¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Re: Harmonic performance - SSB vs CW


Gordon Gibby
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Another physical alteration that might be performed is merely to wire TWO different relays into each of the existing FOUR relay spots --- thus mechanically separating the two halves of the relays that do the jobs.??


This could be done with four little "daughter boards" with pins sticking out to contact the necessary holes on the original board, and TWO relays wired up above.? ? Messy, but it might provide the needed separation.? If needed, a metalic SHIELD could extend downward between the "halves" of the wiring.


By putting them at alternating heights, one might actually work within the existing lateral dimensions.? ?


And I'm sure several of you will come up with alternate solutions to key a completely separate 4 relays placed instead?on the FAR END??so that the switching can also be divided up among more relays.?


If warren is correct, then splitting the relay function may make a very significant improvement in the harmonics output (but not the spurs for the higher bands).? ?


This will lead to better designs for future ubitx's!? ?


Since I basically only use 4 bands (80/40/30/20) I might only need modify a smaller amount of the board realestate.??


Gordon




From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Gordon Gibby <ggibby@...>
Sent: Monday, August 6, 2018 7:57 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Harmonic performance - SSB vs CW
?

warren, very nice work to answer a very crucial question....

so it's time to see if the relay can be


a) altered so as to be improved? (move wires, add shielding, to existing relay type)

b) replaced in some easy fashion (different device, or even?"replace" it by adding additional circuitry to move half the function to a different physical location)


Also reasonable to consider

c) given that there are FOUR relays, how can one cleverly reroute physical signals (board changes) and software changes so as to get X bands working, where none of the inputs pass near the outputs on a single relay???


In other words, for(c) you can reroute signals somehow and achieve at least TWO working bands, and possibly MORE by being more clever than I generally am....can someone see how to get THREE or FOUR signal paths working?? ?


Adding a manual switch of some sort would certainly also be a possibility!? ?



But MY goal this week is to give a nice tutorial to our ARES group on how to load up the IDE, and how to capture software upgrades to bitx-type products and load them onto these little critters, and a tiny bit of how to alter the code yourself as well......in preparation for our beginnning to "build" these devices on August 18th.


Cheers,


gordon




From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Warren Allgyer <allgyer@...>
Sent: Monday, August 6, 2018 7:31 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] Harmonic performance - SSB vs CW
?

There is unfortunately not good news for a quick fix by changing lead layout on the board. It appears that a substantial portion of the input/output crosstalk in the filter bank is caused by having both the input and output of each filter routed through the same relay.

Attached is the level of crosstalk between to sets of closed contacts inside one relay. I removed K3 from my board and connected leads to it and then to the S/A - TG combination. The attenuation at critical harmonic frequencies for 80 and 40 meters are shown in the table. The numbers shown are for one relay. Since the 80 meter signal is routed though 3 relays it can be assumed that the crosstalk due to the relays alone is 4.7 dB worse for that band. For 40/30 meters the signal goes through two relays and would be 3 dB worse than the table numbers.

Bottom line: if all crosstalk due to board layout and lead length is eliminated, there is still an unacceptable level of input/output coupling caused by sharing of relays between input and output to make this filter bank design acceptable.

?

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