¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

  1. BITX20
  2. Messages
Single Messages Topics Expanded Polls

Re: Thoughts on a Ham Bus

Jack Purdum
 

Arv:

My EE knowledge is like going to an axe fight with a squirt gun. Perhaps the best I can hope for realistically is a modular approach. Separating into function blocks like we see in equipment discussions might be the best I can hope for...and I can live with that. Farhan, for example, simplified modifying/replacing the LCD display by simply using the pin connections between the main board and the Raduino. A few more pins from the main board IF would have made the JackAl board interface virtually plug-and-play. Building with that kind of flexibility would be good enough for most of us who enjoy tinkering without having to resort to a "ham bus".

The good news is that I'm not smart enough to even join an EE battle, let alone pick one. I'll try to stand in the background, nodding occasionally so I look like I understand what's going on, and wait to the EE guys to model a workable module approach. That, too, would be fun.

Jack, W8TEE

On Thursday, June 21, 2018, 12:15:06 PM EDT, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:


Jack

After attempting to discuss this with a local ham, it became obvious that the idea
of a "Standard Ham Radio Bus" is many things to many people, and maybe not a
manageable concept.? It sort of fits with the old saying that "one should pick battles
that can be won".? Probably not even a committee could decide whether this bus
includes I2C/TWI, RF-signal, RF-power, virtual? links, radio links, 24V/12V/5V/3.3V,
keying, PTT, Linear control, regulated voltages, unregulated voltages, USB, Ethernet,
POE, CAT, terminations, etc.? And some have already suggested that it might be
focused particularly on support of modular BITX specific design blocks.? Maybe the
concept is best kept within the group members who are doing modular builds of BITX
and BITX related designs??

Arv
_._


On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 8:50 PM Jack Purdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=[email protected]> wrote:
Arv:

All tough questions, but worth answering. Think of the possibilities. Personally, I think this should be of the free-to-use license, mainly because I don't want to see extensions to the bus that aren't under someone's control. Otherwise, the standard slowly dissolves into chaos.

Every time an organization question comes up, I think of a sign I had on my desk when I was the department chairman:

??? For God so loved the world, he didn't send a committee.

Still, there has to be a small knot of knowledgeable people who know the EE and software side of this. It needs to be small because it needs to be nimble, yet with enough technical depth to make things work. I've seen the agony of trying to define a standard (i.e., the X3J11 committee to write the first standard for the C language)...it is a formidable task, and the difficult increases with the size of the committee. There are all kinds of technical details to think about and the Atlas bus would at least be a thoughtful starting point.

I think this could be a rewarding endeavor.

Jack, W8TEE



On Wednesday, June 20, 2018, 8:36:53 PM EDT, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:


If hams were to design and standardize a ham-bus-system approach to modular equipment,
should the design be placed in public domain, or under one of the free-to-use licenses???
Should a group be formed specifically for the purpose of bus design, documentation, and
publication?
How would upgrades, modifications, and alternative bus designs be handled?

Seems there are lots of questions, lots of possible opinions, and lots of work to do.

Arv
Join [email protected] to automatically receive all group messages.