Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
Well I didn¡¯t want to be so obvious to say you may consider reading through the history of the development of the alternate PA transistors in the forum.? This is a support group but it only works if you read what has happened previously so you are ¡°up to speed¡±.? That will probably clear up 99%+ of your confusion. ? MRM ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Evan Hand
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2019 6:38 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] ubitx schematic cleanup #ubitx ? MadRadioModder,
First thing is you are entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine.
With that understanding,
1 - At first I was confused on the schematic, and I have passed my US Extra exam, so your assumption on Everyone is off by at least one.? I thought that it was an option to add the second devices in parallel.? I had to ask the question to get the correct answer.?
2 - The diagram is very congested in that area of the schematic.? I had difficulty in just reading the second value of the device, and the pin out numbers were so mixed in with the nonessential wires so as they were hard to read with my 60+ year old eyes.
3 - Though I have not done much in Amateur radio for over 30+ years, I am an engineer and have been dealing with schematics for electronics for all of those years and then some.
4 - The alternate parts are not provided by HF Signals, so not sure why they are even there on the documentation from them.
I appreciate the comments against my idea of cleaning up the schematic (Again thank-you Curt and Ted,? I continue to learn from both of you),? If you are stating that this is common for amateur radio documentation, then I will stand corrected.? In the work that I have done, this type of ambiguity is not acceptable.
I do not appreciate the derogatory comments.? If the intent is to prove that you are better then me, then fine, I concede that point in only the current acceptability of current radio documentation standards, assuming you are correct (still only your opinion at this point).
This is not the first time that I am trying to make it easier for others new to the ubitx journey.? Obviously I had worked out that both parts were not there, or would not have mentioned it.
Again, My Opinions.? I will continue to state them in as reasonable a fashion as I can.? I started a separate thread just so any one not interested can mute the thread, or me individually, if they so desire.? I reserve that right as well.
73
Evan
AC9TU? -- ¡_. _._
|
Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
Thank-you Raj for the details.?
Would still like to see the HF Signals web pages updated, at least to the current shipping version and handle the v4 as archive like v3.
73
Evan
AC9TU
|
Many Thanks Ben!
Tom - N8TPN
|
Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
Evan,
The missing transistors are for alternate use of RDD series. You remove the IRFs and replace with RDD16.
RDD pin outs are different so you have been provided alternate holes on PCB.
The missing caps places are there if you want to put them in to compensate for flattening the power. Options only!
Raj
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
At 23-02-19, you wrote: Not sure who is the correct person to send this to in a private email, so created a new thread for all to see.
When I first started on the ubitx journey, I was often confused by the differences between what was on the published schematic and what was actually provide. Currently there are 2 that I am aware of:
1 - Q942 and Q952 do not exsist, and I am not sure would work as shown (most times you need some sort of resistor or other feedback to keep 2 parallel active devices sharing the load). Regardless, they are not there
2 - C210 and C216 also do not exist (though at least they do have a 0 as the value}.
I know that these are minor points, however there is enough things to learn without having to verify that the schematic is in fact what is on the board.
This should not take that much effort, as it is just removing the components from the original and saving a new PDF.
The above are my opinions only
73
Evan
AC9TU
|
Broadcast is one thing, if you're listening to hams running AM, many of them are running old equipment that drifts, so you'd be constantly re-tuning to zero beat.
Vince - K8ZW.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 02/22/2019 03:17 PM, Don, ND6T via Groups.Io wrote: Jim,
Why a separate AM detector? When the reference oscillator is calibrated
then you just tune to the carrier frequency and it is zero beat. I've
been listening to broadcast on the BITX since I first went digital with
them. It works better than the normal AM detector since the carrier
isn't necessary. No distortion. Exalted carrier.
Biggest issue is the narrow filter band pass. But it's good enough for
my ears.
73,
Don
--
K8ZW
|
Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
MadRadioModder,
First thing is you are entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine.
With that understanding,
1 - At first I was confused on the schematic, and I have passed my US Extra exam, so your assumption on Everyone is off by at least one.? I thought that it was an option to add the second devices in parallel.? I had to ask the question to get the correct answer.?
2 - The diagram is very congested in that area of the schematic.? I had difficulty in just reading the second value of the device, and the pin out numbers were so mixed in with the nonessential wires so as they were hard to read with my 60+ year old eyes.
3 - Though I have not done much in Amateur radio for over 30+ years, I am an engineer and have been dealing with schematics for electronics for all of those years and then some.
4 - The alternate parts are not provided by HF Signals, so not sure why they are even there on the documentation from them.
I appreciate the comments against my idea of cleaning up the schematic (Again thank-you Curt and Ted,? I continue to learn from both of you),? If you are stating that this is common for amateur radio documentation, then I will stand corrected.? In the work that I have done, this type of ambiguity is not acceptable.
I do not appreciate the derogatory comments.? If the intent is to prove that you are better then me, then fine, I concede that point in only the current acceptability of current radio documentation standards, assuming you are correct (still only your opinion at this point).
This is not the first time that I am trying to make it easier for others new to the ubitx journey.? Obviously I had worked out that both parts were not there, or would not have mentioned it.
Again, My Opinions.? I will continue to state them in as reasonable a fashion as I can.? I started a separate thread just so any one not interested can mute the thread, or me individually, if they so desire.? I reserve that right as well.
73
Evan
AC9TU?
|
Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
The boards (and I¡¯m sure the Gerber files) so both parts¡ so why wouldn¡¯t the schematic?? Everyone who passes a ham test knows you don¡¯t use both parts together. ? MRM ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Evan Hand
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2019 1:31 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] ubitx schematic cleanup #ubitx ? Ted,
Thank-you for pointing that out.? I understand now that this is an alternate device, however I would have preferred not showing two devices in parallel on the schematic, with the pin out labeled by the device.? Rather, put the pin out in a table with letters on the schematic that are resolved by the device and pin assignments in the table that lists the alternative devices.? That is what I have seen in alternate device choices.? Regardless, are there any plans by HR Signals to provide boards with the RD15HV1 parts?? If not, then the schematic should represent the version that is being provided.? In other words, put the correct PDF on the HF Signals web page so we know what we are getting.
My opinion.
73
Evan -- ¡_. _._
|
Wack me again... (haven't finished my coffee!) ... it's in the files section here in a subfolder 'K6QV'
Ben - K6QV
|
Wack me upside the head, should have thought of that ... I've uploaded the files I got... I cannot vouch that it makes a functioning uBitx, I can only vouch that a Chinese vendor used the files and sent me PCB boards.
|
Re: Ubitx - using Amateurradiokits.in AGC
#ubitx
I have one of those kits that I decided not to use. It is just as received from Sunil, if interested, let me know.
--
72 and God bless
KD4EPG
|
Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
Ted,
Thank-you for pointing that out.? I understand now that this is an alternate device, however I would have preferred not showing two devices in parallel on the schematic, with the pin out labeled by the device.? Rather, put the pin out in a table with letters on the schematic that are resolved by the device and pin assignments in the table that lists the alternative devices.? That is what I have seen in alternate device choices.? Regardless, are there any plans by HR Signals to provide boards with the RD15HV1 parts?? If not, then the schematic should represent the version that is being provided.? In other words, put the correct PDF on the HF Signals web page so we know what we are getting.
My opinion.
73
Evan
|
Re: Ubitx - using Amateurradiokits.in AGC
#ubitx
Thank you. ?The picture helps confirm I put the parts in the right places. ?Appreciate the clear picture. Harder to see on the manual ?copies.?
Dan. ?W3BU
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Feb 23, 2019, at 2:25 AM, Wayne Leake < wayneleake@...> wrote: Just thought, I should have added this picture of a finished board, showing the parts nicely.
<dummyfile.0.part> --
|
Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
I'll wager those extra final section reservations will accommodate a pair of? ?RD15HVF1, subject to checking pinout. I know they have 2 of the leads reversed as compared with the IRF510's.? The former are true RF devices and are rated to do well at 12v.
I'll let the class know how that works out, when my pair come in and I shove them into a version 5 board.
Ted K3RTA
|
Re: ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
Evan
thanks for many thoughtful and useful posts here to this list.? they certainly have helped me.??
the 2 different PA's are alternatives (one of our local builders questioned the same thing).? I have no clue why the designer left them there even in v5 -- but it does keep us on our toes.? I haven't researched those caps -but I would imagine there is a place for them in the layout - for those making modifications.??
As you know Farhan I trust stays quite busy - otherwise we would not be blessed to have a ubitx.? What might seem small to us may not fit into his schedule.??
Glad to journey with you.? I hope to report when my ubitx gets measured it passes spurious, and I am toying with a couple of the AGC circuits (I now realize I may have installed them wrong - yes when the style of the schematic, that leaves off the off-board components confuses me!)
73 Curt WB8YYY
|
ubitx schematic cleanup
#ubitx
Not sure who is the correct person to send this to in a private email, so created a new thread for all to see.
When I first started on the ubitx journey, I was often confused by the differences between what was on the published schematic and what was actually provide.? Currently there are 2 that I am aware of:
1 - Q942 and Q952 do not exsist, and I am not sure would work as shown (most times you need some sort of resistor or other feedback to keep 2 parallel active devices sharing the load).? Regardless, they are not there
2 - C210 and C216 also do not exist (though at least they do have a 0 as the value}.
I know that these are minor points, however there is enough things to learn without having to verify that the schematic is in fact what is on the board.
This should not take that much effort, as it is just removing the components from the original and saving a new PDF.
The above are my opinions only
73
Evan
AC9TU?
|
Re: Bitx-40 Arrived Today - Advice Solicited on My Plan
Thanks, good suggestions all. I assume you do as much of the wire up as possible on the bench, and then put it in the case?
Pat
Just a few things. I would do some partial assembly of the raduino, main board etc to get a feel for things. Many in qrp community like bnc, of course idea is to do it the way you want it. For some folk in the world, that ptt and microphone element get them on the air. Yes normally open ptt.
I suggest wiring up both headphone and speaker. You may find audio output lacking to drive a speaker. Some folk use an external amplified speaker, or add an internal audio amplifier.
I suggest you visit some websites from around the world that describe bitx assembly.
Curt
|
Re: Bitx-40 Arrived Today - Advice Solicited on My Plan
There were eight of them, and they were all the same size. Those look like the standoffs the come with the ubitx kit. I watched a video of a guy assembling that kit with a custom ubitx case, and he had a hard time figuring them out. I do not see how those would attach the display to the raduino, maybe somebody could post a photo of how they used these standoffs to do that.
?Are these what you mean by stand offs? ?4 are used to mount the main board, and the other 4 to mount the display to the raduion.
|
Re: Bitx-40 Arrived Today - Advice Solicited on My Plan
I just went to eBay and searched for 10 turn 10k pots. This was recommended by somebody here to make tuning more precise. There are dozens of them. Same with the speaker, momentary switch and SO-239. Bear in mind, I may not use any of them and just build with the supplied parts. TThey were all dirt cheap.The part that came with the kit I am pretty sure I am not going to use is the supplied PTT switch.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 7:50 AM SAM R BURNES via Groups.Io <sburnes= [email protected]> wrote: Just getting started on my 40. Is there a preferred pot??
Would you please share the dealer and part number for the pot?
Sam
WY8V ?Are these what you mean by stand offs? ?4 are used to mount the main board, and the other 4 to mount the display to the raduion.
<image.png>
Plain and simple. ?
|
I know that this is an old thread, but it was never clear exactly what the files being converted were for...was this a conversion of the posted M0HYT thru-hole uBitx gerber files?
From the tone of the posts, it sounds very similar to the problems I ran into when trying to get the M0HYT boards fabricated at a PCB vendor.
All the vendors I tried said that there was a problem with the drill definitions.
If these are the files for the M0HYT uBitx, was any thought given to posting them to the files area here so that others could take advantage of the converted gerber files?
I for one would really appreciate getting my hands on gerbers for the M0HYT thru-hole uBitx that are acceptable to the PCB vendors in China.
Thanks and 73,
Tom - N8TPN
|
Re: Bitx-40 Arrived Today - Advice Solicited on My Plan
Just getting started on my 40. Is there a preferred pot??
Would you please share the dealer and part number for the pot?
Sam
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Feb 22, 2019, at 10:43 PM, Wayne Leake < wayneleake@...> wrote: ?Are these what you mean by stand offs? ?4 are used to mount the main board, and the other 4 to mount the display to the raduion.
<image.png>
Plain and simple. ?
|
MadRadioModder
Raj vu2zap
Ted