¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Date

Re: BITX40 PTT Noise

Baruch Atta
 

So the high value resistor will get swamped by that low impedance node when you power up the microphone amp.? I think.

and?? Will it affect the POP?

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io <jgaffke@...> wrote:

So the high value resistor will get swamped by that low impedance node when you power up the microphone amp.? I think.

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 12:27 pm, Jerry Gaffke wrote:

When the microphone amp drives the modulator, it sees the two diodes plus R37,R38,R39.? A very low impedance load.?



Re: USB/LSB operation

 

I never said anyone proposed it. But I am now saying it has come up several times. After the earliest conversations of operating CW, on this BITX someone had looked it up and provided greater detail on it. And now we know we can't, and why we can't.

Now for a serious request of you Jerry. Between several to many times you have offered your opinion of running the VFO at 19Mhz instead of 5Mhz. But I don't recall you ever detailing how to do it. You know I can follow along and change the code. But what else is involved. Any other specific changes? As much as you seem to think it would solve a lot of problems and make some hacking easier. I would have expected you to have written a paper, or constantly instruct people how to do it, or upload a sketch with it all done for us by now.?

Is this where the VFO get's set at 19Mhz? This is just a cut and paste.

#define INIT_BFO_FREQ (1199800L)

unsigned long baseTune = ?7100000L;

unsigned long bfo_freq = 11998000L;

Finally, I think your ragging on me for being wrong now is because I said the toroid band pass filter put's it on LSB. But it's the crystal filter that does that. Right? I would rather be corrected and learn, than get a blow up about it later. Or continue the same debate without ever making progress. We are licenced communicators. We can do better.


Re: AD9850 instead of Raduino

Billy Shepherd
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Okay thank you!

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Kuhn
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 3:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] AD9850 instead of Raduino

?

Yes, it's ignored.? I actually have a pre-raduino and post-raduino version and this is the only difference I could spot.? I'm using a 10-turn pot connected to the Arduino to tune similar to the raduino supplied with the later kits.

?

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Billy Shepherd <billy.shepherd@...> wrote:

Would you think the whole circuit behind C93 and L4 is ignored? Also, did you not remove the tuning pot? Do you use the rotary encoder to tune?

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Kuhn
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 3:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] AD9850 instead of Raduino

?

I removed C93 and L4.? Works perfectly.

?

73 - Ben

?

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Billy Shepherd <billy.shepherd@...> wrote:

I purchased my Bitx40 last December. Everything works great. I¡¯m trying to use items I already own to build a DDS. I connected a AD9850 with an Arduino Mega 2560. I added a contrast control, an LCD display and a rotary encoder.

I used the sketch found here:

The DDS works. I connected my DDS to the DDS pins on the Bitx40 near L4.

What changes do I need to make with the pre-Raduino Bitx40 to use a DDS? Remove L4? Keep or change caps in original VFO?

?

Thanks in advance,

Billy

?

?

?

?

?


Re: AD9850 instead of Raduino

 

Yes, it's ignored.? I actually have a pre-raduino and post-raduino version and this is the only difference I could spot.? I'm using a 10-turn pot connected to the Arduino to tune similar to the raduino supplied with the later kits.

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Billy Shepherd <billy.shepherd@...> wrote:

Would you think the whole circuit behind C93 and L4 is ignored? Also, did you not remove the tuning pot? Do you use the rotary encoder to tune?

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Kuhn
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 3:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] AD9850 instead of Raduino

?

I removed C93 and L4.? Works perfectly.

?

73 - Ben

?

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Billy Shepherd <billy.shepherd@bartholomew.in.gov> wrote:

I purchased my Bitx40 last December. Everything works great. I¡¯m trying to use items I already own to build a DDS. I connected a AD9850 with an Arduino Mega 2560. I added a contrast control, an LCD display and a rotary encoder.

I used the sketch found here:

The DDS works. I connected my DDS to the DDS pins on the Bitx40 near L4.

What changes do I need to make with the pre-Raduino Bitx40 to use a DDS? Remove L4? Keep or change caps in original VFO?

?

Thanks in advance,

Billy

?

?

?

?



Re: AD9850 instead of Raduino

Billy Shepherd
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Would you think the whole circuit behind C93 and L4 is ignored? Also, did you not remove the tuning pot? Do you use the rotary encoder to tune?

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Kuhn
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 3:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] AD9850 instead of Raduino

?

I removed C93 and L4.? Works perfectly.

?

73 - Ben

?

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Billy Shepherd <billy.shepherd@...> wrote:

I purchased my Bitx40 last December. Everything works great. I¡¯m trying to use items I already own to build a DDS. I connected a AD9850 with an Arduino Mega 2560. I added a contrast control, an LCD display and a rotary encoder.

I used the sketch found here:

The DDS works. I connected my DDS to the DDS pins on the Bitx40 near L4.

What changes do I need to make with the pre-Raduino Bitx40 to use a DDS? Remove L4? Keep or change caps in original VFO?

?

Thanks in advance,

Billy

?

?

?

?


Re: AD9850 instead of Raduino

 

I removed C93 and L4.? Works perfectly.

73 - Ben

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Billy Shepherd <billy.shepherd@...> wrote:

I purchased my Bitx40 last December. Everything works great. I¡¯m trying to use items I already own to build a DDS. I connected a AD9850 with an Arduino Mega 2560. I added a contrast control, an LCD display and a rotary encoder.

I used the sketch found here:

The DDS works. I connected my DDS to the DDS pins on the Bitx40 near L4.

What changes do I need to make with the pre-Raduino Bitx40 to use a DDS? Remove L4? Keep or change caps in original VFO?

?

Thanks in advance,

Billy

?

?

?



Re: BITX40 PTT Noise

 

So the high value resistor will get swamped by that low impedance node when you power up the microphone amp. ?I think.

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 12:27 pm, Jerry Gaffke wrote:

When the microphone amp drives the modulator, it sees the two diodes plus R37,R38,R39. ?A very low impedance load.?


AD9850 instead of Raduino

Billy Shepherd
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

I purchased my Bitx40 last December. Everything works great. I¡¯m trying to use items I already own to build a DDS. I connected a AD9850 with an Arduino Mega 2560. I added a contrast control, an LCD display and a rotary encoder.

I used the sketch found here:

The DDS works. I connected my DDS to the DDS pins on the Bitx40 near L4.

What changes do I need to make with the pre-Raduino Bitx40 to use a DDS? Remove L4? Keep or change caps in original VFO?

?

Thanks in advance,

Billy

?

?

?


Re: BITX40 PTT Noise

 

When the microphone amp drives the modulator, it sees the two diodes plus R37,R38,R39. ?A very low impedance load.


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:42 am, Baruch Atta wrote:

Let me suggest --- has anybody tried --- ?connect a high value resistor between the coupling caps of the mic amp and the receive audio amp.? That should balance the charge on both caps.? Unless it would affect the balanced modulator itself...
Any thought on this solution?? Has anyone tried it yet?

?


Re: USB/LSB operation

 

The transformers are to transform the 50 ohm bidi gain blocks of the uBitx to the 200 ohm impedance of the crystal filter. ?The 2-to-1 winding ratio gives 4-to1 impedance ratio. ?The spare winding is just that, as on the Bitx40 they wind all those transformers trifilar but not all of them make use of the third winding.

Slipping in the uBitx filter might not be trivial. Google "Dishal Crystal Ladder Filters" and read up. ?The Bitx40 does not have 50 ohm bidi gain blocks. ?Likely on the order of 200 ohms around the filter, but note that the Bitx40 gain block's input port impedance depends on output port impedance and vice-versa. ?They are what they are, and it is not obvious exactly what that is. ?

Jerry


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:27 am, davetelling . wrote:

I cranked up the Raduino drive level when selecting USB, and that helped. I think I'll pull the un-needed caps, also. The final thing is to tweak the firmware so that the "center" frequency is the same for USB/LSB.

Finally - I have seen some of the ubitx schematics - is there any reason I couldn't build an equivalent filter & drop that into the bitx40? I see that the filter schematic shows transformers on the input/output, with one winding connected to, what? Nothing? Could you just use a 1:4 balun for this application?

?


BITX40 PTT Noise

Baruch Atta
 

Subject:?Re: [BITX20] Re: BITX40 PTT Noise
"...It seems that the culprit is the coupling capacitor between microphone amplifier and the?balanced modulator, and the coupling capacitor between receive audio amplifier and the?balanced modulator.? In either transmit or receive mode these capacitors get charged?to a particular value.? When a transition is made from transmit to receive or from receive?to transmit this charge causes a few milliseconds of bias upset in the balanced modulator..."

Let me suggest --- has anybody tried --- ?connect a high value resistor between the coupling caps of the mic amp and the receive audio amp.? That should balance the charge on both caps.? Unless it would affect the balanced modulator itself...
Any thought on this solution?? Has anyone tried it yet?

73, Joe W3TTT


Re: USB/LSB operation

 

I cranked up the Raduino drive level when selecting USB, and that helped. I think I'll pull the un-needed caps, also. The final thing is to tweak the firmware so that the "center" frequency is the same for USB/LSB.

Finally - I have seen some of the ubitx schematics - is there any reason I couldn't build an equivalent filter & drop that into the bitx40? I see that the filter schematic shows transformers on the input/output, with one winding connected to, what? Nothing? Could you just use a 1:4 balun for this application?


Re: Quick turn around

 

Rob,

My videos can have that effect on your credit card.

Randy


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 12:58 AM, Rob KG7MNK <robvulliet@...> wrote:

Hi Randy,

? ? your Youtube review was what pushed me to Order my Bitx40 on march 27 i have not seen anything about when shipped yet I'll update with more info when i get it.


73

KG7MNK



Re: USB/LSB operation

 

Switching between LSB and USB by moving the VFO from 5mhz to 19mhz works, and is the way that Farhan wrote the sketch. ? ?Disadvantages are: ?More trouble with harmonics and mixer products when at 5mhz, such as those SW Broadcaster images and the 7.2mhz birdie. ?Also, drive level out to the final changes some between 5mhz and 19mhz, could be due to how the diode ring and transformer respond, in addition to ?C91,C92.

The other method is to move the BFO by a few khz using the Si5351's CLK0. ? ?Leave the VFO at either 5mhz or 19mhz, your choice. ?(19mhz is preferred to reduce images.) ? ?Disadvantage is that the crystal filter skirt is not as steep on one side as the other, so LSB with a 19mhz VFO and USB with a 5mhz VFO will have less rejection of the residual carrier and opposite sideband. ?A better crystal filter such as on the uBitx would help here. ?


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:16 am, Ion Petroianu wrote:

The change from USB to LSB can be done by changing the VFO (Raduino) frequency range from (19MHz - 19.3MHz) to (4.7MHz - 5MHz)

?


Re: USB/LSB operation

 

Interesting...why would CW on a SSB rig be illegal in the US.? If it is a single-tone it would
be CW and not SSB anyway.???

Problem with just changing the BFO insertion frequency on a BITX40 and expecting USB
capability lies in the shape factor of the crystal filter.? The front-end filter is relatively broad
and thus can pass either lower or upper sideband.?

Arv? K7HKL
_._


On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 11:12 PM, John Smith via Groups.Io <johnlinux77@...> wrote:

There is something that took a while for me and others to understand and accept is that the BITX40 is a lower single side band phone mode transceiver. Making it do anything else is impractical and maybe even be impossible. The functions in the raduino code are leftover from the BITX20 which is upper sideband phone mode transceiver. Which can do digital modes because digital modes are on USB. CW on sideband might be legal somewhere, not in U.S.

Getting the BITX40 to do something else other than simple phone mode on 40 meters would require you to rebuild it in a different way. Such as the row of four toroids is a passband filter for LSB. You would need to change them and some other parts to work on USB. And then not on LSB anymore. Not just change it in the code.?Rebuilding it is doable. But if you can do that, then you can make it that way to begin with.

If the uBITX is a buyable product, it might be able to do the digital stuff so many of us are wanting to do. I am aware that I might be wrong about something I said here. And I am sure someone here could say it better.



Re: Raduino won't go above 8.500 mhz

 

Marc,


If you want to stick with Raduino as a VFO remove C91 and C92. They are not required.

Now for any frequency below 10MHz you should use LSB and your VFO shall generate 2MHz to 8.6 MHz for a coverage between 10MHz to 3.4MHz

At frequencies above 10 MHz you switch to USB by moving the VFO frequency above input frequency,?

That will translate in VFO generating 22MHz to 26.5MHz for input frequencies between 10MHz and 14,5MHz.

BTW if you can cover 160 m band that means your VFO runs at (12MHz - 1.8MHz) = ?10.2MHz, so it goes higher.

For a displayed frequency of 8.5MHz your VFO actually generates 3.5MHz.
--
Ion

VA3NOI


Re: USB/LSB operation

 

@Tim

You don't need C91 and C92 if you use the Raduino. They are a part of the analog VFO originally designed. As long as you use Raduino you can take them out for good.

The change from USB to LSB can be done by changing the VFO (Raduino) frequency range from (19MHz - 19.3MHz) to (4.7MHz - 5MHz)
--
Ion

VA3NOI


Re: USB/LSB operation

 

First off, I like that you have a sense of humor. ?I was going to say "Bull ?;-)", but replaced it with "No" at the last minute. ?Figured you'd take it the right way, but that was a bit coarse for the refined tastes prevalent in this forum.

But you are wrong at least as often as you are right, and somebody has to throw something back at you before the entire discussion runs off the rails.

You did say: ?"CW on sideband might be legal somewhere, not in U.S". ?Nothing illegal in the US has been proposed, assuming it was done correctly. ?An audio tone into the microphone input can create legal A1A transmissions, but is difficult to do correctly as Collins Radio found out 60 years ago: ?/g/BITX20/message/22372. ? (The crystal filter must also be perfect, by the way.) ?I much prefer something like what Farhan is doing on the uBitx. ?


> Ruff.?

A bit off topic, but these were our birds: ?? ?And we now have yaks about to calve. ?And I'm several months behind on an engineering project. ?So unfortunately, I haven't gotten back to tinkering with my Bitx40 for over a month now.


Jerry, KE7ER


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 08:10 am, John Smith wrote:

I only mentioned CW because it is considered a digital mode. And digital was the context.

I wasn't condemning anyone for it. You seem a little barky in the morning Jerry. Ruff.?

?


Re: USB/LSB operation

 

John, we know. . . . You like to talk. . . . Even when you don't. . . . ?:-))

Roy,

WA0YMH

On Apr 7, 2017 10:10 AM, "John Smith via Groups.Io" <johnlinux77=[email protected]> wrote:

I only mentioned CW because it is considered a digital mode. And digital was the context.

I wasn't condemning anyone for it. You seem a little barky in the morning Jerry. Ruff.?


Re: USB/LSB operation

 

I only mentioned CW because it is considered a digital mode. And digital was the context.

I wasn't condemning anyone for it. You seem a little barky in the morning Jerry. Ruff.?