开云体育

Thanks all for sugestions....

Rich, This one is the same as Kees' in operation: RF
I was also wotking on an AF (VK3YE board) version for those who would prefer that...


73 Nick.

Nick, it is my understanding that Kees' AGC kit works of the RF (IF)
stage, whereas your kit works off the audio stage? Thanks - Rich
WB2GXM

Chuck,

I'd ague against more than an octave for another reason, pattern.?
That and for 12, 10M and 6M up antennas get small enough there are a
a whole other set?possible improvements.? ? ?I'd think if one can get a
monster wire up then several smaller antennas are possible.? A?
dipole for 6M in wire is maybe 115 inches, no excuses there.

Most do all wires tend to be among the greatest compromises.

FYI even though I have a LNR- quad (40/20/15/10) I don't use it on 15 or 10.
Its the goto for 40 and 20.? ?The K6STI loop on 10 is way better.? A larger
scaled version for 15 is very good.? I used a 6M scaled version in a tall oak
for FD and worked a lot stuff and had a 3 element beam to compare to.
Beam was better only when pointed that way.? ?Rest of the bands
(not VHF) if I want to work them I put up a monoband wire using
one favorite tree with a lanyard in it, poles, or green mil aluminum
pipe as a temporary tower.

Goes back to the first statement, pattern, you have to hear them first.

Allison

Yes same problem here.

Philip.

I know this is an old thread, but I wanted to say thank you to everyone involved.? My BFO was set to 11.995.250.? If I went 1 kHz away people were loud by tinny.? If I went on frequency, they were soft but sounded right.? I set it to 11.996.100 and everything sounds wonderful!

Jack
KG4GJY

I also "cheated", using Jim W0EB's breakout boards for the sockets and encoder. They're silkscreened with labels for tip, ring, sleeve, so I didn't wire it to "pin 2", I wired it to what is marked as "tip". So I avoided the incorrect instructions entirely.

Best purchase EVAR.

Gwen NG3P

Joel,

Try changing the length of the coax on the PAR.? Something like 5FT can change that.

For cases Allied Electronics too.? They stock a lot of the Hammond products.

Allison

Mike,

I agree with everybody else that your getting RF back down the feed line, it happens bad on my Par EFHW on 20 meters. Thanks for unwittingly giving me a tip on where to buy my case for my uBitx, I haden't thought of Jameco. I just placed the order.

Joel
N6ALT

I added a file/photo showing the reversed side mounting pins for nano

Forgot one...

Painted box, did you clear the pat at the coax connector and use the star washer?

Same for the board mounting standoffs, All of them.

Allison

Mike KK7ER,

What form of end fed 1:9 with random wire very bad without counterpoise.
Or resonant half wave (swr under 1.7:1).? FYI if not low at the desired frequency
read the manual and tune it.

FYI: a dipole without a balun or with one and a bad coax routing has RF on the coax
and off center fed is pretty bad too.

Most vertical with out a choke at the entrance are pretty bad as well. A Butternut
HF2V was the only antenna that gave me bites despite 8 radials.? The fix a?
length of LMR240 with about 50 FT50-43 toroids. before it cam into the house
and grounding the sheild.

Solutions, one is a choke balun (air or ferrite) at the shack entrance and also ground it there.
The other is load up all the wire you suggest has RF on it with ferrite.

Then again I ran into that with someone and moving the antenna (he was
literally less than 10ft under it). Didn't help that the coax used had broken off ground
in the connector too.

Insure the lead from the board to the coax connector really has the ground lead to
ground and not swapped.? You laugh...

More than like if the picture is correct... The wires hanging out of it could be as much the cause.

Power supply leads can be an path in.

Allison

Add in 6b : modify the raduino vanilla software to use kd8cec memory manager and get the settings -so you can put these settings in your other nano with the kd8cec software neesing very few calibration.

to do that :
1-load official raduino sources v4.3
look at it and apply the mod shown on kd8cec site to use memory manager with original firmware (add Memory CAT communication kd8cec compatible -take care the published file is for v3 raduino, on v4 sketch the ? case ? instruction Is used In places of multiples ? if ? but you can use the same logic (i will send you the file after returning from hollyday this sunday -but if you know arduino prog it’s easy)
2-apply it on your vanilla nano (working nice, well calibrated)
3-run kd8cec memory manager and retrieve memory data from your board
4-save the datas (write or print the main values -calibration, bfo...)
5-program your New nano with kd8cec firmware and preset the values previously found (it’s perhaps not perfect but might not be totally off-calibration is a true problem, i ve not seen a nice process to do it)
TAKE care the pins on the nano might be reversed (the ch340 on the uper side), I ve ?put them in order to be able to insert the nano on 1 side or the other
i hope i m Clear enough (not so easy on a smartphone)
73-f1mqj

Warren,
I it was soemthing easy to try but I'd call it the same as you.? Lots of harmonics
in square waves and little filtering.? ?

At frequencies below 20MHz the filters at the amp output are the only filter.
Not my favored way, either.?

If there were band pass filters at the amp input this would not be an issue
nor would spurs be an issue.

One way and likely there are many:
An improvement is to move the keying (CW_TX) to the product detector/ TX modulator
and move the BFO to the edge of the pass band and key that.? ? The easy way is
remove R105? and run a wire from the junction of C1/R104 under the board to
a replacement R105 at the modulator junction C222-1 and the transformer T7.? ?
Then both the 12 and 45mhz filters can clean it up.? That would be the wire changes.

Doing that requires a code change.? Actually any change that comes immediately
to mind requires that.? ? The code change would remove the mix of VFO switching
to only the BFO and the signal CW-key would drive the Balanced modulator.? That
works well as It has been done on many other radios.? Code is easier than solder.

Allison

The signal at TP1, the output of the first mixer is a pure square wave as it is derived directly from the Si5351 in CW mode. The signal in SSB mode is much closer to a sine wave as it is a mix of the Si5351 square wave and the 45 MHz drive that has been filtered by the roofing filter of Y1 and associated components.?

The only filter that the CW signal encounters before the output filters is the 30 MHz LPF between TP1 and TP2. It has a 2 dB point of about 34 MHz in my case so any harmonics below that are unattenuated until after the final.

The obvious way to fix this is to do the CW generation prior to the roofing filter. What is not obvious to me is the best way to do that. As it stands it is pretty messy.

WA8TOD

Hi everyone,
can anyone please supply the wiring diagrams or photos of the correct connections for thee small pcbs that came with my kit cant find any wiring details anywhere any help would be most gratefully received
73 de Don G4MTR

From what I've been able to find, if it has silkscreened component locations, it's not a PWB, it's a PCB.

Most people use PCB nowadays.

http://www.circuitnet.com/experts/59367.html

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 06:38 AM, Warren Allgyer wrote:

In actual operation these losses would be the best case and would be experienced only when the antenna is a resonant multiple of a half wave. The losses when not terminated in a 2470 ohm resistive load, which would be the case if the antenna were used on any band other than the single resonant band, are far higher. On the order of 8 - 10 dB.

Thank you Warren.? Your VNA and 'scope plots illustrate very clearly why in antenna literature, "all band" doesn't mean what most folks would have it mean - it almost always means "lossy".? Even commercial manufacturers have a difficult time producing a high transformation-ratio UNUN that operates across multiple octaves of frequency with acceptable losses - it's just not an easy set of design objectives to satisfy...? so for casual construction projects it a reasonable design constraint to limit (focus) yourself to making a transformer with minimal losses across ONE octave of frequency.? I.E 1.8~3.6Mhz; 6~12Mhz, and 14~28Mhz.? Even minimizing losses in the 14~28Mhz range can be challenging, due to the very high transformation ratio (1:49) - look very closely at your use case before choosing core materials -

Material #43 isn't? "the best" choice in many cases; in fact I try to avoid it whenever possible below 5Mhz and above 20Mhz because of it's high(er) losses.?
Material #61 yields lower losses than #43 for nearly every application in the 10~30Mhz; and Material #31 has lower losses than #43 in most applications at or below 5Mhz.?
In practical applications, the loss curves of materials #43 and #31 'cross each other' in the ~8Mhz range, so an UNUN | BALUN made for use on 40 Meters can utilize either core material and achieve a respectable loss figure, when all other design limitations are observed.

This is why I strongly recommend designing and building separate matching units for (80)/40/30 meters, and 20/17/15 meters - that way, each can be optimized for minimum losses in the specific band(s) it will be used on.

I would use matching techniques for 12/10/6 Meters which don't employ ferites or iron powdered toroids at all.? Air core coils and/or transmission-line sections are compact enough on these bands; yield very generous matched bandwidth figures; and have much lower losses when compared to the toroidal transformers [tuned and un-tuned] being discussed throughout this thread.

Cheers,
Chuck