the AGC boardack to thevolume pot.  Again, that is for a different circuit, but we recognise the wire-up could be similar.  One just is not interested in finding out by way of smoke, that connections were incorrect.....many thanks for any input to a 2 year old posting...73

Re: Power instead of S-Meter for CEC-software? #ubitx #smeter #arduino

anders@...
 

The circuit I tried is the simplest possible. A voltage divider 1.5K/220R followed by a 1N5711 and decoupled by 0.001u, (almost) identical as on the K2 (see schematic, p. 146 https://ftp.elecraft.com/K2/Manuals%20Downloads/E740001_K2%20Owner's%20Manual%20Rev%20I.pdf ). I will see if I pursue this. Maybe my uBITX is officially "finished" without this feature after all ;)

Good luck!

Anders SM0HPL

Re: Released a beta version of the firmware CEC Version 1.12 for uBITX V5 #ubitx

BruceN
 

Ian, you may have already answered this and I missed so please excuse this query.

I notice that this release is 1.12 and I assume (bad thing to do) that it is targeted only for V5.  V1.11 appears to be for the V3 and V4.  The question is will your new version 1.12 be backward compatible with V3 and V4?  If not, will any enhancements for the V5 software (new features, etc) be applied to the versions for V3 and V4? If you're going to maintain two strains of software, will it be possible to name the strains differently?  Or, will development on the V3 and V4 versions cease?  Interested because I plan to have both a V3 and a V5 and want to keep both up to date.

Thanks,

Bruce, K4TQL

Constructing a Case for Bitx-30

Pat Anderson <anderson5420@...>
 

I have looked at a lot images for many creative ways people have made a case for their bitx-40s, very cool! My radio kit will arrive tomorrow, and I am starting to think about a nice case - I probably won't use a Dollar Store lunchbox! I have access to a nice wood shop here in Arizona where we are for the winter. I was thinking of 1/4" birch plywood for the face. The face plate in most of the nice looking cases seem to have a fairly  standard layout. I was wondering whether anybody has created a template for the face, with dimensions including sizes of the holes that need to be cut or drilled in the face. Or am I hoping for too much?

Re: Released a beta version of the firmware CEC Version 1.12 for uBITX V5 #ubitx

Ian Lee
 

Bruce

Thank you for asking questions I did not explain.

Version 1.12 is just a conversion of Version 1.11 to uBITX V5.
It supports both V3 and V4. Because it is the same source.
As you can see from the source below, when compiling, UBITX_BOARD_VERSION determines whether to compile for V3, V4 or V5.
If the function is added to CEC Firmware, it will be added for both V3, V4 and V5 at the same time.

I have one V3 board in use, one V3 board for analysis, and one unassembled V4 board. Since there is no V5 board yet, all tests are based on the V3 board.

image 6.png

Ian KD8CEC

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 12:14 AM BruceN <k4tql@...> wrote:
Ian, you may have already answered this and I missed so please excuse this query.

I notice that this release is 1.12 and I assume (bad thing to do) that it is targeted only for V5.  V1.11 appears to be for the V3 and V4.  The question is will your new version 1.12 be backward compatible with V3 and V4?  If not, will any enhancements for the V5 software (new features, etc) be applied to the versions for V3 and V4? If you're going to maintain two strains of software, will it be possible to name the strains differently?  Or, will development on the V3 and V4 versions cease?  Interested because I plan to have both a V3 and a V5 and want to keep both up to date.

Thanks,

Bruce, K4TQL


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

Re: has anyone built this kit AGC from Amateur Radio Kits?

Robert D. Bowers
 

I added an external DSP noise filter to my bitx40... it has awesome AGC built-in, and can really cut back on noise without garbling voice (as long as I don't turn it up too far).  The audio out is also quite strong and clear - great for mobile use. 

Since people are often dumping the filters (as they're usually built-in these days to the commercial rigs), they're available used (and usually still working fine) for cheap, as well as still being sold if you have that sort of income (probably not that bad a price for most hams).

This could be another answer regarding AGC.

The only thing I miss is an external squelch circuit - I've got the schematic for one that is based on voice characteristics, but have too many pans in the fire so to speak, to build it and try it out.

Bob

N4FBZ

On 2/21/19 10:03 AM, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io wrote:
The AGC issue is part apples and part oranges. Some AGC circuits work off the volume control while others work off the IF chain. If you're using the IF chain, chances are there's going to be some messing around with the PCB itself. If you're happy with an automatic volume control, working off the volume control is less invasive to the board itself. The IF surgery need not be too invasive, however. The JackAl board (hamradiodesigns.com) provides both IF and audio AGC. The IF surgery requires removing an SMD resistor and moving an on-board cap to that resistor's position and then attaching a cable to the old cap location. There is no audio AGC surgery, since the board has its own 6W audio amp on board. (It preserves the old µBITX audio so you can compare the results.)

Anyway, you need to decide which kind of AGC you want and be prepared to perform some minor surgery for IF AGC and perhaps minor "wire moving" for audio AGC. Always remember that no decision is a decision--thousands are using the µBITX with no AGC. Pick what makes you happy!

Jack, W8TEE

On Thursday, February 21, 2019, 9:44:32 AM EST, thomas.donoghue@... <thomas.donoghue@...> wrote:


I too was hoping to find answers to this same question.  I have looked through Sunil's documents and I think the question above needs clarification.  We are interested in how/where to connect the plugs/wires from the AGC kit to the Bitx40 board.  Some other models show Bitx20 boards having circuit oard traces cut and pins soldered in to "receive" the plugs from the AGC board.  In bringing this AGC board tothe Bitx40, one does not want to cut or modify the board without some awareness that the process is correct.  Other AGC circuits call for removing wire(s) from the volume pot for audio "in" then runing "out" from the AGC boardack to thevolume pot.  Again, that is for a different circuit, but we recognise the wire-up could be similar.  One just is not interested in finding out by way of smoke, that connections were incorrect.....many thanks for any input to a 2 year old posting...73

Re: No TX #ubitx

Ted
 

Here's the emitter, collector, and base readings.  There was a question elsewhere about my meter, so I thought I'd document the process for those concerned. :o      Mike keyed w/ no audio.

Extra junk distributed about for effect.....