?

Hi Mark -?

Chasing down a similar (same) problem over here -?[email protected] | Arduino, PC, Serial Communications / CAT

What platform are you running WSKTX on Windows or Linux???

If you don't already know about it there is a command line program in the Hamlib distribution called "rigctl"? I find it very useful - in it's verbose debug mode it shows you every byte it sends and receives.? ? My observations is that it thinks it is sending but nothing arrives at the Arduino - unless I open and close the Arduino IDE serial monitor before running the program - then it all works fine - including WSJTX (with DTR un-checked).

I am Interested in collaborating on this - it would be good to get Arduino / Hamlib communications to be reliable.

73,
Dean

I probably should defer to Shirley.
But instead I'll just say "yes, it would work", except that the pins are soldered to the wrong side of the board for plugging into the Raduino.
You want a board that does not come with the pins soldered in place.

Would this one work?? According to their site, it's the 'classic' version: ? Again, I am so clueless about Arduino products but am learning through this group.

?

Not having to insulate the RD's tab from ground is definitely a win.

> the RD generates less heat per watt than the IRF510

Are you saying the RD is significantly more efficient?
Do you have numbers?
Or perhaps this is your way of pointing out that heat transfer from the die is somewhat slower for a given delta-T.

> Less drive per watt out is good, 20 watts if you need it at 13.8V.

I think you will have to do a significant redesign of the uBitx to get 20W out at 13.8v,
starting with the transformer at T11.
Considerably more involved than just swapping in some RD's.

I can believe that less drive is needed, but I'm not sure how big a factor this is.
I doubt it is terribly significant.?
The uBitx final is limited in part by how much power is available from the driver stage,?
but those who have tried swapping in RD's in the past have not seen much improvement.
Has anybody done measurements of drive required for RD's vs IRF510's from 3.5 to 30mhz?

The primary advantage of an IRF510 is that it doesn't cost $25 (with shipping) when you blow a pair.
There are disadvantages, but they can be designed around.

Jerry, KE7ER


On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 02:47 PM, Slurm wrote:

Seems for continuous digital operation the RD might be preferred just for the fact that you can bolt it's tab directly to an aluminum radio's case,, giving a very large heat sink, add to that , the RD generates less heat per watt than the IRF510.? Those two things together seem important for digital operation and heat concerns in general.

Less drive per watt out is good, 20 watts if you need it at 13.8V. Nice that the Ubitx already has holes in the PCB for the RD. Being fairly new to the tech of radio I'd have to study the changes to the output transformer and ask do you have to change the output transformer if you keep the supply voltage to the finals at the 13.8V??

Comes down to what people need or want.? For any heat sink, get a big one, and get the best heat transfer paste you can find.? You can also run a fan, 24Volt fans run at 12v are quiet. I've never used a water cooled heat sink on a computer and ask those who know how sturdy and reliable they are, also how much power consumption and noise is acceptable.

Thanks for this discussion.

Slurm?

TL:DR version: don't buy a Nano Every to use in your Raduino?right now unless?you are prepared to do some software development.

?

The ATMega 4809 is not an ARM processor. It's still an 8 bit AVR. It does have more RAM and flash memory than the ATMega328P does. The pinout of the 4809 is different from the 328P (it's not just a matter of having more pins), but the layout of the Nano Every board gets around that and puts the pins back where you expect them. Code changes may be needed; anything that uses libraries that come with the Arduino IDE is already covered, but the peripherals are different so any code that talks to ports directly or uses third party libraries is likely to need rewriting.

?

It's not quite a drop-in replacement, but adapting the Raduino?for the Nano Every should not be difficult in most applications. I don't know if anybody has done it yet for the?Raduino; until that happens, I don't recommend?that anybody make the switch unless they plan to do that work. The advantage would be the ability to use a larger sketch without the need to make the more extensive code changes needed to switch to another microcontroller such as the Teensy. There are two notable hardware differences that can affect compatibility?in some applications: PWM is not available on D11, and the USB serial interface is now completely separate from the serial interface on RX0 and TX1 so you can use both at the same time. (The USB to serial is Serial, the?other is Serial1.)

?

The Nano Every uses a different chip for USB to serial conversion: a pre-programmed?ATSAMD11D14A Cortex-M0 ARM processor. Ironically, that's more powerful in some ways than the board's primary CPU. The driver on Windows gets installed when you install the Arduino IDE; if you have an old version you may need to update it.

?

Here is a link to a blog post that talks about the hardware differences:?