Hmmm...that leaves 26t bytes unused. Can you run it?
Jack, W8TEE
On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 2:18:28 PM EDT, W2CTX via groups.io <w2ctx@...> wrote:
Played a little:
bands.cpp
#include "bands.h"
//#include "utils.h"
constexpr Band_t bands [] PROGMEM { //? {?????? 0UL,????? 255UL, 255, "U8"},//Utility conversion option //? {?????? 0UL,??? 65535UL, 254, "UF"},//Utility conversion option //? {? 530000UL,? 1700000UL, 253, "AM"},//Broadcast AM, actually centers at 268, but uint8 can't do that //? { 1800000UL,? 2000000UL, 160, "A0"},//0xA0 is 160 ? { 3500000UL,? 4000000UL,? 80, "80"}, ? { 5330500UL,? 5403500UL,? 60, "60"}, ? { 7000000UL,? 7300000UL,? 40, "40"}, ? {10100000UL, 10150000UL,? 30, "30"}, ? {14000000UL, 14350000UL,? 20, "20"}, ? {18068000UL, 18168000UL,? 17, "17"}, ? {21000000UL, 21450000UL,? 15, "15"}, ? {24890000UL, 24990000UL,? 12, "12"}, //? {26965000UL, 27405000UL,? 11, "CB"},//Citizen's Band ? {28000000UL, 29700000UL,? 10, "10"}, };
ubitxv6.ino
//#include <Wire.h>
#include "encoder.h"
#include "menu.h"
#include "menu_main.h"
//#include "morse.h"
#include "pin_definitions.h"
#include "push_button.h"
#include "nano_gui.h"
//#include "settings.h"
#include "setup.h"
#include "si5351.h"
#include "touch.h"
#include "tuner.h"
#include "ui_touch.h"
results 1.8.13:
Sketch uses 30694 bytes (99%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30720 bytes.
Global variables use 819 bytes (39%) of dynamic memory, leaving 1229 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2048 bytes.
On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 2:04:06 AM EDT, Reed N <greenkid336600+groupsio@...> wrote:
Well that's annoying. Since obviously the code didn't change between Arduino versions, that means there's 400 bytes of extra Arduino bloat being built into the new version! :/
Reed
-- Jack, W8TEE
|
Re: ANTUINO antenna analzer CERTAIN CLARIFICATIONS REG
Hi Peter, Although the Region 1 20M band? may be close to 2X as wide as 40M, the frequency is also 2X higher- making the percentage? bandwidth virtually the same. ? Regards, ? Dale W4OP ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter LB0K
Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2020 3:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] ANTUINO antenna analzer CERTAIN CLARIFICATIONS REG ? Muthu
There are always new questions, these continue until one realises one is helping others. This is when life gets more interesting.
I omitted making any mention of current, Common Mode, chokes (aka baluns) at the feedpoint, Raj had put that forward, and so has Iz.. Without such a choke at the feedpoint the outside of the feeder coax will ALSO be part of the radiating aerial, and could be making part of an extra resonance. Certainly without such a choke you will easily get the 'RF in the shack' which you now complain of.
My solution is to this phenomenon would be to make a balun/current choke for the feedpoint, and another one for the feeder just before it enters your house or shack. These should stop the RF energy that is obviously following the cable down from the antenna, they won't stop direct radiation from the antenna.? ?
Another factor in clearing RF feedback is to ensure you do have a resonant load in the antenna, looking at your measurement results you appear to have a very low Q antenna, I doubt if you are radiating much energy at all.
Go back to Start!? - Remake your antenna with a current choke in the feedpoint. Make sure you trim the 40m section first, and then the 20m part. Using a ferrite core in the current choke will allow it to cover a wider bandwidth, but at a pinch one can wind feeder cable around any magnetic material, even a mild steel bolt will make a difference. Although the most effective, Ferrite Rings are not the only
sort of possible core material.
One expects to see on 40m something like a 1.4:1 to 1.7:1 response at 7.1MHz rising to somewhere over 2:1 or 2.5:1 at the band edges. These are not catastrophic results, instead they are expected.
On 20m one should expect higher values at the band edges maybe 3:1 to 3.5.:1. In Region 1 the band is almost twice the the span of 40m.
As another has pointed out 1.1:1 or even 1:1 matches are not the be-all or end-all aims.
Off you go and experiment a lot more.
And just maybe you'll find time to make contacts on the air, I look forward to a QSO, on 20m?.
Remember to waterproof all the coax connections with vulcanising tape and then cover with black electrical tape to prevent degradation in sunlight.
Peter
|
Played a little:
bands.cpp
#include "bands.h"
//#include "utils.h"
constexpr Band_t bands [] PROGMEM { //? {?????? 0UL,????? 255UL, 255, "U8"},//Utility conversion option //? {?????? 0UL,??? 65535UL, 254, "UF"},//Utility conversion option //? {? 530000UL,? 1700000UL, 253, "AM"},//Broadcast AM, actually centers at 268, but uint8 can't do that //? { 1800000UL,? 2000000UL, 160, "A0"},//0xA0 is 160 ? { 3500000UL,? 4000000UL,? 80, "80"}, ? { 5330500UL,? 5403500UL,? 60, "60"}, ? { 7000000UL,? 7300000UL,? 40, "40"}, ? {10100000UL, 10150000UL,? 30, "30"}, ? {14000000UL, 14350000UL,? 20, "20"}, ? {18068000UL, 18168000UL,? 17, "17"}, ? {21000000UL, 21450000UL,? 15, "15"}, ? {24890000UL, 24990000UL,? 12, "12"}, //? {26965000UL, 27405000UL,? 11, "CB"},//Citizen's Band ? {28000000UL, 29700000UL,? 10, "10"}, };
ubitxv6.ino
//#include <Wire.h>
#include "encoder.h"
#include "menu.h"
#include "menu_main.h"
//#include "morse.h"
#include "pin_definitions.h"
#include "push_button.h"
#include "nano_gui.h"
//#include "settings.h"
#include "setup.h"
#include "si5351.h"
#include "touch.h"
#include "tuner.h"
#include "ui_touch.h"
results 1.8.13:
Sketch uses 30694 bytes (99%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30720 bytes.
Global variables use 819 bytes (39%) of dynamic memory, leaving 1229 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2048 bytes.
On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 2:04:06 AM EDT, Reed N <greenkid336600+groupsio@...> wrote:
Well that's annoying. Since obviously the code didn't change between Arduino versions, that means there's 400 bytes of extra Arduino bloat being built into the new version! :/
Reed
|
Arv:
I'm not sure how to address it. One way would be to remove a header file include and measure the 1.8.12 and 1.8.13 sizes to see if the impact is uniform. However, that would not test the core libraries. Also, any observed changes could be in the code generator and not the library itself. It's an interesting problem but, unfortunately, I'm up to my butt in alligators right now and don't have the time to investigate. Maybe later.
Jack, W8TEE
On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 12:31:39 PM EDT, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:
Reed & Jack
I wonder if the bloat might be from some of the #includes or maybe?
in an update to the automatically included arduino.h ?? How to find? where it is coming from may be the real issue.
Next I wonder if it might be overcome by modifying compile parameters? such as adding more levels of optimization...?
Arv _._
Well that's annoying. Since obviously the code didn't change between Arduino versions, that means there's 400 bytes of extra Arduino bloat being built into the new version! :/
Reed
--
Jack, W8TEE
|
Reed & Jack
I wonder if the bloat might be from some of the #includes or maybe?
in an update to the automatically included arduino.h ?? How to find? where it is coming from may be the real issue.
Next I wonder if it might be overcome by modifying compile parameters? such as adding more levels of optimization...?
Arv _._
Well that's annoying. Since obviously the code didn't change between Arduino versions, that means there's 400 bytes of extra Arduino bloat being built into the new version! :/
Reed
|
Got the end-fed a little higher yesterday in an inverted V and was receiving pretty good. Used headphones to hear the weaker signals so I think I'm in ok shape. However, I don't think there's any audio from my microphone. I did drill a bigger hole in it, but don't think that helped. I've read many posts here about the mics, so I'll have to decide which path I'm going down to get that part working.
Thanks again for the help. I appreciate you all.
--
Mark, kb9woo
Milwaukee, WI uBITX v6
|
Re: has the supply chain for the uBITX been affected by the covid-19
I think I know the case:
I brought everything out to the front, except for the power, antenna, and ground connections. The mic is made from PCV pipe and the cartridge shipped with the kit. I have the PTT micro switch snapped into a small hole in the tubing and a dab of hot glue to hold it in place. The green stuff is heat-shrink tubing which also helps hold the switch in place. The case works well and should be big enough for the new ?BITX.
I also used this case for a V5 ?BITX with the JackAl board. That's a good case, too, but more expensive:
Jack, W8TEE
On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 10:15:24 AM EDT, McRuss via groups.io <wtrrtw@...> wrote:
A little off topic but on March 9, Banggood shipped the enclosure for my uBitx V-6.? On June 18th, I received it, two days after Banggood issued a credit because I was sure it was lost in shipment.? So now I'm working on fitting the radio into the box, a bit of a challenge but I know it has been done. Anyone here who has done it is welcome to share some tips on how they did it.? Oh, the enclosure is plastic with a 'handle' that transforms into a support.
Russ
K5FJR
-- Jack, W8TEE
|
Re: has the supply chain for the uBITX been affected by the covid-19
A little off topic but on March 9, Banggood shipped the enclosure for my uBitx V-6.? On June 18th, I received it, two days after Banggood issued a credit because I was sure it was lost in shipment.? So now I'm working on fitting the radio into the box, a bit of a challenge but I know it has been done. Anyone here who has done it is welcome to share some tips on how they did it.? Oh, the enclosure is plastic with a 'handle' that transforms into a support.
Russ
K5FJR
|
Re: ANTUINO antenna analzer CERTAIN CLARIFICATIONS REG
Sorry, My rep[ly? obviously was not meant for the ubitX group. Dale W4OP ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter LB0K
Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2020 3:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] ANTUINO antenna analzer CERTAIN CLARIFICATIONS REG ? Muthu
There are always new questions, these continue until one realises one is helping others. This is when life gets more interesting.
I omitted making any mention of current, Common Mode, chokes (aka baluns) at the feedpoint, Raj had put that forward, and so has Iz.. Without such a choke at the feedpoint the outside of the feeder coax will ALSO be part of the radiating aerial, and could be making part of an extra resonance. Certainly without such a choke you will easily get the 'RF in the shack' which you now complain of.
My solution is to this phenomenon would be to make a balun/current choke for the feedpoint, and another one for the feeder just before it enters your house or shack. These should stop the RF energy that is obviously following the cable down from the antenna, they won't stop direct radiation from the antenna.? ?
Another factor in clearing RF feedback is to ensure you do have a resonant load in the antenna, looking at your measurement results you appear to have a very low Q antenna, I doubt if you are radiating much energy at all.
Go back to Start!? - Remake your antenna with a current choke in the feedpoint. Make sure you trim the 40m section first, and then the 20m part. Using a ferrite core in the current choke will allow it to cover a wider bandwidth, but at a pinch one can wind feeder cable around any magnetic material, even a mild steel bolt will make a difference. Although the most effective, Ferrite Rings are not the only
sort of possible core material.
One expects to see on 40m something like a 1.4:1 to 1.7:1 response at 7.1MHz rising to somewhere over 2:1 or 2.5:1 at the band edges. These are not catastrophic results, instead they are expected.
On 20m one should expect higher values at the band edges maybe 3:1 to 3.5.:1. In Region 1 the band is almost twice the the span of 40m.
As another has pointed out 1.1:1 or even 1:1 matches are not the be-all or end-all aims.
Off you go and experiment a lot more.
And just maybe you'll find time to make contacts on the air, I look forward to a QSO, on 20m?.
Remember to waterproof all the coax connections with vulcanising tape and then cover with black electrical tape to prevent degradation in sunlight.
Peter
|
Re: ANTUINO antenna analzer CERTAIN CLARIFICATIONS REG
Hi Peter, Thank you for the inquiry into our CW/SSB ??VHF/UHF Omnidirectional antennas. Despite 80+ hour weeks, we are running (xx) days behind- thank you for your patience. ? Please note- we are not accepting amateur orders until likely the 3rd week of July. We have a large backorder log and milcom work. Our apologies. Pricing is as follows: OA-50 ?$119 OA-144 $84 OA-222 $79 OA-432 $79? Type N All of the above come standard with silver/teflon SO-239. Type N (silver/teflon) is a $5 option ? ? Stacking Kits: SK-50? $56 SK-144 $54 SK-222 $54 SK-432 N/A ? Allow $17 U.P.S. shipping. On some orders, we can combine cartons to reduce freight costs. Please email us with multiple item orders so we can determine if we can save you money. We accept PayPal to parinc1@... or send us a check. ? If you are looking at other antennas, and we encourage you to: Please ask the manufacturer for an azimuth plot of their antenna or at least an NEC model. Our anechoic tests:
illustrate that the Omniangle design has the best omni pattern in the industry. ? Also inquire into what means they have employed to reduce common mode RF on the outside of the feedline and/or the mast. If this issue is not address, then the feedline/mast ?becomes? part of the antenna. The Omniangles series address these? two important issues as follows: 1. The antenna structure is isolated from the mast- so no? RF on the mast. 2. Employs a built in choke with >2K choking resistance- so no RF on the? outside of the coax. ? PAR uses aluminum hardware (screws/lockwashers which are more expensive than stainless) in the RF critical junctions so that not only will the? antenna perform well today, but? also years down the road? because of the aluminum to aluminum contact with no galvanic corrosion as would be the case with steel screws. Mounting hardware is of course stainless steel. ? Regards, ? ? 
Dale Parfitt BSEE/MSEE PAR Electronics, Inc.
Voice: (828)743-1338 Toll Free FAX: (866)304-8479 ? ? ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter LB0K
Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2020 3:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] ANTUINO antenna analzer CERTAIN CLARIFICATIONS REG ? Muthu
There are always new questions, these continue until one realises one is helping others. This is when life gets more interesting.
I omitted making any mention of current, Common Mode, chokes (aka baluns) at the feedpoint, Raj had put that forward, and so has Iz.. Without such a choke at the feedpoint the outside of the feeder coax will ALSO be part of the radiating aerial, and could be making part of an extra resonance. Certainly without such a choke you will easily get the 'RF in the shack' which you now complain of.
My solution is to this phenomenon would be to make a balun/current choke for the feedpoint, and another one for the feeder just before it enters your house or shack. These should stop the RF energy that is obviously following the cable down from the antenna, they won't stop direct radiation from the antenna.? ?
Another factor in clearing RF feedback is to ensure you do have a resonant load in the antenna, looking at your measurement results you appear to have a very low Q antenna, I doubt if you are radiating much energy at all.
Go back to Start!? - Remake your antenna with a current choke in the feedpoint. Make sure you trim the 40m section first, and then the 20m part. Using a ferrite core in the current choke will allow it to cover a wider bandwidth, but at a pinch one can wind feeder cable around any magnetic material, even a mild steel bolt will make a difference. Although the most effective, Ferrite Rings are not the only
sort of possible core material.
One expects to see on 40m something like a 1.4:1 to 1.7:1 response at 7.1MHz rising to somewhere over 2:1 or 2.5:1 at the band edges. These are not catastrophic results, instead they are expected.
On 20m one should expect higher values at the band edges maybe 3:1 to 3.5.:1. In Region 1 the band is almost twice the the span of 40m.
As another has pointed out 1.1:1 or even 1:1 matches are not the be-all or end-all aims.
Off you go and experiment a lot more.
And just maybe you'll find time to make contacts on the air, I look forward to a QSO, on 20m?.
Remember to waterproof all the coax connections with vulcanising tape and then cover with black electrical tape to prevent degradation in sunlight.
Peter
|
All:
Is this a great group of people or what? Almost 100 individuals offered their time to help read my new intro C book. To everyone one, thank you!
There is no way that I can read and do justice to the comments from 100 readers, so I need to shut down the volunteer Beta readers appeal and consider it closed. I will likely thin the number to perhaps a dozen or so readers. I'll do this in the next two days.
Again, thank you for your support...it is sincerely appreciated.
73,
Jack, W8TEE
-- Jack, W8TEE
|
Re: IF shift needed for listening correctly V4 UBITX
#bitx20help
Andrea,
There are two possibilities:
1 - You loaded the wrong version of the KD8CEC software.? There is a version for the v5 and v6 ubitx (uBITXV5), and one for v2/v3/v4 (you want this one-uBITXV234).? This is due to the different SSB filter frequencies used in the later versions.
2 - The other possibility is that the ubitx needs to be calibrated.?
By chance did you change the Nano to keep the original if needed to be restored?? The calibration data is specific to a ubitx mainboard/Raduino combination and stored in the EEPROM area of the Nano.? This area is not part of the "Sketch" or program part of the firmware that is downloaded.? It is kept in the Nano.? What this means is that any time that you change the Nano, you will need to recalibrate both the BFO and the frequency (called Calibration).
If you understand the differences, you can use the v6 calibration process.? Otherwise, the steps in general are:
1 - Tune in the BFO using the BFO Tuning aid, or an audio spectrum analyzer program to center the noise of a clear frequency between 300 and 3,000 Hz.? Press the PTT when done.
2 - Use a known AM station (WWV on 5 or 10 MHz is best) to "zero beat" the station's AM carrier.? This is done by first setting the dial to read the frequency of the station, then going into calibration mode, and adjusting for the zero beat.? The final step is to press the PTT, wait 15 seconds, and then reboot.??
3 - go back and redo the BFO adjustment.
Here is Ashhar Farhan's BFO tuning for the v6:
And the BFO Tuning Aid:
Note that the steps to get to the settings is the only real difference with the v4 vs the v6.? You will need to go into the "Yellow Box" mode (press in the encoder) of the CEC software to get to the calibration and BFO setting screens.? Once done, there is a Memory Manager program from KD8CEC that can be connected via the USB port and used to save all of the configuration data if you later need to reload software on the Nano.
GitHub link to the KD8CEC v1.2 firmware:
?
You want to use the uBITXV234 folder.
I hope this helps with your calibration issue.
73
Evan
AC9TU
|
IF shift needed for listening correctly V4 UBITX
#bitx20help
Hi,?
since the beginning I'm experiencing the fact that I nee to move the IF aroundf 1800 - 2000 (it varies a little thorugh the different band) for receiving the correct modulation.
I was thinking it was depending by a different firmware (I was using the nextion compatible fw) but after i decided to go back to the original implementation this issue remains the same.
What I can do?
|
Re: has the supply chain for the uBITX been affected by the covid-19
Hello John,
Thanks for inquiring.??
We at HF Signals are taking in orders for the latest V6 uBitx. However we are only accepting shipping through DHL which will be done in a day or two. There is no wait times for DHL as of now till the stocks last. So if you book one now we would be able to ship it out immediately in a day or two.
We did have a bit of an issue during the lockdown but DHL resumed shipping almost immediately after the lockdown was lifted and we have had no problem since then with DHL.
However India Posts have still not started it regular international shipping but we were told that they too would resume international shipping in the coming days. Once that happens we will be updating the website and let everyone know about it.
Till such time please go ahead and book your order through DHL.
Thanks and Regards,
Thomas
--
Support@...
|
Re: ANTUINO antenna analzer CERTAIN CLARIFICATIONS REG
Muthu
There are always new questions, these continue until one realises one is helping others. This is when life gets more interesting.
I omitted making any mention of current, Common Mode, chokes (aka baluns) at the feedpoint, Raj had put that forward, and so has Iz..
Without such a choke at the feedpoint the outside of the feeder coax will ALSO be part of the radiating aerial, and could be making part of an extra resonance. Certainly without such a choke you will easily get the 'RF in the shack' which you now complain of.
My solution is to this phenomenon would be to make a balun/current choke for the feedpoint, and another one for the feeder just before it enters your house or shack. These should stop the RF energy that is obviously following the cable down from the antenna, they won't stop direct radiation from the antenna.? ?
Another factor in clearing RF feedback is to ensure you do have a resonant load in the antenna, looking at your measurement results you appear to have a very low Q antenna, I doubt if you are radiating much energy at all.
Go back to Start!? - Remake your antenna with a current choke in the feedpoint. Make sure you trim the 40m section first, and then the 20m part.
Using a ferrite core in the current choke will allow it to cover a wider bandwidth, but at a pinch one can wind feeder cable around any magnetic material, even a mild steel bolt will make a difference. Although the most effective, Ferrite Rings are not the only
sort of possible core material.
One expects to see on 40m something like a 1.4:1 to 1.7:1 response at 7.1MHz rising to somewhere over 2:1 or 2.5:1 at the band edges. These are not catastrophic results, instead they are expected.
On 20m one should expect higher values at the band edges maybe 3:1 to 3.5.:1. In Region 1 the band is almost twice the the span of 40m.
As another has pointed out 1.1:1 or even 1:1 matches are not the be-all or end-all aims.
Off you go and experiment a lot more.
And just maybe you'll find time to make contacts on the air, I look forward to a QSO, on 20m?.
Remember to waterproof all the coax connections with vulcanising tape and then cover with black electrical tape to prevent degradation in sunlight.
Peter
|
Some library routines must have become bloated with new "features".
In the old days I wrote library routines in MASM just to shrink code in DOS!
Raj
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
At 21/06/2020, you wrote: Well that's annoying. Since obviously the code didn't change between Arduino versions, that means there's 400 bytes of extra Arduino bloat being built into the new version! :/
Reed
|
Well that's annoying. Since obviously the code didn't change between Arduino versions, that means there's 400 bytes of extra Arduino bloat being built into the new version! :/
Reed
|
Re: has the supply chain for the uBITX been affected by the covid-19
Nice , ya I I can. Afford one either , that are nice tho..? think it is Ft8 time need a lil break
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 9:03 AM John KG9DK < jab3739@...> wrote: I am thinking about ordering the latest version of the uBITX and wondering if there has been any delay in shipping?????
john kg9dk
|
Man, a 400 byte change is huge. Right now I don't have the time to dig into it, but I'm sure there's got to be a way to pare down some bytes somewhere, or just back off to 1.8.12.
Jack, W8TEE
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:19:15 PM EDT, W2CTX via groups.io <w2ctx@...> wrote:
I too got same as you Jack with 1.8.12. So I loaded 1.8.13 and it does give too large error!
rOn
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 4:10:08 PM EDT, Jack, W8TEE via groups.io <jjpurdum@...> wrote:
I just compiled it to 30316 bytes just fine. However, I'm using release 1.8.12.
Jack, W8TEE
On Saturday, June 20, 2020, 3:58:57 PM EDT, joe@... <joe@...> wrote:
when compiling code for a V6 from I received this error message
Arduino: 1.8.13 (Windows 10), Board: "Arduino Nano, ATmega328P"
Sketch uses 30750 bytes (100%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30720 bytes.text section exceeds available space in board
Global variables use 819 bytes (39%) of dynamic memory, leaving 1229 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2048 bytes.
Sketch too big; see http://www.arduino.cc/en/Guide/Troubleshooting#size for tips on reducing it.
Error compiling for board Arduino Nano.
I thought I read this code would fit a V6 kit
option enabled in File -> Preferences.
--
Jack, W8TEE
-- Jack, W8TEE
|
Re: has the supply chain for the uBITX been affected by the covid-19
I recieved mine with only 3 days shipping time using DHL. That was about 10 days ago.
Alex
WD2T
|
Raj vu2zap
W9THC CriP Sparks
Alex