BITX20@groups.io | Messages

Re: WSJT-X 2.2.2

Update -?

I now believe I have serial I/O for CAT control working seamlessly on the Arduino Nano Every.? ?In short, the default parameters for the Nano Every serial port are 115200, N81? - if I set that in the firmware and set that in WSJTX and any other PC program, then? communication comes up and works fine.? Apparently what happens is if the firmware is set to anything other than that there is a serial port reset that occurs and that was apparently causing WSJTX to hang.? I still can't account for 100% of the behavior but limited testing so far - everything is working as expected.? ?

Thanks to everyone that contributed to the discussion? - sorry I kind hijacked Mark's thread.?

See this post and replies for more details ...?/g/SoftwareControlledHamRadio/message/10062

Back to building radios...

73,
Dean
KK4DAS

Flash the arduino nano

#85205

Hi all,

Do I need to buy some flasher equipment to change the firmware of the
arduino? I already compiled a new firmware based on the original with
gcc-avr, but avrdude always give me the same error when I try to flash:
avrdude: stk500_recv(): programmer is not responding


Thanks,
Rafael

OpenPGP_signature

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

#85204

the rectangle shaped parts are 17.6 cm by 8.3cm (front and back panels),
and the distance between front and back is 17cm.

Rafael

Show quoted text

On 1/6/21 10:56 AM, Alessandrochiste@... wrote:
Hi Rafael, my basic kit is on the way as well and i'm also researching
housing options.
I have a 3d printer and i'm planning to print what's missing of the
enclosure.
Would you kindly measure the two plexiglass parts for me? So that i
can see if they fit in any 3d printed model.

Thank You

OpenPGP_signature

Re: Mrf101 for sale

#85203

These have been sold. Thanks for allowing me to post.

Barry

K3bo

Show quoted text

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021, 2:50 PM barry halterman via <kthreebo=[email protected]> wrote:

Anyone interested in a pair of MRF101 power FETs. I have a pair of them, never used and in the original sealed packages from Mouser.
One is the AN the other the BN version. Asking $40 for the pair shipping included to conus.
I changed my plans for these devices, so they are surplus to my needs.
Contact me off the
kthreebo@...
Barry

Re: Different Nano's

#85202

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:44 AM, Mark Erbaugh wrote:

But more severely, it failed on the low level writes that I was using to set up timers:

Hi Mark - I don't use timers in my code.? Did a quick search - you probably already found these - but for the thread...

Dean
KK4DAS

Re: FOR SALE Ubitx ver 3 in nice metal case

Johnny AC0BQ

#85201

I also have the N8? Version of the AGC?
control unbuilt.
15.00 extra if you ?buy the rig.
tnx
JohnnY AC?BQ?

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

Jack, W8TEE

#85200

Evan:

The function can do away with the cascading if statement block several ways. You could use a switch/case statement block, but that still creates a jump table and redundant calls to digitalWrite(). See if this would work:

#define BAND15??? 0
#define BAND20??? 1
#define BAND40??? 2
#define BAND80??? 3

void setup() {
? Serial.begin(9600);
? setTXFilters_v5(BAND15);
}

void loop() {
? // put your main code here, to run repeatedly:

}

void setTXFilters_v5(int band)
{
? static int filterParameters[4][3] = {
??? {0, 0, 0},? // 15M
??? {1, 0, 0},? // 20M
??? {0, 1, 0},? // 40M
??? {0, 0, 1}?? // 80M
? };
? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, filterParameters[band][0]);
? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, filterParameters[band][1]);
? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, filterParameters[band][2]);
}

This version uses no cascading if statement block so it should execute slightly faster. I doubt that it will save any memory because of the static array I've added.

Jack, W8TEE

On Wednesday, January 6, 2021, 11:36:25 AM EST, Rafael Diniz <rafael@...> wrote:

Thanks a lot Evan!!

I'll set the arduido development environment here and test with
different filter settings. I'll create a fork of the firmware for playing.

Cheers,
Rafael

Show quoted text

On 1/6/21 8:35 AM, Evan Hand wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 07:49 PM, Rafael Diniz wrote:
>
>? ? Btw, I noticed I get zero output on 6.9MHz, and full power on
>? ? 7100. Why?
>
> I believe it is due to this section of the v6.1 code where the low
> pass filter is selected:
>
> void setTXFilters_v5(unsigned long freq){
> ??
> ? if (freq > 21000000L){? // the default filter is with 35 MHz cut-off
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);
> ? }
> ? else if (freq >= 14000000L){ //thrown the KT1 relay on, the 30 MHz
> LPF is bypassed and the 14-18 MHz LPF is allowd to go through
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 1);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);
> ? }
> ? else if (freq > 7000000L){
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 1);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);? ??
> ? }
> ? else {
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);
> ? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 1);? ??
> ? }
> }
>
> Note that there is a small bug in the above, as the 60/80 meter filter
> will be selected if the frequency is set exactly at 7MHz.? Not sure
> that anyone would run that close to the band edge, but it does mean
> that taking any measurements you would want to be at least a few hertz
> above 7MHz.? I would have made the compare >=.? The same is true for
> 15m (21MHz).
>
> You need to also take into account the sidetone offset when testing
> CW, as the actual carrier is shifted by the sidetone value.? Since I
> do not have a v6 I am not sure how the CWL or CWU mode is handled.?
> All of my uBITX have been converted to KD8CEC firmware.? To be safe,
> the best bet is to set a test frequency of 1kHz or more above the
> 21MHz and 7MHz filter selection points.
>
> 73
> Evan
> AC9TU
>

--
Jack, W8TEE

OpenPGP_signature

Re: Optimize for 5 - 6 MHz range

#85199

So lets say, when operating at 6.1 MHz with the 40m band filter setting:
? ? TX_LPF_A = 0
? ? TX_LPF_B = 1
??? TX_LPF_C = 0 ?

The first harmonic will not be attenuated, so it might be good to add
another low pass filter, or modify the LPF_B, right? We'll use
auto-certification, as there is a special treatment for telecom in
Brazilian Amazon rain-forest (and many other parts of the world, too),
where there is no telecom infrastructure at all in many parts of the region.

Rafael

Show quoted text

On 1/6/21 1:35 PM, Curt via groups.io wrote:
I would check regulations in the intended country of use, in case
transcivers must be approved for that use. Possibly the existing low
pass filter may not be compliant for harmonics. While it may be
possible to do the component modification whether it can be used might
involve some expensive certified lab testing.

Curt

OpenPGP_signature

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

#85198

Thanks a lot Evan!!

I'll set the arduido development environment here and test with
different filter settings. I'll create a fork of the firmware for playing.

Cheers,
Rafael

Show quoted text

On 1/6/21 8:35 AM, Evan Hand wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 07:49 PM, Rafael Diniz wrote:

    Btw, I noticed I get zero output on 6.9MHz, and full power on
    7100. Why?

I believe it is due to this section of the v6.1 code where the low
pass filter is selected:

void setTXFilters_v5(unsigned long freq){
??
? if (freq > 21000000L){? // the default filter is with 35 MHz cut-off
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);
? }
? else if (freq >= 14000000L){ //thrown the KT1 relay on, the 30 MHz
LPF is bypassed and the 14-18 MHz LPF is allowd to go through
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 1);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);
? }
? else if (freq > 7000000L){
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 1);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);? ??
? }
? else {
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);
? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 1);? ??
? }
}

Note that there is a small bug in the above, as the 60/80 meter filter
will be selected if the frequency is set exactly at 7MHz.? Not sure
that anyone would run that close to the band edge, but it does mean
that taking any measurements you would want to be at least a few hertz
above 7MHz.? I would have made the compare >=.? The same is true for
15m (21MHz).

You need to also take into account the sidetone offset when testing
CW, as the actual carrier is shifted by the sidetone value.? Since I
do not have a v6 I am not sure how the CWL or CWU mode is handled.?
All of my uBITX have been converted to KD8CEC firmware.? To be safe,
the best bet is to set a test frequency of 1kHz or more above the
21MHz and 7MHz filter selection points.

73
Evan
AC9TU

OpenPGP_signature

Re: Optimize for 5 - 6 MHz range

#85197

I would check regulations in the intended country of use, in case transcivers must be approved for that use. Possibly the existing low pass filter may not be compliant for harmonics. While it may be possible to do the component modification whether it can be used might involve some expensive certified lab testing.

Curt

FOR SALE Ubitx ver 3 in nice metal case

Johnny AC0BQ

#85196

Gm group
i bought this as a unfinished kit.
I put it together fired it up, upgraded it to
the CEC software.

VERSION 3?

It has the real nice blue metal case with several?
adaptor boards for IO ports.

It works as it should.
it needs to be calibrated, especially on band pass.

I have only tried it on CW so it does NOT have?
a mic.

I will take 100.00 plus shipping in the US.
shipping will be around 20.00 or 25.00 because?
of the size??

it would be a nice candidate for the ver 6 upgrade?
board, lots of Room!
pics on request to my email.
72
Johnny AC?BQ?

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

#85195

Hi Rafael, my basic kit is on the way as well and i'm also researching housing options.
I have a 3d printer and i'm planning to print what's missing of the enclosure.
Would you kindly measure the two plexiglass parts for me? So that i can see if they fit in any 3d printed model.

Thank You

Re: How long does shipping take?

#85194

Next DHL round?
E-38911 Frontera....
Wikipedia shows:

But DHL ask:
Pse supply the country and the ZIP Code
...its for cry and laugth...
?
---
73 de Erich

HB9FIH

HS0ZLS

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

#85192

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 07:49 PM, Rafael Diniz wrote:

Btw, I noticed I get zero output on 6.9MHz, and full power on 7100. Why?

I believe it is due to this section of the v6.1 code where the low pass filter is selected:

void setTXFilters_v5(unsigned long freq){

??

? if (freq > 21000000L){? // the default filter is with 35 MHz cut-off

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);

? }

? else if (freq >= 14000000L){ //thrown the KT1 relay on, the 30 MHz LPF is bypassed and the 14-18 MHz LPF is allowd to go through

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 1);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);

? }

? else if (freq > 7000000L){

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 1);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 0);? ??

? }

? else {

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_A, 0);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_B, 0);

? ? digitalWrite(TX_LPF_C, 1);? ??

? }

}

Note that there is a small bug in the above, as the 60/80 meter filter will be selected if the frequency is set exactly at 7MHz.? Not sure that anyone would run that close to the band edge, but it does mean that taking any measurements you would want to be at least a few hertz above 7MHz.? I would have made the compare >=.? The same is true for 15m (21MHz).

You need to also take into account the sidetone offset when testing CW, as the actual carrier is shifted by the sidetone value.? Since I do not have a v6 I am not sure how the CWL or CWU mode is handled.? All of my uBITX have been converted to KD8CEC firmware.? To be safe, the best bet is to set a test frequency of 1kHz or more above the 21MHz and 7MHz filter selection points.

73
Evan
AC9TU

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

Mark - N7EKU

#85191

Hi,

6.9MHz is outside the ham bands.

Optimize for 5 - 6 MHz range

#85190

Already read it is because of the LPF in the output. Has anyone already
modified the ubitx v6 to optimize for the 5 to 6MHz range for civil HF use?

Rafael

Show quoted text

On 1/5/21 10:49 PM, Rafael Diniz wrote:
Thanks Rafael!

Btw, I noticed I get zero output on 6.9MHz, and full power on 7100. Why?

Rafael PU2UIT


On 1/5/21 10:23 PM, rafaelgcpp@... wrote:
For radio audio out to pc line in, a stereo cable will do. On the
other way around use two stereo plugs but leave the mid section of the
plug disconnected. The mid section on the mic input is the PTT, hence
a mono plug will put the radio in tx continuously. Using a regular
stereo cable can lead to erratic behavior, as the radio will
understand some low voltage as PTT pressed.

OpenPGP_signature

Re: IRF510 sale

#85189

group,

I need the parts list for the transmission step, at least uBITX v4.
I need to order IRF510, LM78L05ACZ (U2 voltage regulator), 10K potentiometer (RV2 and RV3), which I intend to order from Mouser.

--

73's PY2PVB

Rubens Kamimura

Técnico em Eletr?nica e Eletrotécnica

CFT/CRT-SP: 80254934820

Cel. +55 (18) 9-9819-2225 WhatsApp

Em sex., 1 de jan. de 2021 às 16:05, Ted via <k3rta=[email protected]> escreveu:

Show quoted text

"Power from the 16db 2n3904 based driver stages falls off as the frequency goes up.
That may well be more of a factor than the IRF510's in your "much less on the higher bands".

I concur with Jerry and did follow Allison's lead that band performance upstairs can be improved by swapping 2N2222 cans for the original pre driver & driver 3904's with resistor halving as suggested.??

I've done that on one board and have been happy. On a separate board, I put in one 2N5109 for each pair of 3904's. That works especially well with 20v on the finals.? I'm getting around 20-25W SSB on 20 meters, and maybe 15 -20 on 80 & 40.??

Ted
K3RTA?

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

#85188

Thanks Rafael!

Btw, I noticed I get zero output on 6.9MHz, and full power on 7100. Why?

Rafael PU2UIT

Show quoted text

On 1/5/21 10:23 PM, rafaelgcpp@... wrote:

For radio audio out to pc line in, a stereo cable will do. On the
other way around use two stereo plugs but leave the mid section of the
plug disconnected. The mid section on the mic input is the PTT, hence
a mono plug will put the radio in tx continuously. Using a regular
stereo cable can lead to erratic behavior, as the radio will
understand some low voltage as PTT pressed.

OpenPGP_signature

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

#85187

Rafael,

For radio audio out to pc line in, a stereo cable will do. On the other way around use two stereo plugs but leave the mid section of the plug disconnected. The mid section on the mic input is the PTT, hence a mono plug will put the radio in tx continuously. Using a regular stereo cable can lead to erratic behavior, as the radio will understand some low voltage as PTT pressed.

73 de PU1OWL
Rafael Pinto

Re: unboxing the ubitx v6

#85186

ok. I'm on air on the 40m band, the radio is wonderful

for data modes, apart of the PTT I can do over serial, for the audio
path, which cables should I use to connect to line-in and line out of a
sound card? Normal mono or stereo jacks, or something else?

Cheers,
Rafael

Show quoted text

On 1/5/21 8:28 PM, Rafael Diniz wrote:
Hi there,

I bougth a ubitx v6 basic kit, and I'm wondering what to do with the two
parts cut with the shape of the ubitx? It there a "case guide" on how
can I get my ubitx in a nice casing?

And btw, in the 12v jack, the positive is the center, and negative the
outer side of the jack, right?

Yay! I'll be on air soon.

Rafael PU2UIT

OpenPGP_signature

开云体育