Here is another pretty clean LPF board .....I just sent the Gerber off, boards in a week.
- Uses 60mil RF lines over a full Ground plane for some level of impedance control.
- Uses 6 sets of the same 12V relays as used on the uBITX
- All relays have bifurcated and redundant contacts and switch both ends of the LPFs, normally grounded
- SMA Coax connector options on either end of the board.
- Board measures 99mm x 83mm
- Control is via switching 1 of 6 lines to ground with a remotely located rotary switch, can use a micro controlled mux later on
- LPF sockets are set up for Hans' "QRP Labs" LPFs, or make your own, or use the parts off the uBITX to build your own.
- Symmetrical LPFs can be mounted right side up or upside down, just watch the orientation (Grounds).
- If you are using T37 toroids, upside down LPFs should be about as tall as the?relays and make a thin "sandwich".
- Gaps in the "top" wiring are continued as "jumpers" on the back of the board.
73 Kees K5BCQ
|
Re: Harmonic performance - SSB vs CW
You send an audio signal of the digital mode over the mic input. If its not CW you¡¯re communicating with you¡¯ll be in SSB mode.
Joe
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Aug 15, 2018, at 6:32 PM, peder@... wrote:
Could you do a run on Digital?? We have a group planning on using this system to introduce hams to digital.? Does the digital approach simply use the CW system?
Peder, W7RPK
|
Re: Modular uBitx - "Ex: Harmonics"
Take a look at Hans new SSB/CW etc rig. And future 10 band capability......
|
Re: Modular uBitx - "Ex: Harmonics"
I think a modular transceiver, SDR or analog, is a great idea, and I'm seeing some links to transceivers that look very interesting. But, I think trying to convert the uBITX transceiver to something completely different may not be necessary. The uBITX hits a sweet spot, because it is not overly complicated and has the cost benefit of being just one board. For us hackers it provides a low cost radio component we can slice, dice, hacksaw, mod and accessorize anyway we wish.
The folks with the Ham Radio hacker sprit, that are slicing and dicing their radios, are helping to lead the way to another cost effective uBITX for the next round of experimentation. ?And, of course, use as is.
As technology advances, the point where it makes more sense to have a single replaceable component travels towards a singe replaceable component.
I'm sure at one time a company having 64GB of storage in their computing environment justified having a whole department of managers and specialist to manage the memory, make budget predictions, determine upgrade paths. ?And to, of course, become the department that had the power to be the authority to control who had access to this valuable asset.
Now 64GB of storage can come in a package shaped like Garfield the Cat. Nobody is worried about modularizing it, and nobody feels much pain if it is just tossed (recycled) if it fails.?
At some point, and the uBITX is getting close, just thinking of the whole transceiver as a replaceable component makes sense. But, that doesn't stop all of us that do like to hack on it, from doing so and making something better. Or treating the uBITX as just a component in a bigger system we are building.
Tom, wb6b
|
Is there a narrower filtering going on in CW?? 2.4 kHz won't be good
|
John:
I'm not getting how this Raduino is working. My issue is this. The
Arduino runs on 5V. When programmed as an output for I2C A4 and A5
drive up to 5 volts. I am seeing 4.6 volts. The SI5351 is supposed
to run on 3.3V. So we are over driving the SDA and SCL inputs by
trying to pull them above the 3.3 volts supply. In fact, the 3.3 V
supply is pulled up through the IC inputs to 4.4 volts. The
SI5351A isn't happy about this. This seems like a design problem,
unless the SDA and SCL lines are supposed to be driven as open
collector and the pull ups define the high level. This doesn't
seem to be happening either.
Howard
On 8/15/2018 8:05 PM, John wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
|
 This is the filter section of the codan Envoy. ?
Caps are under the pcb as you can see. ?Again this pa is rated at 125watts.
It¡¯s quite compact?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 16 Aug 2018, at 8:52 am, Adrian Waiblinger < vk5zbr@...> wrote: Codan NGT,? Its getting old in the tooth now, we are up to Envoys.? Will see if I can take a phone of that. Easily 125Watts, Codan design there stuff to be tough.? We have these radios in service for the last 15 years with a 1% failure rate in the out back, (quite harsh)
|
|
|
Re: Modular uBitx - "Ex: Harmonics"
Mr. Farhan,
We could sure use more that attitude these days! Your open architecture about the radio extends to your person!
I'm in for a new one, to play again.? These are a hoot, and I've been away since before chips, much less computers in radios.? My other rig is a KWM2.
Eddie
|
Re: uBitx v4 plus 3 AGC kits and 3 Pop Fix kits for sale
Any more AGC kits hidden away?
Eddie
|
appears to be a single relay switching of each filter, also.
|
Codan NGT,? Its getting old in the tooth now, we are up to Envoys.? Will see if I can take a phone of that. Easily 125Watts, Codan design there stuff to be tough.? We have these radios in service for the last 15 years with a 1% failure rate in the out back, (quite harsh)
On 16 August 2018 at 04:14, iz oos <and2oosiz2@...> wrote: Which Codan model? Can all these SMT caps handle 125w?
|
"comma" = "comms" in spellchecker language.
|
Hoeard:
You are correct. The menu is navigated with number plus Enter.
Please check that all comma parameters are as per the readme.txt including the line feed options.
Your oscilloscope test will tell you a lot too.
73, John
|
Re: Harmonic performance - SSB vs CW
Could you do a run on Digital?? We have a group planning on using this system to introduce hams to digital.? Does the digital approach simply use the CW system?
Peder, W7RPK
|
Re: Modular uBitx - "Ex: Harmonics"
Very cool, I may well bite on that qsx40.
But the *Bitx* rigs scratch an itch.
There's a need for a simple back-to-basics almost-all-analog radio
you can poke a scope probe into.?
Educational, for one, not many of us will figure out the DSP code of an SDR rig
to where we can take significant whacks at it.?
And an analog rig can sound better.
Jerry
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 02:44 PM, Roy Appleton wrote:
Or like this one!
?
?
|
Re: Modular uBitx - "Ex: Harmonics"
By utilizing a Teensy 3.6 board you are opening the way for DSP-based generation and reconstruction of SSB and other signals. For example a pair of 45 deg. symmetrical Hilbert transforms can take care of precise phasing to effectively suppress the carrier and unwanted sideband. Such Hilbert filter can simultaneously replace the second IF crystal filter, if the conversion is brought down to audio frequencies. Being a programmable filter, the Hilbert transform can also provide variable bandwidth for the desired mode of operation. Further audio processing, like the audio band equalizer that you apparently implemented is just as icing on the cake. With appropriate CODEC, the Teensy 3.6 with its DMA capabilities, can easily support 192 kHz sampling rate, which means that in principle you could show FFT an waterfall diagrams in real time for a much wider bandwidth. This becomes essentially a hybrid SDR architecture at a very low cost.
--Ron? ?N7FTZ? ?
On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:19 AM Jack Purdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum= [email protected]> wrote: Carl:
Some very good ideas.
I'm showing the Rev 2 JackAl board here, partly to show what we done, but also to show the mistakes we made along the way. (We're doing
the Rev 4 board now.) First, we've taken the buck converter off simply because it was too fragile when adjusting...far to easy to rip the adjusting screw right off the board. Second, the 7W audio amplifier (big IC on lower left) is stupid for the nano acres it takes plus its cost. Most users have powered speakers or can easily add them. We don't have a direct I2C connection, but we do have an SPI interface for the touch screen display. (Our display handles the video processing.) The rest are connections that work through the exiting ?BITX headers, which would not be the same for a new design. Still, the above is less than 100mm x 100mm and parts are being taken off. Obviously, we have the Si5351 chip onboard, but that probably should be on the main board. The SMD parts will be part of the PCB when sold.
To me, perhaps the most important thing we've done is bring out a bunch of pins, both digital and analog, for others to use. I hope the selected processor for such a project has a bunch available.
Jack, W8TEE
On Wednesday, August 15, 2018, 12:27:03 PM EDT, RCBoatGuy via Groups.Io <ijnfan-HamRadio= [email protected]> wrote:
Here's some features I'd like to see in any new design that shouldn't cost much, but would make life/testing/experimentation easier:
- Sockets for CPU boards on any new Raduino design.? (Teensyduino has this already, and I think the JackAl does, too)
- Sockets for relays, as these have been a frequent source of failure
- Move any pull-up resistors required onto the Raduino/Teensyduino/JackAl board and not rely on the user to wire them up.? Many users either failed to wire up the 4.7K external resistor correctly or had the connection fail later, causing the rig to immediately go into transmit on power-up.? This is easily avoided by having the required pull-ups on the Raduino/Teensyduino/JackAl board itself.
- Add 3-pin 0.1" input and output headers/jumpers?to each section (Bi-di Amps, Audio Amp, Mic Amp, BPF, PA, LPF, etc) on a given board so that the given section can be isolated and tested independently.? For inputs to a section, 1st pin is output from prior section, 2nd pin is input to current section, 3rd pin is GND.? ?For outputs from a section, 1st pin is output from section, 2nd pin is input to next section, 3rd pin is GND.? Normal operation uses shorting jumpers across pins 1 and 2 to allow signals to flow thru, but jumpers can be removed and test inputs/outputs connected via molex/etc connectors to pins 2 and 3 (or to all 3 pins if desired).? This also makes it easier to replace a given section with an external circuit for experimentation/modification.
- Room for extra I2C headers on the Raduino (Teensyduino already has this, not sure about the JackAl) that the user can install later if desired
- Would be nice if the modular design had the PA on a separate board so different PAs can be used based on user preference.? Having different boards for a IRF510 PA, a RD16HHF1 PA, etc, would be nice as the user can pick and choose what they want, or build their own much easier.
- Support for adding additional BPF/LPF for those that want 160M, 6M, etc
- As for the LPF relays, I'd recommend using a relay scheme like that on the mcHF transceiver.? Their approach minimized the number of relays (only 4 DPDT relays needed for 4 filters), but still had filter inputs and filter outputs going to different relays.
- Design board so that the Raduino/Teensyduino/JackAl board has no obstructions from parts and/or connectors along the entire edge of the radio board.? The Teensyduino had to design in special cut-outs to use with the current uBitX due to obstructions. It would be nice if cut-outs like this were not needed in the future.
- Si5351 on main board, not on Raduino/Teensyduino/JackAl
That's my 2 cents.? Take it for what it's worth.? :)
73,?
Carl, K0MWC
|
Re: Modular uBitx - "Ex: Harmonics"
Or like this one!
That's how I ended up here.
Gary
AG5TX
|
John:
I can get to the diagnostic menu. I assume I am to press 1 for the
core? I tried all of them, and I see nothing happening. I will
load my code, and look with a scope at the I2C bus.
Howard
On 8/15/2018 4:43 PM, John wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Howard:
The interaction with the diagnostic software is via the serial
port as I assumed the communication with the?display or the
encoder could be faulty.
Use the serial monitor of the IDE. See the README.txt file for the
comms parameters.
The i2c bus tests are:
1. Is the bus locked (lines pulled down)?
2. Is the si5351 at the expected address responding?
3. Can we write a byte to a register at that address?
If you get error 1 check the bus. You could change the blink
sketch to toggle A4 and A5 and measure the voltages (0V then
3.3V).
If you get error 2 it could be 3.3V not getting to si5351 or chip
dead, or other bus issue.
If you get error 3, prepare the (de)soldering station, chip gone
mad :(
73, John (VK2ETA)
|
Re: Modular uBitx - "Ex: Harmonics"
Or like this one!
Roy WA0YMH
On Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 3:54 PM Tom, wb6b < wb6b@...> wrote: If we are upping the processing power on-board, why don't we build a Soft Rock type of transceiver with all bands, relay switched filters and 10 watts out?
Using the onboard processor instead of an external laptop or PC for the signal processing.
Tom, wb6b
|
