¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Date

Re: Using switching power supply....

 

There is a switching supply called the "Megawatt" (https://www.amazon.com/MegaWatt-S-350-12-9-5-15-Adjustable-Supply/dp/B00JZBE97U) that is filtered for radio use. I have one and it does work really well. Just make sure you get the "real thing (and spend the extra cash), and NOT a Chinese clone (those aren't filtered as well).

Rich
KC8MWG


On Friday, March 17, 2017 4:25 AM, Mvs Sarma <mvssarma@...> wrote:


People had used smps for HAM psu.
?here is a possible link.
?
by xq2fod

?the Chinese make MW and others can be tried but with a toroid based filter at the output suiting the load

sarma
?vu3zmv


On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Yeonghwan Jun <ds5siz@...> wrote:
I wish to use switching power supply.
because I don't have power supply yet. but I can find to buy cheap switching power supply.
I had know that the switching power supply make a lot of noise.
So I will add RFC and Capacitor to reduce noise. if I will.
Is it possible?

I didn't received my BITX yet.
But I want to finish it before getting reach my BITX.






--
Regards
Sarma
?



Re: Letting the smoke out

Michael Davis
 

I am sure we all, or most all, have fused the Bitx at the power in side. I am using a 2 amp quick acting fuse with leads attached. Although not in the original kit directions or as a part, it is a "must do" to protect the delicate unit. 73

Sent from Mike's iPad WA1MAD


Re: Changing frequency display

Michael Davis
 

I am about to make a tuning mod. I will add a 27-50 ohm resistor in series to each side of the tuning pot (yellow and green) That will prevent the pot from fast tuning at either end of travel. I will add 2 momentary buttons from the pot. One violet to yellow, the other violet to green. If my understanding of the tuning method is correct, this will exclude the control from doing anything but changing frequency in its normal range. When I want to step up, just push the U button, down press the D button, essentially having a sort of band range control over the desired frequency. I also plan on using a 10 turn, or a 3 turn 10k linear pot. Obviously using a multi turn pot makes the button mod a real necessity. No more getting close to the end of pot tuning travel then "ooops' the frequency starts taking off. Thoughts?

Sent from Mike's iPad WA1MAD


Re: MAR-3SM+ and new display/VFO board coming

 

If there isn't, it would probably be a good idea, as many boards that have been sold already!

Roy,
WA0YMH

On Mar 17, 2017 2:31 AM, "Kelly Jack" <kellyjack1968@...> wrote:

Jack


Is there a group for discussing the analyzer? Wondering if any other component adjustments were required for the MAR-3SM+.


Regards?


Simon VK3ELH


12vDC wiring and hookup

 

I am pacing the house waiting for my Bitx40 to arrive (we. Should be mere days away now) and looking over the build plans. I am looking for some clarification on the 12v power. From the power jack do you run direct to the volume pot for on/off and then distribute to the board or are all the connections made in parallel??

If you parallel the connection wouldn't that keep power flowing into parts of the board after other pieces (via the on/off volume pot) had been turned off?


Re: BITX attenuator

Rafa? Lichwa?a
 

Hi Peter,

Thanks for this forwarded message!

So I noticed my first mistake: crystal filter has ~200 ohms Zin/Zout - not 50, as I thought before.

Ok, so that means, attenuator has right Zin/Zout, but there is an impedance mismatch between 1st AMP (just right after LPF) and mixer.
This AMP translates 50 ohms of the LPF to ~200 ohms, but mixer expects 50 ohms. Maybe that's why we can notice much improvement in the way BITX works, when we remove that 1st AMP completely - then mixer has 50 ohms on all ports.

But I don't understand two things:

Second the terminal impedance of the crystal filter and the various
RF/IF amplifiers were optimized for 200 ohms the mixers are better at
50 ohms and there is no impedance matching to correct for that.
Why mixers are better at 50 ohms?
I thought there is not much difference in mixing for different impedances on mixer ports, but the point is to keep them EQUAL on each port (nevermind if it is 50 ohm or 200 ohms - mixer will work fine as long as those impedances are equal on each port). Is that correct?

And second thing: why RF/IF are optimized for 200ohms?
As it was explained by the author of that project, each AMP translates impedance: 50ohms -> 220ohms and 220ohms -> 50ohms (for resistances used in the circuit).
So I think there is no mismatch anywhere except this one between 1st RF AMP and mixer. Is that correct?

Additional question at the end: is that a good idea to use ADE-1 (SMD level 7 double balanced mixer) instead of those 1n4148 diodes and "manual" transformers?

Regards,
Rafal SP3GO


Re: BITX attenuator

 

Rafal,

John posted this in Feb. If you have not seen it it may be of interest to you.

Yes, it is good to try to make improvements to a design.

Best regards,

Peter VK1XP

On 20-02-2017 13:05, John Backo via Groups.Io wrote:
With Allison's permission, here is the message to EMRFD regarding the BITX.
This is good information from a master RF engineer.
john
AD5YE
"Some thoughts on improving the bitx...
First so there is no bad feelings Frhan did a bang up job with the
design and its persistence
speaks loads of the reproduceability and utility of the design.
The yabut..
The BITX was not intended to be the high performance transceiver only
low cost and
its avoidance of hard to get parts. So there are compromises, a hard
fact of engineering life.
Things that may help or improve it based on the 40M version I built years ago.
The mixers using 1N914/4148 diodes are not level 7 mixers (nominal
7dbm drive) like commercial DBMs.
the reason for this is Schottky diodes have a lower turn on threshold
than silicon junction diodes with the difference being .2V compared to
.65V. This means you need more LO drive for the terminal impedance
of all ports to be 50 ohms. It also means they are higher level
mixers by about 3db. So enough drive is important to intermod and
overload.
Second the terminal impedance of the crystal filter and the various
RF/IF amplifiers were optimized for 200 ohms the mixers are better at
50 ohms and there is no impedance matching to correct for that. This
means that the DBMs are compromised in performance again for overload
and IMD. The fix here is to insure all ports
especially the IF port is matched to 50 ohms.
It many radios I've built the DBM to IF amp has a Diplexer. Th reason
for this is to insure the IF port sees a wide band (dc to 100mhz)
match and only the desired IF pass though it. This keeps reflected
signals from reentering the mixer and adding to the possible products.
Choice of LO frequency. Unless there is a defining reason I use a LO
that is Higher than the IF as in 40M
with 12mhz if that would be 19mhz. For VFO that would be drifty but
for a NCO (Si5351) its no big deal.
Why? When mixing signals there are two known players (IF and LO) and
many live signals in the band
and they all mix so you get sums and differences and then harmonics of
all those making sums and differences. A program like spurtune can
list them all out and show what the result and likely strength
of each will be. When the LO is lower than the IF the likely
possibilities and their harmonic mixes are
more numerous at or neat the RX pass band and IF passband. Again a
low pass filter between the
LO and the mixer can help sometimes.
RF amplifier... For bands below 10mhz its likely not needed or needs
to be very low gain as there are an abundance of strong signals. RF
selectivity before the preamp is an aid in this and even adding
switchable
attenuators (I use 6 and 12DB so I can get 6/12/18db of attenuation)
and in a strong signal cases that can
help. Lowering the gain of the RF amp (for RX) can help as well.
Another item is if the RF amp is not robust enough it can easily
overload before the mixer, at that point all is lost to IMD. What
high end radios do is use lots of current in the RF amp so its not
easily overloaded then use a mixer that can tolerate that as well as
its no sense having the RF amp be clean and overload the mixer.
Its important to point out that for a given RF amp design and DC bias
level there is a maximum signal level
that will exceed it distortion capabilities. Differently said that
amp has a maximum undistorted power out
that must be spread over all the accepted signals often that means the
amp must be very robust. An
example is a RF amp I used in a radio that had to withstand 10dbm or
more at the input in band
and not overload. The amp ran at 160ma and could deliver .4W of two
tone signal undistorted (better than 35db down). It actually used RF
power devices (2xMRF584) to get that level of capability. Of course
the next stage had to deal with that. The end result was a crunch
proof radio but would be unforgiving about power
used (RX needed 1.5A with .4A in the low level RF sections). It is
sometimes easier to attenuate the
offending signals (as well as desired) as a strategy. Why? because
even if the RF amp is good enough
and the mixer then the first IF (and maybe even second) need to be
able to handle all that signal. In the end it tend to be a very
"system" level problem rather than point solution.
Other tricks are front end preselection using narrow tuneable band
pass filters (loss is tolerable)
to reject the offending players. Notch filters as well though at
higher frequencies they may not
be effective enough.
Consider the case:
Offending signal of -25dbm which is very strong. Add 17db of RF gain
to that and its now -8dbm and any
mixer below level 17 (50mw LO drive) will be overloaded. To make
matters worse if the RF amp is running
less than a maybe 10ma it will be overloaded itself as I've seen this.
So we omit the RF amp and try again
and a -25dbm signal is right below the limits for distortion for a
level 7 (5mw lo drive) mixer. At this
point 6DB of attenuation of RX is an aid as then the signal is down to
-31dbm. Even without the RF amp
the RX is sensitive enough to hear most likely signals your going to
talk to and if need be you can even up
the audio gain to compensate to a point.
They key is managing the levels of all the signal passing through the
RF and mixer or overload will be
a very negative result. Excess gain often deemed desirable are not
always helpful.
My first pass with mine was the described switchable two step
attenuator and then the ability to switch
out the RX RF amp completely. Note that the Elecraft K2 (which has a
very good receiver) took this
path. FYI: small sugar cube relays are handy for this as they can be
placed close to here needed and
powered from a front panel switch.
The BITX is a great experimenters radio and this is one area where
experimenting can be useful of not
required."
Allison


Re: Changing frequency display

 

Sorry, calculation error:

For a range of 400kHz we would need 3 extra bits, so we would need to take 4^3= 64 samples and average the 64 measurements.
The expense of this approach however is that it would slow down the tuning system by (at least) 16 or 64 times.


Re: Changing frequency display

 

Another idea to increase the frequency step resolution would be to use "oversampling".
The nano's ADC has a 10-bit precision, this gives a range of 0-1023 steps for 50kHz. If we want to cover 200 kHz (4x more), but keep the same step size, then we would need two extra bits of resolution.
For every n extra bits of resolution that we want, we have to take 4^n samples at the base 10-bit precision. Then calculate the average of those 4^n samples.
So theoretically we could take 4^2=16 samples and average them.
For a range of 400kHz we would need 3 extra bits, so we would need to take 4^3= 32 samples and average the 32 measurements.
The expense of this approach however is that it would slow down the tuning system by (at least) 16 or 32 times. I have never tried it and I don't know how much practical effect this would have to the user/operator.

73, Allard PE1NWL


Re: BITX attenuator

Rafa? Lichwa?a
 

Hi Peter,

Thanks for reply!

The Bitx is like most things a compromise design (to keep it simple)
Sure. That's clear and even more - that's the whole beauty in this compromise design that it is so simple and it works! :-)
But... even in such simple design, if there is a bug, it should be fixed, right - just to make it working a bit better and still keep it simple.

yes the single transistor amps and crystal filter have a Zin/Zout of
about 200 ohms while the mixers are 50 ohm so there is mismatch and some
performance lost.
Are you sure?
My analysis (described in the previous post) shows that crystal filter has 50 ohms Zin/Zout, each transistor amp has impedance translation (so its Zout depends on Zin applied) and mixer has 220 ohms on each port.

Yes the Bitx could be better but then it would become more complex, so
the trade-off.
I'm not suggesting to make it more complex. Let's keep it simple, but try to fix any bugs if they are found anywhere in this design :-)

By the way - I'm still not sure if my previous impedance analysis is correct - can anyone confirm?

The bug found (in my opinion) is just wrong Zin/Zout attenuator between 3rd amp and product detector...

Regards,
Rafal SP3GO


Re: Using switching power supply....

 

People had used smps for HAM psu.
?here is a possible link.
?
by xq2fod

?the Chinese make MW and others can be tried but with a toroid based filter at the output suiting the load

sarma
?vu3zmv


On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Yeonghwan Jun <ds5siz@...> wrote:

I wish to use switching power supply.

because I don't have power supply yet. but I can find to buy cheap switching power supply.

I had know that the switching power supply make a lot of noise.

So I will add RFC and Capacitor to reduce noise. if I will.

Is it possible?


I didn't received my BITX yet.

But I want to finish it before getting reach my BITX.







--
Regards
Sarma
?


Re: Letting the smoke out

 

The windings of T7 would have got damaged with high current, the trifilar would have shorted. Try a rewind!

At 17-03-2017, you wrote:

I received my BITX40 kit and wired it up on my workbench. The receiver worked well and I made three QSOs before disassembling it to install in a homemade case. While reassembling the IRF150 tab shorted to the case with the power on. This blew the 10 amp fuse on my 13.7 volt power source and literally produced smoke from around C157. Fortunately the receiver still functions but I get no transmit power out. It appears that C157 was not damaged and it is not shorted. I checked L8 and T7 for continuity and they seemed OK. I replaced the IRF150.

What I see now:

0.17 A draw on receive, rises to 0.29 A when PTT pushed but goes no higher

about 9 volts on the drain of the IRF150, drops to 0.0 volts when PTT pushed, speaking into mike causes slight negative voltage (-0.15V)

Any suggestions on what (and how) to check next?

Thanks


Re: uBITX - A reboot of the old BITX

 

Diz gets them directly from micrometals.
- f

On 17 Mar 2017 2:44 a.m., "Ken" <chase8043@...> wrote:
I ran into problems with Ebay bought cores. I now stick to Diz's supply at KitsandParts.
73 Ken

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:09 PM, VK3HN <prt459@...> wrote:

Ken, the FT37-43 that gave unexpectedly high inductances were from a bag of 20 with 22uH windings bought on ebay years ago. They might not even be FT37-43s although they are the same physical size. The ones that gave expected results are from Mark at Minikits in Adelaide, and are no doubt from a reputable source.

Sarma, I also thought that the actual inductance of each winding in a trifilar transformer in a diode mixer would not be critical and my originals would probably work. But in a project like this I prefer to eliminate as many unknowns as I can. VK3HN.



Re: MAR-3SM+ and new display/VFO board coming

 

Jack


Is there a group for discussing the analyzer? Wondering if any other component adjustments were required for the MAR-3SM+.


Regards?


Simon VK3ELH


Using switching power supply....

 

I wish to use switching power supply.

because I don't have power supply yet. but I can find to buy cheap switching power supply.

I had know that the switching power supply make a lot of noise.

So I will add RFC and Capacitor to reduce noise. if I will.

Is it possible?


I didn't received my BITX yet.

But I want to finish it before getting reach my BITX.





Re: Changing frequency display

 

I am not sure that would be possible, as the ultimate frequency step resolution is determined by the A/D input - 1024 steps maximum. The only way to cover a wider range would be to change the step size per A/D bit, but then you'd lose the fine frequency resolution. One thing to consider, if an extra A/D input is available, would be to have a "fine tuning" control, where the main tuning would be set up for, say, 1KHz per A/D bit. That would give you an approximate 1MHz tuning range. The "fine tuning" pot would change at a 100 Hz rate, giving you the finer control. I think that would be very doable, assuming a spare A/D line is available.
Dave, N6AFV


Re: Changing frequency display

 

Your code seems to work beautifully. ?Thank you. ?And for some reason I didn't even realize the double slashes there when I read through it. ?Possibly because I was reading it on my phone at the time. ?Anyway, thanks again. ?

Now on to the next modification - getting a 10 turn pot to cover the whole band and not just 50khz. ?


Re: Toroid Inductance

 

kits and parts indicates AL for FT27-43 at350 +/-5%. possible that? that they indicate AL at 2MHz ? we need to check with factory information.
?Link below shows more varieties of cores from other makers too. please check whether the pdf (english) would be of some help.

?
?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 5:04 AM, K5ESS <k5ess.nothdurft@...> wrote:

I thought I'd start a new thread RE inductance of FT37-43 toroids.? I just measured the inductance of an FT37-43 wound with 10 turns #28 wire.? Measurements at 1, 2, and 7 MHz. using the series resonance method. Inductances measured were 38.5, 35.8, and 20.2 ?H.? This corresponds to calculated Al's of 385, 358, and 202.? The Q is very low for coils wound with these ferrite cores and the dip at 7 MHz was barely discernible.? The lower Al at 7 MHz is consistent with the roll-off of the material permeability starting at about 2.5 MHz or so.? Also if you look at the coil winding data on both Amidon and Kits and Parts sites you will see that the inductance values for a given number of turns is around 20% higher than a calculated value using their published Al numbers.? This all relates only to the type 43 material.?

Mike

K5ESS




--
Regards
Sarma
?


Re: Raduino Sketch upload

 

go to sketch, then include library, then manage libraries. ?Search for si5351. ?choose Etherkit si5351. ?Make sure you choose version 1.0.0 ?That is how I got it to work.


Re: Letting the smoke out

 

I guess the 7805 regulator that provides the bias for the transmitter is blown. are you getting bias on the gate of the IRF510 when you press the PTT?
- f

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Raj vu2zap <vu2zap@...> wrote:
Trace the track from IRF drain through L8 I am willing to bet L8 is fried or track burnt.
If your 10A fuse blew then the PCB tracks didn't have a chance!

From the drain to the power pin at PA power 1 should show 0 Ohms. In your case it wont
and you could friend what has fried. It could even be the 2 pin power connector wire.

Good luck
Raj, vu2zap



At 17-03-2017, you wrote:

I received my BITX40 kit and wired it up on my workbench. The receiver worked well and I made three QSOs before disassembling it to install in a homemade case. While reassembling the IRF150 tab shorted to the case? with the power on. This blew the 10 amp fuse on my 13.7 volt power source and literally produced smoke from around C157. Fortunately the receiver still functions but I get no transmit power out. It appears that C157 was not damaged and it is not shorted. I checked L8 and T7 for continuity and they seemed OK. I replaced the IRF150.

What I see now:

0.17 A draw on receive, rises to 0.29 A when PTT pushed but goes no higher

about 9 volts on the drain of the IRF150, drops to 0.0 volts when PTT pushed, speaking into mike causes slight negative voltage (-0.15V)

Any suggestions on what (and how) to check next?

??? Thanks