|
Re: New V3 encoder shaft problem.
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýMy feelings on this issue is that the IDC male header should have been put on the opposite side from the encoders. ? Barry ? Sent from for Windows ? From: Dave, N1AI
Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2024 6:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BITX20] New V3 encoder shaft problem. ? My earlier thought was to remove the female ribbon connector and replace the ribbon cable with a ten conductor shielded cable soldered directly to the encoder board, then put that encoder into a case and use it like a mouse.? I'm not favoring that approach right now because the cable I was able to find is pretty darn stiff, so it won't really act like a mouse.? It's probably a bad idea overall.? I suppose removing both the female connector and the male end off the ribbon cable and soldering the ribbon cable's wires directly to the encoder board would lower the profile especially if you pre-trimmed the individual wires to length, but not exactly an ideal approach either.? At least it's one that could be accomplished without buying more stuff, no?? I'm no fan of getting out the soldering iron, I am happier working with software. ? |
|
Re: FT8 Pull Request submitted - Signal Level "+" sign
Preface: I know almost nothing about coding.? My question is, how will the logging program respond to a 0(zero) report value since it is unsigned? David On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 18:39 Steve Beckman <n3sb@...> wrote: Just submitted a PR to add a "+" sign to FT8 signal reports that are not negative (including the "+" for positive signal levels does appear to be the FT8 convention) |
|
Re: New V3 encoder shaft problem.
My earlier thought was to remove the female ribbon connector and replace the ribbon cable with a ten conductor shielded cable soldered directly to the encoder board, then put that encoder into a case and use it like a mouse.? I'm not favoring that approach right now because the cable I was able to find is pretty darn stiff, so it won't really act like a mouse.? It's probably a bad idea overall.? I suppose removing both the female connector and the male end off the ribbon cable and soldering the ribbon cable's wires directly to the encoder board would lower the profile especially if you pre-trimmed the individual wires to length, but not exactly an ideal approach either.? At least it's one that could be accomplished without buying more stuff, no?? I'm no fan of getting out the soldering iron, I am happier working with software.
-- Regards, Dave, N1AI |
|
Re: New V3 encoder shaft problem.
Yes Dave, you are correct, the V3 board is on the top and the V2 board on the bottom. The V2 encoders where just barely holding on by about 2-3 threads, I was very careful not to to over tighten them thus stripping what little threads are visible. The obvious solution to me is to use a lower profile ribbon cable plug that would allow the encoders to rest closer to the front panel, however that comes with it's own problems because both plugs would have to be replaced, the one on the radio board and the one on the encoder board, maybe it would be easier to just replace the encoders with longer shaft versions. Another way to do this would be to install standoffs to the encoder board and screw it down to the front panel, (of course this would require drilling holes on the front of the radio), thus abandoning the encoder nuts all together as the means of holding the panel in place.
Joel N6ALT |
|
Re: New V3 encoder shaft problem.
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 04:21 PM, Joel Caulkins/N6ALT wrote:
...the threads on the new encoders are too short. The ribbon cable connector is too tall to allow the encoder threads to poke through the hole. The old encoders just barely made it through but the new ones will never reach.Interesting.? I had already eyeballed that situation and was planning to investigate further, but you beat me to it. I presume your photo shows the V3 encoders with the shorter threads on the top, and V2 encoders with the longer threads on the bottom. I too would like some help resolving this issue. ? -- Regards, Dave, N1AI |
|
New V3 encoder shaft problem.
When I received my V3 board a couple of weeks ago I just swapped the new board in for the old V2 board, leaving everything else in place. Everything has been mostly working until this morning, the main tuning encoder failed so I proceeded to exchange the new encoder board that came with my V3 board when I discovered it can't work because the threads on the new encoders are too short. The ribbon cable connector is too tall to allow the encoder threads to poke through the hole. The old encoders just barely made it through but the new ones will never reach. Does anybody at HFSignals check this stuff before shipping? This is a real problem that cant easily be solved without ordering new encoders with longer shafts and threads or HFSignals sending new encoder boards out. I'm trying not be too critical of this radio but I'm beginning to loose my patience.
Joel N6ALT |
|
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 03:57 PM, Joel Caulkins/N6ALT wrote:
It sounds like most everybody's results are the same, the SWR meter does not work in V3.That might be an over-simplification of what I wrote.? I don't think I've made an extensive enough exploration to reach the conclusion that it doesn't work, all I've concluded so far is that it gets more accurate ( agrees better with other meters ) when I use more drive power when driving a well-matched load.?? ? -- Regards, Dave, N1AI |
|
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 01:46 PM, JJ - W9JES wrote:
Power output is fine and displayed correctly.Interesting.? I find with my V3 it is under-reporting the output power, two different external power meters report higher values than the internal one. The calibration sheet that came with the unit has no mention of whether the SWR was adjusted or checked. I read in a another thread stating that no calibration is required by the operatorPerhaps this post?? and that possibly the diodes are suspect??says "Variations in the diodes used in the power meter make it necessary to use calibration of the meter.".? Not sure if this makes diodes suspects or not.? I do read a lot of posts here about those diodes but haven't dug into the issue myself. I checked user_settings.ini and it shows #fwdpower=0 #vswr=100 and bridge=100. Are these settings correct? Is metercal required to adjust the SWR reading? I haven't opened the sBItx yet to inspect the hardware or measure diodes.The same link (which is probably what you are reading?) and which is written for the V2 hardware says: My observation is similar to what others are reporting, you get more accurate SWR readings with more power, and probably need to go beyond four watts to get enough signal to get a more accurate SWR reading.? I've seen my SWR reading move from 1.0 to 1.1 after going from five watts to fifteen watts into a tuned 40 meter dipole.? Your results may vary. -- Regards, Dave, N1AI |
|
Re: sBitx Logging issue - and Dupe Checking
Ashar,
you say that "2. The other station replies back with your rst. Now that the reports are exchanged, you enter this in your logger and press the LOG button. The qso is logged." When the connection is not completed because the RRR or RR73 confirming the reception is not received - then the entry saved in the log file should be deleted. Where can this be done? Or some data is not correct and after saving it is still possible to see what needs to be corrected - but it is not possible to correct or edit the input saved in the log file. Is there any concrete solution to this? If this is the final log, then it's not finished! Am I waiting for a solution or will the forum solve this too? -- Gyula HA3HZ |
Dave, N1AI
WK4DS
Joel Caulkins/N6ALT
HA3HZ