A slight correction, or perhaps amplification: > Historically, feedback in amplifiers to maintain a somewhat constant output signal > was called ALC (automatic level control) > A google search for ALC finds that it is often a synonym for AGC. AVC (automatic volume control) is another term for this concept, and that is pretty much synonomous with AGC in my book. ?? /g/BITX20/message/68083ALC is more typically used with regard to transmitters, though I do seem to recall the term being used on receivers. There's also "automatic sound control" out there. What's the correct usage? I don't care. It's all auto gain control to me.? Which doesn't quite scan, but could be a song by Billy Joel. Jerry, KE7ER
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 09:03 AM, Jerry Gaffke wrote:
Regarding ALC vs AGC, we don't all speak the same language.
Historically, feedback in amplifiers to maintain a somewhat constant output signal
was called ALC (automatic level control).? We're talking tube radios from the 50's.
A google search for ALC finds that it is often a synonym for AGC. but ALC is now
more often used to describe a circuit in transmitters that maintain a somewhat
constant RF output power regardless of audio level going in.
Apparently in a few companies or groups or forums or regions, ALC might refer to
something that adjusts gain in an audio stage instead of an RF or IF stage.
That seems an arbitrary designation, what do we call gain control going into
an ADC that accepts analog signals between zero and 10mhz?
|
The S meter isn't intended for the guy at the other end. Band conditions and a whole host of other things will affect the signal strength. The S meter is for the operator, it gives him/her something to compare to other signals. Sharing that reading with the guy on the other end is only useful to him if the two (or more) talk on a regular basis or are making a comparison. "The band really sucks tonite, you're only an S7 where you're usually 20 over". "What's better, antenna A or antenna B?"
Vince - K8ZW.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/29/2020 10:59 AM, Jerry Gaffke via groups.io wrote:
Not that I would bother with an AD8307 on a simple transceiver for an
S-Meter.
Even if properly calibrated from uV at the antenna port, it doesn't
account for
your antenna system or local geography, and so is not that meaningful
for the
station at the far end.
May as well just pick a number somewhere between 9 and 1,
9 if it's the among the strongest signals, 1 if you can't hear it.
Or if you want to promote good feelings, just give everybody you can
copy a 9.
There are plenty of other design issues to obsess with first.
--
K8ZW
|
hello,
I tested the following thing.
I¡¯d like to change the 28,000,000 band to 26,960,000 that match the target frequency CIBIE.
So I changed in the manager, saved > Ok
I made a working stop of the Ubitx and recontrolled by rereading the memory Ok
Then, when I test and defy the BANDS, it stays on 28000000 and when I control in the memory of the Ubitx we came back to 28000000. So the program has to rewrite it?
You¡¯re gonna tell me why a frequence is cibie
It is simple, I would first made the emission part and test in emission.
Cibie frequencies, because for the moment it¡¯s the technical side that interests me and I have to admit, I don¡¯t have a license.
Well, after, I can pass it. test in France, 2 series of 40 questions on technique and regulation.
cdt
|
Re: A strange thing about calibration!!
Loris,
Thank you for your answer.?I suspected it was a pb of this type.
Actually my SI5351 is a module, and once disconnected, of course, the pb disappears. (no frequency in the BF section)
For the moment it is a Ubitx clone from M0THY.
https://ubitx.net/2018/07/02/homebrew-ubitx-with-through-hole-components/
I have made improvements, it works very well and it is only for the moment reception.
This does not prevent the reception, because this 16.6 khtz signal is not audible. The ears actually make the decoding and you only hear the sound BF.
For now it is more a V3 because the quartz is at 12MHZ.
Yesterday I received quartz 11.052Mhz. I have to sort them.To convert it like V5
a frequency, not too round, can help
Despite everything, there is this in the manager, perhaps to better calibrate all frequencies precisely.
But I didn¡¯t get an answer on it. no one may have tried these settings
in the Arduino program this value IF1 appears, but I am not a programmer
ex:?byte if1TuneValue = 0;? ? ? ? //0 : OFF, IF1 + if1TuneValue * 100; // + - 12500;
 4
We¡¯re talking about homemade, then?
cdt
|
Re: uBITX ... AGC or AVC?
Amplifier Research did this in their RF Levelers. They used a minicircuits mixer as an attenuator using a control voltage.
Vince - K8ZW.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/29/2020 02:30 AM, Raj vu2zap wrote: Loris,
Try something else..
Use a SBL-1 or similar. DBM. it is a BiDi device
Connect one RF port to signal INput and second to OUTput or other way.
Feed a DC control voltage through a resistor to the IF port. Try with 1-10K.
Vary the voltage and see the signal level change. The behavior is opposite
of the varicap control voltage.
We can use this for AGC and ALC in either direction.
Raj
At 28/10/2020, you wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 12:31 PM, Raj vu2zap wrote:
I had experimented with a AGC which was very simple. Disconnect
R23 and R43 from ground and introduce
a varicap which I had MV2109. A series resistor to the varicap
through which you varied the capacitance
and thereby the gain. This method worked very well with both IF
stages and even on the TX branch.
I wish some members would experiment on this approach.
Hello Raj ...
Interesting solution, if I have some free time I could try it!
I would like to have an explanation from you:
what is the function of AGC transmission for uBITX? ... perhaps as a
compressor instead of an external speech-processor?
Thank you, 73 Loris - IW4AJR
--
K8ZW
|
Re: Suggestion for the NEW UBITX V7.
You really need to check the output of these power supplies with a scope. I'm a cellular systems engineer at AT&T and our -48 volt charger outputs are really dirty. We have additional filtering installed at the radio equipment end of the power circuit to clean it up. In addition we only sell as used the units that took lightning strikes or have severe voltage drops at high current outputs.
John Norris K1CAG
On Thursday, October 22, 2020, 05:24:55 AM CDT, Karl Heinz Kremer, K5KHK <khk@...> wrote:
What would I search for if I am looking for these power supplies??
?
I use $18 surplus cell tower 48V supplies that are RFI free to run my amps
?
|
It's fine to go off topic, that's what a discussion does.
Anyways, the ND6T AGC circuit is about as simple as that from WB8YYY,
and doesn't depend on luck to find the right LED+LDR.?
Unfortunate that WB8YYY couldn't give specific part numbers.
I'd rather have a pot to set the decay time on an AGC circuit
than depend on the characteristics of an LDR (a light dependent resistor).
You may want a different setting for CW than SSB,?
or run into an operator who pauses between sentences.
While ND6T's circuit detects the signal level from the audio exactly as WB8YYY's does,
it attenuates the signal back at RF, not at audio.
Attenuating at RF prevents overloading the two IF amps,
and especially the audio pre-amp at Q70 which saturates first by a wide margin.
Several thousand of these were kitted up a couple years ago by Kees, no longer available.
I think clipping with a couple diodes to prevent ear damage is sufficient on a simple rig,
that and an RF gain pot that you then turn down till the distortion is gone.
Regarding ALC vs AGC, we don't all speak the same language.
Historically, feedback in amplifiers to maintain a somewhat constant output signal
was called ALC (automatic level control).? We're talking tube radios from the 50's.
A google search for ALC finds that it is often a synonym for AGC. but ALC is now
more often used to describe a circuit in transmitters that maintain a somewhat
constant RF output power regardless of audio level going in.
Apparently in a few companies or groups or forums or regions, ALC might refer to
something that adjusts gain in an audio stage instead of an RF or IF stage.
That seems an arbitrary designation, what do we call gain control going into
an ADC that accepts analog signals between zero and 10mhz?
My question is, what is a "BF level"?
Jerry, KE7ER
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 08:08 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
First of all, we all went a bit off topic!
The question was about how to somehow govern the BF level without becoming deaf to any strong signal interfering in the QSO!?
The origin was a beautiful article by WB8YYY explaining why using an ALC in the ?BITX circuit is less expensive, more efficient and easier to plug into the transceiver than any of the various "AGCs" on the KIT market.
|
Thats the objective of an ¡°S¡± meter. (¡°S¡± stands for signal strength and its in db or mv).?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Oct 29, 2020, at 8:10 AM, Raj vu2zap <rajendrakumargg@...> wrote:
? Bill,I completely disagree. Whatever signal is present at the antenna jack is what ?the meter shows.RajAt 29/10/2020, you wrote:Hi Raj,
S9 = 50 uV across 50 ohms. In the wild we rarely (if ever) have 50 Ohms at the antenna terminals. So there goes the baby along with the bath water. I do not know how to have a QSO a while the radio is connected to a set of lab equipment in a lab. I have to operate in the 'wild'.
73,
Bill ?KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/29/20 7:48 AM, Raj vu2zap wrote:
On S meter readings on 80's rigs:
I would generalize from my years of fixing and aligning rigs that S9 = 50uV at the antenna.
S8 = -6db of 50uV and S7 = -12db of 50 uV... below S7 the readings are approx.
S9+20/40/60 are usually correct although some rigs were slightly different at +60.
50uV is my first check for S9, if not then a retune and alignment would follow.
Raj
At 29/10/2020, you wrote:
Hi Bob,
The 'S' value in the RST does have some value but an estimate is good enough (and really all we can do). It is hard enough to pin down a number in a well equipped lab. A radio operating 'in the wild' (meaning outside of lab conditions) is just too uncertain. It is not a *hard* value. "Ten feet" is a good example of a hard value. There are no conditions where a ten foot pole can fit in a nine foot space.
I have pulled the cans off or partially off my ears for the same reasons as you and those old people (whoever they are). How do you do that with "earbuds"? A two-diode limiter works with those too. Use the volume control to keep out of the distortion levels. That's why it is called a volume *control*. Or just let your ears bleed. It can literally happen.
73,
Bill ?KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/28/20 5:40 PM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
Everything is relative. One's S-meter reading depends on the receiver AND the antenna. One too many variables. A Volume Unit reading is based on voltage across a standard resister value. The VU reading may be more accurate but still has too many variables.
Personally, I do not need an S-meter and unless someone asks me, I do not give a Signal Strength report. It means little to me when we are talking about readability.
I can come up with a circuit that may warm someone's heart but my V6 does not need an S-meter. HOWEVER, the same circuit can be an operator for the AGC circuit. Old time operators used to pull the "cans" off the ears and put them over the temple to either adjust the audio level or keep excessive volume from waking them up. Been there, done that...
Bob ¡ª KK5R
--
¡_. _._
|
Re: A strange thing about calibration!!
Hello Gerard,
Have you tried to load a very simplified software on the NANO?
I would not want the problem to arise from the verification cycle that the micro execute in the program loop ...?
The BF is the result of a beat between the second medium frequency and the BFO signal which could somehow be constantly read by the micro at every loop cycle (although this should not be true by analyzing the software), but it could also derive from the beating of the first MF which instead is probably verified by the various calls derived from the encoder control.
Furthermore it must be said that, despite all possible efforts and intensive use in all QRP KITS on the market, the SI5351 is a clock oscillator (square wave) that obtains the three outputs only through dividers and PLLs, therefore, what actually happens between the various beats of the various harmonics is not at all easy to verify.
I can't even imagine what a chain that allows to receive signals of a few tenths of ?V can actually decode ... it would be necessary to analyze the whole chain with an instrumentation system that is at least an order of magnitude more sensitive than the receiver .. . if you give me a few hundred million dollars, I'll do the research and purchase of the right equipment !!!! hehehehe !!!!!
Seriously, you don't tell me anything new, strange beats can arise anywhere, given the use of Micropocessors and Clocks that all work in square wave with very fast rising edges and consequently generators of almost infinite harmonics!
Greetings from IW4AJR Loris
|
Hi,
I respect that you see things differently:)
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/29/20 11:10 AM, Raj vu2zap wrote: Bill,
I completely disagree.
Whatever signal is present at the antenna jack is what the meter shows.
Raj
At 29/10/2020, you wrote:
Hi Raj,
S9 = 50 uV across 50 ohms. In the wild we rarely (if ever) have 50 Ohms at the antenna terminals. So there goes the baby along with the bath water. I do not know how to have a QSO a while the radio is connected to a set of lab equipment in a lab. I have to operate in the 'wild'.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/29/20 7:48 AM, Raj vu2zap wrote:
On S meter readings on 80's rigs:
I would generalize from my years of fixing and aligning rigs that S9 = 50uV at the antenna.
S8 = -6db of 50uV and S7 = -12db of 50 uV... below S7 the readings are approx.
S9+20/40/60 are usually correct although some rigs were slightly different at +60.
50uV is my first check for S9, if not then a retune and alignment would follow.
Raj
At 29/10/2020, you wrote:
Hi Bob,
The 'S' value in the RST does have some value but an estimate is good enough (and really all we can do). It is hard enough to pin down a number in a well equipped lab. A radio operating 'in the wild' (meaning outside of lab conditions) is just too uncertain. It is not a *hard* value. "Ten feet" is a good example of a hard value. There are no conditions where a ten foot pole can fit in a nine foot space.
I have pulled the cans off or partially off my ears for the same reasons as you and those old people (whoever they are). How do you do that with "earbuds"? A two-diode limiter works with those too. Use the volume control to keep out of the distortion levels. That's why it is called a volume *control*. Or just let your ears bleed. It can literally happen.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/28/20 5:40 PM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
Everything is relative. One's S-meter reading depends on the receiver AND the antenna. One too many variables. A Volume Unit reading is based on voltage across a standard resister value. The VU reading may be more accurate but still has too many variables.
Personally, I do not need an S-meter and unless someone asks me, I do not give a Signal Strength report. It means little to me when we are talking about readability.
I can come up with a circuit that may warm someone's heart but my V6 does not need an S-meter. HOWEVER, the same circuit can be an operator for the AGC circuit. Old time operators used to pull the "cans" off the ears and put them over the temple to either adjust the audio level or keep excessive volume from waking them up. Been there, done that...
Bob ¡ª KK5R
|
Bill,
I completely disagree.
Whatever signal is present at the antenna jack is what the meter shows.
Raj
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
At 29/10/2020, you wrote: Hi Raj,
S9 = 50 uV across 50 ohms. In the wild we rarely (if ever) have 50 Ohms at the antenna terminals. So there goes the baby along with the bath water. I do not know how to have a QSO a while the radio is connected to a set of lab equipment in a lab. I have to operate in the 'wild'.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/29/20 7:48 AM, Raj vu2zap wrote:
On S meter readings on 80's rigs:
I would generalize from my years of fixing and aligning rigs that S9 = 50uV at the antenna.
S8 = -6db of 50uV and S7 = -12db of 50 uV... below S7 the readings are approx.
S9+20/40/60 are usually correct although some rigs were slightly different at +60.
50uV is my first check for S9, if not then a retune and alignment would follow.
Raj
At 29/10/2020, you wrote:
Hi Bob,
The 'S' value in the RST does have some value but an estimate is good enough (and really all we can do). It is hard enough to pin down a number in a well equipped lab. A radio operating 'in the wild' (meaning outside of lab conditions) is just too uncertain. It is not a *hard* value. "Ten feet" is a good example of a hard value. There are no conditions where a ten foot pole can fit in a nine foot space.
I have pulled the cans off or partially off my ears for the same reasons as you and those old people (whoever they are). How do you do that with "earbuds"? A two-diode limiter works with those too. Use the volume control to keep out of the distortion levels. That's why it is called a volume *control*. Or just let your ears bleed. It can literally happen.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/28/20 5:40 PM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
Everything is relative. One's S-meter reading depends on the receiver AND the antenna. One too many variables. A Volume Unit reading is based on voltage across a standard resister value. The VU reading may be more accurate but still has too many variables.
Personally, I do not need an S-meter and unless someone asks me, I do not give a Signal Strength report. It means little to me when we are talking about readability.
I can come up with a circuit that may warm someone's heart but my V6 does not need an S-meter. HOWEVER, the same circuit can be an operator for the AGC circuit. Old time operators used to pull the "cans" off the ears and put them over the temple to either adjust the audio level or keep excessive volume from waking them up. Been there, done that...
Bob ¡ª KK5R
|
HELLO TO ALL !
First of all, we all went a bit off topic!
The question was about how to somehow govern the BF level without becoming deaf to any strong signal interfering in the QSO!
The origin was a beautiful article by WB8YYY explaining why using an ALC in the ?BITX circuit is less expensive, more efficient and easier to plug into the transceiver than any of the various "AGCs" on the KIT market.
For the S-meter (which is just an extra candy when you work in the mountains) I am attaching a simple simple schematic with a NE604 (now available as SA604 for no more than 3/4 $ from both DIGIKEY and MOUSER) that I used ?in the ILER-40.
Speaking of DIY, have you tried to build a simple but efficient spectrum analyzer? ... years ago I tried my hand at a project that only reached 300MHZ, that's where I discovered how important it is to try to get a linear dB detector! also a series of two old QST articles covered the subject and the NE/SA604 chip was already the best in cost and benefit back then!
For the rest of the speeches it seems to me that lately the HAM spirit has somewhat decayed, but it is only a little over forty years that I have been desperately trying to do the OM trying to adapt and align myself to the teachings of W1AW ... unfortunately I have my limits and I hope to become a little better and also include the "new" HAMs ...
Hello everybody ! ... discussion over!
73 de IW4AJR Loris
|
If you buy a bunch, one AD8307 is under $0.50
Not clear if those are factory seconds, clones, or got left over at the end of reels.
But as of three years ago, those ebay AD8307's were deemed good enough:
? ? http://ka7exm.net/emrfd/Messages/thread_14309.htm
It's a wonderful part, worth having $10 worth filed away if you build stuff.
Not that I would bother with an AD8307 on a simple transceiver for an S-Meter.
Even if properly calibrated from uV at the antenna port, it doesn't account for
your antenna system or local geography, and so is not that meaningful for the
station at the far end.
May as well just pick a number somewhere between 9 and 1,
9 if it's the among the strongest signals, 1 if you can't hear it.
Or if you want to promote good feelings, just give everybody you can copy a 9.
There are plenty of other design issues to obsess with first.
But an AD8307 as an RF probe can be extremely valuable.
Buy an AD8307 module if you don't want to spend a day fiddling with tiny parts.
Even the modules are well under $14, including shipping.
Anyways, thanks for the pointer to Pete's 40m SSB transcever.
Is there a complete schematic of it available somewhere?
There's a bunch of links at the bottom of that webpage, but nothing complete and consistent.
For example, these bidi amps are interesting, different from *Bitx* and W7ZOI designs:
? ??
and totally different than what's presented in this discussion:
? ??
No mention of prior art, or the pros and cons of his somewhat different implementation.
Jerry, KE7ER
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:33 AM, Dean Souleles wrote:
Let's see - one AD8307 from DigiKey is $14
|
Hi Raj,
S9 = 50 uV across 50 ohms. In the wild we rarely (if ever) have 50 Ohms at the antenna terminals. So there goes the baby along with the bath water. I do not know how to have a QSO a while the radio is connected to a set of lab equipment in a lab. I have to operate in the 'wild'.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/29/20 7:48 AM, Raj vu2zap wrote: On S meter readings on 80's rigs:
I would generalize from my years of fixing and aligning rigs that S9 = 50uV at the antenna.
S8 = -6db of 50uV and S7 = -12db of 50 uV... below S7 the readings are approx.
S9+20/40/60 are usually correct although some rigs were slightly different at +60.
50uV is my first check for S9, if not then a retune and alignment would follow.
Raj
At 29/10/2020, you wrote:
Hi Bob,
The 'S' value in the RST does have some value but an estimate is good enough (and really all we can do). It is hard enough to pin down a number in a well equipped lab. A radio operating 'in the wild' (meaning outside of lab conditions) is just too uncertain. It is not a *hard* value. "Ten feet" is a good example of a hard value. There are no conditions where a ten foot pole can fit in a nine foot space.
I have pulled the cans off or partially off my ears for the same reasons as you and those old people (whoever they are). How do you do that with "earbuds"? A two-diode limiter works with those too. Use the volume control to keep out of the distortion levels. That's why it is called a volume *control*. Or just let your ears bleed. It can literally happen.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/28/20 5:40 PM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
Everything is relative. One's S-meter reading depends on the receiver AND the antenna. One too many variables. A Volume Unit reading is based on voltage across a standard resister value. The VU reading may be more accurate but still has too many variables.
Personally, I do not need an S-meter and unless someone asks me, I do not give a Signal Strength report. It means little to me when we are talking about readability.
I can come up with a circuit that may warm someone's heart but my V6 does not need an S-meter. HOWEVER, the same circuit can be an operator for the AGC circuit. Old time operators used to pull the "cans" off the ears and put them over the temple to either adjust the audio level or keep excessive volume from waking them up. Been there, done that...
Bob ¡ª KK5R
|
Hi Bob,
It's back to that volume control again. Earbuds allow me to run at a much lower volume. A strict interpretation of what you said about damage from using earbuds means that earbuds would damage our hearing even if they were never plugged in and merely in our ears. I will always challenge that. And my earbuds do not 'seal' my ear canal. They are not the expensive kind so maybe that explains the lack of a seal. On the other hand, my cans do seal my entire ear including my ear canal. Except for the cheapest ones I have.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/29/20 7:10 AM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote: Bill, first of all, earbuds are a no-no. They damage the ears. Any device that is so perfect a seal to outside sounds damages the ears. First to go are the high frequencies thus the need for "old" hams to turn up the treble and turn down the bass.
I use over-the-ear earphones. My favorite is one I got from Radio Shack about 1970. The earpads wore out and were replaced with foam rubber squares that I found that had a 3/4-in round hole in the center. Problem is it has a 1/4-in plug so use it on my FT-890 but use other of like manufacture for other radios.
The RST for one person is not necessarily going to be the same number for another person since as taste is in a person's mouth, the hearing is in each individual's ears and is not normally a group thing. As different people see a diamond in different shades of color, different people hear a concert with varying shades of meaning.
I go the contest route: If a guy has a good sounding, loud enough signal, he gets a 5X9 but if it's in the mud, it then gets a 5X5.
Bob ¡ª KK5R
On Thursday, October 29, 2020, 6:52:14 AM EDT, Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:
Hi Bob,
The 'S' value in the RST does have some value but an estimate is good
enough (and really all we can do). It is hard enough to pin down a
number in a well equipped lab. A radio operating 'in the wild' (meaning
outside of lab conditions) is just too uncertain. It is not a *hard*
value. "Ten feet" is a good example of a hard value. There are no
conditions where a ten foot pole can fit in a nine foot space.
I have pulled the cans off or partially off my ears for the same reasons
as you and those old people (whoever they are). How do you do that with
"earbuds"? A two-diode limiter works with those too. Use the volume
control to keep out of the distortion levels. That's why it is called a
volume *control*. Or just let your ears bleed. It can literally happen.
73,
Bill? KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 10/28/20 5:40 PM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
> Everything is relative. One's S-meter reading depends on the receiver
> AND the antenna. One too many variables. A Volume Unit reading is based
> on voltage across a standard resister value. The VU reading may be more
> accurate but still has too many variables.
>
> Personally, I do not need an S-meter and unless someone asks me, I do
> not give a Signal Strength report. It means little to me when we are
> talking about readability.
>
> I can come up with a circuit that may warm someone's heart but my V6
> does not need an S-meter. HOWEVER, the same circuit can be an operator
> for the AGC circuit. Old time operators used to pull the "cans" off the
> ears and put them over the temple to either adjust the audio level or
> keep excessive volume from waking them up. Been there, done that...
>
> Bob ¡ª KK5R
|
Re: A strange thing about calibration!!
hello bob, thank you for your answer, but this does not solve my problem and I do not have an explanation on these 2 parameters in the ubitx manager. 
|
hello, I will do some tests later this that: Noise reducteur and some AGC noise reducrer + Bargraph with leds? kit less 2 euros. See A.....o. lm 1894 pcb board less 11€? see E..y. if you what DIY with transistors for AGC see here: /g/BITX20/topic/4103085#8877try to adapt that,?I think there have already been topics on this? lees 5€ orders placed cdt
|
Dean:
You're absolutely correct about the work done by Pete. Stick him in a jungle with a penknife and some matches and he'd come out a month later with a 1KW xcvr...he does amazing stuff.
Also, if you want to see some absolutely beautiful Manhattan style construction, look at work by Dave Richards, AA7EE. This is a series of photos of one of his builds:
There's a lot to be learned from both guys!
Jack, W8TEE
On Thursday, October 29, 2020, 8:34:04 AM EDT, Dean Souleles <dsouleles@...> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:44 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
AD8307
Hi Loris -?
Let's see - one AD8307 from DigiKey is $14 - my handful of parts is about $3 - so if you want to save "a lot of money" use my design :)!? ? In fact the entire? Furlough-40 can be built for less than $100 in parts - only about a dozen active parts for an SSB transceiver.
My purpose was not commercial - it was to lean basic electronics and RF theory and practice.? I'm not an EE and had very little electronics experience before building the Furlough-40.? ?The Furlough-40 is based on a brilliantly simple design by N6QW, Pete Juliano that uses only about a dozen active parts for an exceptional performing? scratch-built? QRP SSB rig.? Pete calls it the and he presented it to enthusiastic response at the GQRP club conference two months ago.??
At this point in my learning curve an "integrated, that's all folks" approach isn't for me.? ?built the F-40 from scratch because I didn't learn much from the simple uBitx kit build.? ?I built it during quarantine (thus the name "Furlough-40") earlier this year and have since worked "around the world" of 5 watts SSB phone and digital.? I could not be more pleased with how well the rig works and what I have learned. There is something to be said for simplicity,. Following Pete's advice I built my own Manhattan style boards, built one module at a time so I could really understand and learn how the circuit works.? So, when I wanted to add AGC and S-Meter I kept in mind the simplicity of design and low cost of components.? (Although adding a transistor and Op-Amp increases the active component count by 20%!) The great thing about this hobby is that there are continual learning opportunities.? ?And if you don't like it one way - you can have it your way!?
Thanks for the note and 73,
Dean
KK4DAS
-- Jack, W8TEE
|
Re: A strange thing about calibration!!
I was not talking about "calibrating" the V6, I call that something else. I was talking about "calibration" of the S-Meter/VU Meter at one point (volume level) and not assuming that it it correct for other volume levels.
I used to have a job at a calibration unit for the government and one item I calibrated was an audiometer. I used the Technical Manual for this and it was to check it at different levels represented by numbers on the unit's meter. Modern technology has not changed so much but military nomenclature and standards do not without being intensely documented. Therefore, proceed.
Bob ¡ª KK5R
On Thursday, October 29, 2020, 8:03:41 AM EDT, Gerard <kabupos@...> wrote:
Curt,
I don¡¯t think you understood what I meant.
Calibration is one thing, setting the BFO is another.
what I mean, when you do.calibration, you look for the zero beat.Then you validate
and have to reboot the Ubitx for this .
And that¡¯s where it¡¯s weird, your BF signal is good to the ear, but in fact it is modulated at the frequency of 16.6 Khtz. (60 micro second of pulsation). You don¡¯t hear it, but that¡¯s the reality. You can try to calibrate in all directions, you¡¯ll always get that result.
Plug an oscilloscope into the speaker and you¡¯ll see.
BFO setting has nothing to do with this.
Now, I have another question, does anyone know these settings
and their implications.
cdt
|
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:44 AM, IW4AJR Loris wrote:
AD8307
Hi Loris -?
Let's see - one AD8307 from DigiKey is $14 - my handful of parts is about $3 - so if you want to save "a lot of money" use my design :)!? ? In fact the entire? Furlough-40 can be built for less than $100 in parts - only about a dozen active parts for an SSB transceiver.
My purpose was not commercial - it was to lean basic electronics and RF theory and practice.? I'm not an EE and had very little electronics experience before building the Furlough-40.? ?The Furlough-40 is based on a brilliantly simple design by N6QW, Pete Juliano that uses only about a dozen active parts for an exceptional performing? scratch-built? QRP SSB rig.? Pete calls it the and he presented it to enthusiastic response at the GQRP club conference two months ago.??
At this point in my learning curve an "integrated, that's all folks" approach isn't for me.? ?built the F-40 from scratch because I didn't learn much from the simple uBitx kit build.? ?I built it during quarantine (thus the name "Furlough-40") earlier this year and have since worked "around the world" of 5 watts SSB phone and digital.? I could not be more pleased with how well the rig works and what I have learned. There is something to be said for simplicity,. Following Pete's advice I built my own Manhattan style boards, built one module at a time so I could really understand and learn how the circuit works.? So, when I wanted to add AGC and S-Meter I kept in mind the simplicity of design and low cost of components.? (Although adding a transistor and Op-Amp increases the active component count by 20%!) The great thing about this hobby is that there are continual learning opportunities.? ?And if you don't like it one way - you can have it your way!?
Thanks for the note and 73,
Dean
KK4DAS
|
Gerard
MadRadioModder
Raj vu2zap
Bob Lunsford
