Keyboard Shortcuts
Likes
- BITX20
- Messages
Search
Re: Need help with constant tone in audio output
Try a battery supply.? My shack supply does not play nice with the BitX.? A small wall wart 2A, 12V is silent.? I get tone with the shack PS. Larry KB3CUF On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Chuck <chucke2@...> wrote:
|
Re: Need help with constant tone in audio output
Good morning Jerry and the group, Had to stop last night, having probed for nearly 10 hours. Jerry, my trouble shooting is hampered by not having an up-to-date schematic. My board is a Bitx40 V3. It's interesting to note that when I power the '40 up the tone is immediate and the rcvr comes on about a second later. I have all the components taken out of the '40 except the volume control... still the tone. I wonder if India could replace the board given the amount of time spent trying to get it working? I'll continue to trouble shoot today and will keep you and the group updated. BTW, the tone encountered is not a clicking noise. 73, Chuck K3VPZ From: "Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io" <jgaffke@...> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2017 4:59:53 PM Subject: Re: [BITX20] Need help with constant tone in audio output Did you enable the analog vfo by adding L4? If the tone is still there with no vfo, that's a hint On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 01:07 pm, <chucke2@...> wrote: Have disconnected the Raduino, tone still there. ? |
Re: BITX40
The current drawn will depend upon the peak to average ration of the voice characteristics which is different for every individual. That is why a speech processor would be a great help to maintain a quasi-constant level. Regards Lawrence On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:50 AM, John Smith via Groups.Io <johnlinux77@...> wrote:
|
Re: BITX40
It is standard practice that to eliminate any source of noise the decoupling has to be as near the source as possible using capacitors suitable for the frequency/ies involved. This also aids stability. Shielding of the readout and its wiring will also help. Using shielded cables including in the audio stages is also standard practice. Regards Lawrence On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke@...> wrote:
|
Re: KB1GMX on the BITX
Hi, Has anyone had any success in getting the bitx40 running with VFO at 19Mhz? I tried last night and observations were: Drive out of the raduino needed to increase to 4ma before any noise came out of the receiver. Frequency measured at the output of Q7 was not 19Mhz??? Tested BFO at both 11.9985 and 12.0015 made no difference to resolving a signal. I have a trimmer cap at the BFO. C103. I'm wondering if the normal pins are the right place to inject the VFO. And there was still a birdie at 7.200Mhz- with no antenna just dummy load.? Also, varying the BFO varies the frequency of the birdie at 7.2Mhz for both VFO frequencies. Another observation, the birdie was louder with increased drive out of the raduino. Regards Simon VK3ELH ? |
Re: BFO Location
You will find a single 12Mhz xtal with some components next to the 860 - thats the bfo.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
73 Raj At 20/02/2017, you wrote:
Hi, |
Re: bitx output harmonics
I have been advancing the silver trimmer to the point of achieving a amp meter reading of 1 Amp plus a little bit while speaking up into the mic. Is this overdriving the BITX 40? I have found that it gives me the expected amp meter and watt meter readings from the wire up instructions that I not had before. I understand that increasing it and the bias beyond the recommended settings increases risk of damage and radiating wild harmonics.. Am I doing this right? I can take instruction if not. And, does the cap change anything if I am not overloading the PA? Saturday night we had the magic band conditions, and I heard my call signal really well on three WebSDR stations on each side of the U.S. |
Re: bitx output harmonics
John, The two section low pass filter is a standard across a number of transceivers build and sold in the USA. Our harmonic suppression is just within the legal limit. Here is the scan as I had performed when we finished the layout.? The difference between my and Wayn's scan results is probably due to overdriving of the power amplifier that clips and distorts the waveform. With Wayn's modification, you can be sure that even if you overdrive, you will still be within the legal limits. A simpler fix is to just back off the sliver coloured preset near the driver transistor until the point where the transmit power starts dropping. That is the point power beyond with ?the compression and distortion increases substantially. You are safe within that limit. - f On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 7:42 AM, John Smith via Groups.Io <johnlinux77@...> wrote: I used a 100pf ceramic 50V cap that tested out to be 87pf. It did not blow up. But I have no way of testing it. I'll just have to trust that the second harmonic solution will keep me legal. It was that, or a 120pf testing at 115pf. Does anyone know what it actually takes to suppress the second harmonic frequency adequately? Or is this close enough to do some good? |
Re: Unbalancing mixer
The center tap that takes the audio from the mic. A caveat though, the carrier is on the skirt rather than in the center of the filter. - f On 20 Feb 2017 7:58 a.m., "Ken" <chase8043@...> wrote:
|
Re: Unbalancing mixer
4.7K resistor from center tap of R106 to 12 volts? 73 Ken VA3ABN On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Ashhar Farhan <farhanbox@...> wrote:
|
Re: bitx output harmonics
I used a 100pf ceramic 50V cap that tested out to be 87pf. It did not blow up. But I have no way of testing it. I'll just have to trust that the second harmonic solution will keep me legal. It was that, or a 120pf testing at 115pf. Does anyone know what it actually takes to suppress the second harmonic frequency adequately? Or is this close enough to do some good?
|
KB1GMX on the BITX
With Allison's permission, here is the message to EMRFD regarding the BITX.
This is good information from a master RF engineer. john AD5YE "Some thoughts on improving the bitx... First so there is no bad feelings Frhan did a bang up job with the design and its persistence speaks loads of the reproduceability and utility of the design. The yabut.. The BITX was not intended to be the high performance transceiver only low cost and its avoidance of hard to get parts. So there are compromises, a hard fact of engineering life. Things that may help or improve it based on the 40M version I built years ago. The mixers using 1N914/4148 diodes are not level 7 mixers (nominal 7dbm drive) like commercial DBMs. the reason for this is Schottky diodes have a lower turn on threshold than silicon junction diodes with the difference being .2V compared to .65V. This means you need more LO drive for the terminal impedance of all ports to be 50 ohms. It also means they are higher level mixers by about 3db. So enough drive is important to intermod and overload. Second the terminal impedance of the crystal filter and the various RF/IF amplifiers were optimized for 200 ohms the mixers are better at 50 ohms and there is no impedance matching to correct for that. This means that the DBMs are compromised in performance again for overload and IMD. The fix here is to insure all ports especially the IF port is matched to 50 ohms. It many radios I've built the DBM to IF amp has a Diplexer. Th reason for this is to insure the IF port sees a wide band (dc to 100mhz) match and only the desired IF pass though it. This keeps reflected signals from reentering the mixer and adding to the possible products. Choice of LO frequency. Unless there is a defining reason I use a LO that is Higher than the IF as in 40M with 12mhz if that would be 19mhz. For VFO that would be drifty but for a NCO (Si5351) its no big deal. Why? When mixing signals there are two known players (IF and LO) and many live signals in the band and they all mix so you get sums and differences and then harmonics of all those making sums and differences. A program like spurtune can list them all out and show what the result and likely strength of each will be. When the LO is lower than the IF the likely possibilities and their harmonic mixes are more numerous at or neat the RX pass band and IF passband. Again a low pass filter between the LO and the mixer can help sometimes. RF amplifier... For bands below 10mhz its likely not needed or needs to be very low gain as there are an abundance of strong signals. RF selectivity before the preamp is an aid in this and even adding switchable attenuators (I use 6 and 12DB so I can get 6/12/18db of attenuation) and in a strong signal cases that can help. Lowering the gain of the RF amp (for RX) can help as well. Another item is if the RF amp is not robust enough it can easily overload before the mixer, at that point all is lost to IMD. What high end radios do is use lots of current in the RF amp so its not easily overloaded then use a mixer that can tolerate that as well as its no sense having the RF amp be clean and overload the mixer. Its important to point out that for a given RF amp design and DC bias level there is a maximum signal level that will exceed it distortion capabilities. Differently said that amp has a maximum undistorted power out that must be spread over all the accepted signals often that means the amp must be very robust. An example is a RF amp I used in a radio that had to withstand 10dbm or more at the input in band and not overload. The amp ran at 160ma and could deliver .4W of two tone signal undistorted (better than 35db down). It actually used RF power devices (2xMRF584) to get that level of capability. Of course the next stage had to deal with that. The end result was a crunch proof radio but would be unforgiving about power used (RX needed 1.5A with .4A in the low level RF sections). It is sometimes easier to attenuate the offending signals (as well as desired) as a strategy. Why? because even if the RF amp is good enough and the mixer then the first IF (and maybe even second) need to be able to handle all that signal. In the end it tend to be a very "system" level problem rather than point solution. Other tricks are front end preselection using narrow tuneable band pass filters (loss is tolerable) to reject the offending players. Notch filters as well though at higher frequencies they may not be effective enough. Consider the case: Offending signal of -25dbm which is very strong. Add 17db of RF gain to that and its now -8dbm and any mixer below level 17 (50mw LO drive) will be overloaded. To make matters worse if the RF amp is running less than a maybe 10ma it will be overloaded itself as I've seen this. So we omit the RF amp and try again and a -25dbm signal is right below the limits for distortion for a level 7 (5mw lo drive) mixer. At this point 6DB of attenuation of RX is an aid as then the signal is down to -31dbm. Even without the RF amp the RX is sensitive enough to hear most likely signals your going to talk to and if need be you can even up the audio gain to compensate to a point. They key is managing the levels of all the signal passing through the RF and mixer or overload will be a very negative result. Excess gain often deemed desirable are not always helpful. My first pass with mine was the described switchable two step attenuator and then the ability to switch out the RX RF amp completely. Note that the Elecraft K2 (which has a very good receiver) took this path. FYI: small sugar cube relays are handy for this as they can be placed close to here needed and powered from a front panel switch. The BITX is a great experimenters radio and this is one area where experimenting can be useful of not required." Allison |
Re: BITX40
jerry grzelak
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýTry a 001 cap from the regulator? from input and output to ground ? Sent from for Windows 10 ? From: John Smith via Groups.Io
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2017 5:51 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BITX20] BITX40 ? Update: Mine still does that quiet clicking thing. It's just less prominent now. And still jittery on last digit, like I said.? And I wanted to check the current draw of the PA with the 20V supply. I found that R136 doesn't do much at 20V. When I experimented with R136 at 12V it made all the difference in the world. But the no audio current draw was 90mA and long aahhh current draw was as much as 1.3 Amps. Just something about that note in my voice makes it peak high, and normal talking is around 750mA. So, current draw is about the same, going from 12V to near max of 24V. No need to recalibrate after doing it at 12V. ? |
Re: BITX40
Update: Mine still does that quiet clicking thing. It's just less prominent now. And still jittery on last digit, like I said.? And I wanted to check the current draw of the PA with the 20V supply. I found that R136 doesn't do much at 20V. When I experimented with R136 at 12V it made all the difference in the world. But the no audio current draw was 90mA and long aahhh current draw was as much as 1.3 Amps. Just something about that note in my voice makes it peak high, and normal talking is around 750mA. So, current draw is about the same, going from 12V to near max of 24V. No need to recalibrate after doing it at 12V. |
Re: BITX40
There was discussion of "Tuning clicks" before. My Raduino had this and also the jitter on the last digit. I would describe it as a rustling noise rather than clicking. I tried caps around the 7805 regulator but the noise was still there. What made the noise inaudible was a series 10ohm and a 2200uF electrolytic to ground in the supply to the Raduino. (Values as available in my spares box.) Small 104 caps had no effect. It is a power supply problem. The DDS takes 78ma, as much as the rest of the receiver. Presumably when the DDS frequency changes, there are several milliseconds of much higher power demand. Like Mark, I think my bandpass filter might be off frequency. The rx seems much more sensitive at 7.5MHz than at 7.0. Next step is to test the tx side and I can more easily then plot the bandpass filter response. |