开云体育

why does this group have people smarter than me? wrote:

You would get 2.4 Farhan! One turn of tune shaft should turn encoder 10 times to get 240.

Hello, What I saw is actually a tough one, but doesn’t interfere with the operation. Besides I did the test to remove it and put 2 separate power supplies of 5V and 12V, my parasitic noise does not

Why not pulley-and+thread the existing encoder to a smaller shaft? If the drum Diameter on the encoder is 10 times the diameter of your tuning shaft, you will be 240 pulses instead of 24.

Trystan I am thinking there is a large population of v3 and v4, I wonder if they might outnumber the later versions. Our local club did a group build, more than 2 dozen. Actually my v4 was originally

Optical encoders that drive a small computer like an Arduino should be easy to handle in software. It the number of states per revolution is too high, just use a software divider to lower the number

Jack Me too. It sounds like fun! Arv _._ [email protected]> wrote:

Hi Reed, That's exactly what I did. In addition, I toned down fastTune() by a factor of 20 or so. And I changed the minimum step size to ( I think ) 25Hz. - Jerry

All, Well, I have a solution to the loud sidetone. Sort of. In cwKeydown() I replaced the call to tone() with a call to analogWrite(). By specifying a really low value ( 1 ) , I was able to get a CW

Hi Jerry, The only function that should really need adjusting is enc_read ( https://github.com/reedbn/ubitxv6/blob/master/encoder.cpp#L110 ). If you revise it to the below, it will be fully linear:

Actually, yes, I can report that putting a 5k ppt in there (or a 10k divider) will drop side tone. Ted

I understand exactly where you're coming from!

All, The CW sidetone is extremely loud. Is it adjustable? Don't think so. It comes out of an Arduino pin and is fed directly into the receive audio chain just before the volume control. OK, is it

Hi Arv: I misunderstood what you were saying for the?clear dumb terminal. Your solution works fine, is easy to code...what's not to like? If the column does come into existence, I hope readers will

Joe: There are a lot of optical encoders that can approach 200 ppr, but they're not cheap. I think I saw one on eBay for less that $30, but that was several weeks ago. Some go as high as several

All, As a first cut toward reasonable tuning, I tried disabling the "momentum" stuff in encoder.cpp. Not too bad. It tunes fairly slow, and is not at all "skittish". But I wouldn't want to scan to the

Hi Jerry, Are you happy with how Reed's firmware works for tuning?? I don't know if the tuning is different on that version or how it works. I have made changes to the tuning myself as I really

Justin, That is the same way that I connected the AGC for my friend's ?BITX.? Was not sure if you did the connection to the board or the volume control. I complain about keyboards and spellcheckers

Jack, That would be very cool. But darn, I’d have to subscribe to CQ. If they go for it let me know and I’ll subscribe. I’ve been wondering about a better encoder. Something like 200 PPR so a

I would be interested in this topic. I put together one that I got a couple of years ago (a v4).