Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
Search
QRP SWR meter recommendation?
#ubitx
So far I have been setting the antenna tuner using my Kenwood and then swapping in the uBITX.? But now we want to take the uBITX on the road.? Problem is that the uBITX does not put out enough power for full deflection on our MFJ versa tuner II so we cannot get an accurate SWR reading to tune the antenna.? Does anyone have recommendations for a QRP SWR meter?? Thanks!
73, Mike KK7ER (and son KI7ZZS) |
Joe Milosch
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 08:31:35 -0700
"Mike KK7ER" <groupio@...> wrote: Hi, try the Emtech ZM-2 It only handles 15 watts, but is highly regarded. Comes as a kit or pre-built. Youtube has a few good reviews. Joe So far I have been setting the antenna tuner using my Kenwood and then swapping in the uBITX.? But now we want to take the uBITX on the road.? Problem is that the uBITX does not put out enough power for full deflection on our MFJ versa tuner II so we cannot get an accurate SWR reading to tune the antenna.? Does anyone have recommendations for a QRP SWR meter?? Thanks! |
If all you want is an SWR meter and are on a budget,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
consider this guy from Diz at $12 for the kit: ? ?? The Emtech would be nice though, no need to haul out that MFJ. Might be a way to hack a switch into the MFJ to give a low power option. I'm not familiar with it. Jerry On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 08:40 AM, Joe Milosch wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 08:31:35 -0700 |
V Zecchinelli
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
So far I have been setting the antenna tuner using my Kenwood and then swapping in the uBITX.? But now we want to take the uBITX on the road.? Problem is that the uBITX does not put out enough power for full deflection on our MFJ versa tuner II so we cannot get an accurate SWR reading to tune the antenna.? Does anyone have recommendations for a QRP SWR meter?? Thanks! |
I'm able to tune on the same tuner with a non Bitx/uBitx with 6 watts. 73 Ken VA3ABN On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Mike KK7ER <groupio@...> wrote: So far I have been setting the antenna tuner using my Kenwood and then swapping in the uBITX.? But now we want to take the uBITX on the road.? Problem is that the uBITX does not put out enough power for full deflection on our MFJ versa tuner II so we cannot get an accurate SWR reading to tune the antenna.? Does anyone have recommendations for a QRP SWR meter?? Thanks! |
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 09:37 AM, Jerry Gaffke wrote:
If all you want is an SWR meter and are on a budget,I second that.? Cheap and easy.? I have a few around here, one standalone in a box. Some of the others are built into a radio.? Does the job. Allison |
Hi Mike,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The tuner itself does not care how much power you use to 'set' it as long as it isn't *more* than it can handle. It is not impressed if your TX can pin the needle or not. If your uBitx will only drive the meter to half scale in it's "Forward" configuration then set the "Cal" knob full right. Flip the switch to "Reverse" and adjust the tuner for minimum as per usual. If you can get it all the way to zero - well zero is still zero. And less is still less. So what if you can't read that it is 1.25 to 1 if it is 1.25 to 1. A zero in "Reverse" is 1:1 no matter how high the TX didn't drive the needle in "Forward". I built an SWR bridge that could be pinned with less than two watts (maxed at about 30) and discovered that it doesn't make any difference as described above. What does make a difference is a tuner and SWR bridge built for QRP power levels can be made much smaller and lighter:) Put the tuner and the bridge in the same box together for even more convenience out in the field. Like a scaled down version of your MFJ. If you build it into your uBitx you will forfeit using it with other radios but will be even more convenient when taking the uBitx to the field. Keep us posted with progress. 73, Bill KU8H On 08/20/2018 11:31 AM, Mike KK7ER wrote:
So far I have been setting the antenna tuner using my Kenwood and then --
bark less - wag more |
开云体育I would also recommend the ZM-2 tuner if you do need a SWR meter reading.It has a resistive bridge to protect your rig, very fast to tune, and the range is amazing. ?You could likely tune to low SWR on a pool umbrella with it! ?Now that I think about it...Maybe I will give it a try this week!? Best regards, |
开云体育Sorry guys. ?A Typo on my ZM-2 recommendation. ?If you “do not” need a metered SWR display. ?The tune to a dim LED works great except in direct sunlight. ?In this case I use a small shade. ? |
Bill, I guess you are right.? I ought to be able to do some experiments before we leave to get a sense for how the MFJ performs at low power.? If I can understand what readings correspond to 2:1, I can keep it below 2:1.? And we can order one of the kits and take our time building it.? Thanks!
73 Mike KK7ER |
Correct, no meter provided.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
A DVM is sufficient. Or could go into analog pin A7 (with an analog switch to select forward/reverse) of the Nano.? Perhaps both A6 and A7, use D0,D1 for the keyer if you want CW. Let the Nano take care of the math. On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 09:06 PM, Mike KK7ER wrote: Allison, the instructions are pretty terse.? Looks like the meter/meters does/do not come with it.? How does it work?? Use a DMM to measure forward and reverse voltages and do the math in my head?? Thanks! |
Here are some code snippets from a project I did. It calculates SWR from the voltages read from analog pins A6 and A7.
It does a number of other things, so here are the basic pieces of code for SWR extracted out into small snippets. This first code segments captures selected analog pin voltages and applies an exponential smoothing filter to them.
This next slice of code captures the max voltage and applies a slow decay to the max value.
And here the SWR is calculated from the Max values.
You can see the full code here: Tom, wb6b |
Gordon Gibby
开云体育If you look at the schematic of your tuner, there is probably one or two resistors in a voltage divider chain that you could parallel ?something with to increase the voltage that gets to the meter. ?Either before or after the rectifier diode or diodes. ?Just make sure that whatever gets done to the forward circuit is the same as what gets done to the reverse circuitSecondly, you don’t have to have a full-scale indication to figure out your swr. ?It’s a relative measurement. ? If the reverse is 50% of the forward on the meter range, most of the time youre at 3 to 1. ?You could look at how yours is calibrated to verify
that. ??
You can first do a rough tune just using the receiver, adjusting for loudest receive noise. Then get the transmitter going & null out the return as low as you can.
Some of the other people may already have pointed it out, but there are several excellent little qrp swr kits out there that implement a simple resistive bridge circuit going to an LED diode, and you adjust tuner for the dimmest diode or so. ? They are
basically comparing against a 50 Ohm load and when your Antenna has been transformed into 50 ohms there is no longer relative voltage between the Antenna and the reference 50 ohms, so the light emitting diode goes dark.
Cheers
Gordon
|
Gordon Gibby
开云体育Here is an example of one of the little swr indicators ?where you just dim the diodeI’ve used that kind of a circuit as well as the two torrid system ?others recommended which also works fine but you’ll need an external meter or voltmeter or something.?
|
Jack Purdum
Tom: You can get a marginal speed improvement by moving the data definitions out of the loops. For example:
float scaledReadin;
for (int pin = 0; pin < ELEMENTS(_analogValue); pin++) {
?? if (_analogActive[pin]) { ???? scaledReading = analogScalingFactor * (float)analogRead(pin);
???? _analogValue[pin] += (scaledReading - _analogValue[pin]) * _analogFilterValue[pin];
The macro ELEMENTS() allows you to determine the number of elements in an array automatically a compile time, thus eliminating the need to hard-code array sizes into the body of the program. That way, you can simply change the definition of the array in one place in the code, recompile, and the new size is automatically changed everywhere in the code. The really nice thing about the macro is that it's completely typeless...that it, it will work with any aggregate data type. Moving the definition of a variable before and outside the loop saves the compiler the instructions necessary to adjust the stack pointer on each pass through the loop in the "in-scope, out-of-scope" aspect of a data definition within the loop. Quite honestly, on 8 iterations of the loop it will not likely be noticeable. Still, in other programs where SRAM is pretty tight, it could mean the difference between running and a stack crash. Jack, W8TEE
On Tuesday, August 21, 2018, 1:02:39 AM EDT, Tom, wb6b <wb6b@...> wrote:
Here are some code snippets from a project I did. It calculates SWR from the voltages read from analog pins A6 and A7. It does a number of other things, so here are the basic pieces of code for SWR extracted out into small snippets. This first code segments captures selected analog pin voltages and applies an exponential smoothing filter to them.
This next slice of code captures the max voltage and applies a slow decay to the max value.
And here the SWR is calculated from the Max values.
You can see the full code here: Tom, wb6b |
So to elaborate on my previous really short reply. I really like the macro, it handles the hardcoding the number of elements issue well.
For the definition inside the loop. I may be trusting the optimizer too much, the definition outside the loop is technically more correct. Out of curiosity I'll see if I can get an assembly output to look at, as with these tiny processors that type of code checking is still of value. In programming teams, as optimizers get better, the holy wars have started to move from coding style vs resulting assembly code to each individual programmer's perception of what must be easiest to read for them must therefore apply to everyone else. So, may have been beat-up in one of those wars.? Readability and coding is a manner that is consistent with the style of the team are good things, though.? Tom, wb6b |
to navigate to use esc to dismiss