¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io

Re: Welcome to the group!!

 

Thank you Andy,
for your excellent?work too.

Panow sv1acw

On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 1:28 AM g6lbq via <ah.electronics=[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Panos

Thanks for joining the group.

Regards

Andy G6LBQ


--
de sv1acw


Re: Welcome to the group!!

 

Hi Panos

Thanks for joining the group.

Regards

Andy G6LBQ


Welcome to the group!!

 

Thank you for accepting me into the G6LBQ group.
It seems to be a fascinating group fulfilling the real amateur spirit of radio as ITU refers to, establishing?the radio-amateur service.
I guess I am here to have a pleasant time trying to recover the?new developments in radio!

73's de sv1acw Panos
Athens/Greece

--
de sv1acw


File /G6LBQ Irwell Transceiver/STM32 Si5351 VFO/Oscillator & Multiplexer Module/G6LBQ_Irwell_VFO_Osc_Module_Rev2.0 .pdf .pdf uploaded #file-notice

Group Notification
 

The following files and folders have been uploaded to the Files area of the [email protected] group.

By: g6lbq <ah.electronics@...>

Description:
Schematic For G6LBQ Irwell HF Transceiver Oscillator & Multiplexer With TCXO.


Re: Multiband BITX Mk 1 Linear Amp

 

Hi Adrian

Unfortunately I do not have a MK1 linear board to hand I can test though I may have one packed away in my attic and if I get time over the weekend I will have a look.

To use the Mk1 linear with the MK2 exciter the RF output ideally needs reducing by 15 to 17dB, this will take the MK2 exciters RF output down from around 500mW to 10mw and produce 10 watts of RF output from the MK1 linear.

You could drive the MK1 linear a little harder and get up-to 20 Watts RF output but the linearity will start to reduce.

The MK1 linear was originally produced to match the MK1 exciter which only had an RF output of a few mW which is much less than the MK2 Exciters 500mW so the excess power must be reduced via the attenuator.

Regards

Andy G6LBQ


Re: Multiband BITX Mk 1 Linear Amp

 

Hi Andy
Thanks for the reply.
I have been using the instructions dated 10 April 2013 to set up the PA.?

Could you confirm a few things please ? Referring to the instructions above, my measurements are:
  • Test 1: I measure no standby idle (well I measure a few micro amps like 5 or 6uA)
  • Test 2: I measure around 20mA
  • Driver BIAS adjustment: I can set the BIAS to 145mA (20mA plus 125mA
  • I can then BIAS each of the output devices to 250mA each. So a total current consumption of 645mA.
I am not sure about the standby idle current, this is really weird.?
Could you also advise typically how much attenuation is used between the MK2 Exciter and the amp. ?

Cheers

Adrian M1LCR


Re: Multiband BITX Mk 1 Linear Amp

 

Hi Adrian

Sorry to hear you are having problems with your MK1 Linear amplifier.

I am not aware of any issues with the MK1 linear apart from people over driving it when used with the MK2 multiband.

It sounds like the BC640 is passing excessive current so it may be worth checking the 5 volt regulator in the bias circuit, also please ensure when you first power up the amplifier the three bias presets are set so the wiper is at the ground position as this will prevent the RF driver and output transistors from being biased.

With the RF transistor bias presets all set to zero or ground the BC640 should switch and power the 5 volt regulator with minimum load/current being passed, if the BC640 still fails there must be a short or faulty component in the bias circuit.

I hope this helps and you can resolve the problem.

Regards

Andy G6LBQ


Multiband BITX Mk 1 Linear Amp

 

Hi all

Having just resurrected my G6LBQ Multiband BITX transceiver I discovered a problem with the PA. Historically I had issues with a splurge of carrier and stuff as I went from TX to RX. Now fixed.

However the PA stage is playing up, and taking it of the case and testing results in the BC640 transistor giving up as soon as I go to TX. I cannot measure the idle current (35mA). Has anyone else had problems with the Mk 1 PA ?

I notice there is a MK2 and a MK3 so am wondering if there was a common problem, hence the new versions ?

Cheers

Adrian M1LCR


Re: Hi mate

 

Haha I'm fine mate, qnd yes still have radio close by and fingers crossed I will have a huge shed shack by summer so looking forward to getting stuck in again?


On Thu, 10 Feb 2022, 13:52 g6lbq via , <ah.electronics=[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Paul

Good to see you are still part of the family :)

Doing okay here and hope all is well with you and your family.

Regards

Andy (G6LBQ)


Multimode Double Balanced Modulator.

 

Hi Everyone

I have just posted details on my blog detailing the Irwell transceiver modulator.

The web link to the post is:



I hope it is of interest!

Regards

Andy (G6LBQ)


Re: Hi mate

 

Hi Paul

Good to see you are still part of the family :)

Doing okay here and hope all is well with you and your family.

Regards

Andy (G6LBQ)


Hi mate

 

Hi Andy, hope you doing ok mate?


Irwell transceiver update

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Hi Andy,

Your update to the IF amp/agc looks great.

Had few questions as outlined below.

If I were to use the AD8361 outside of your agc circuit as a AM demod what is signal range in dBm that it can successfully demodulate ? E.g -40dBm to -10dBm

Can you indicate the input matching component values in your IF/agc for an IF or 9 MHz or 10.7 MHz

Also could you help with calculating the diplexer values in your mixer for an IF or 10.7 MHz and 45 MHz ?

The current values in the diplexer are for 11.059 MHz.
Can you explain your component value choices for 11.059 MHz ?

I looked at the values and somehow they didn¡¯t seem to match the expectations below.

Series LC branch XL = XC = 50 x Q factor at IF freq

Parallel LC branch XL = XC = 50/ Q factor at IF freq



Kind regards

Rahul.S


Re: AD831 Mixer vs ADE-1-24

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Hi,

I have conducted measurements, but I certainly have built a dual conversion IF sub module. (See photo below)

Image.jpeg

Kind regards

Rahul.S


Re: AD831 Mixer vs ADE-1-24

 

Hello AP2RF,
I have not done comparative tests in the laboratory, but the advantages and disadvantages of one or the other are also highlighted by the respective data-sheets ...
If your desire is limited to the "Noise Figure" it is evident that the ADE-1 mixer from Mini-Circuits has an isertion loss of 6db (¡À 0.5db) over the entire usable band, from LF to UHF, while the 'AD831 declares nothing below 50MHz with a "Noise Figure" of at least 10db around 75MHz, growing up to 17db between 200 and 250 MHz.
There are two other important factors in favor of the ADE-1:
1) does not require power supply
2) simply by phase-shifting the mixer with a DC voltage, a direct passage between LO and FR can be obtained (unless the mixer attenuation), also allowing CW transmission by intervening only on the LO frequency.
In conclusion, although I have never tried the AD831 directly (but I have tried similar ones like the NE602), I have always been in favor of passive mixers, more versatile and with less intermodulation products than active mixers.

73 de IW4AJR Loris

AD831 data sheet
ADE-1 data sheet?



Which one has a better Low noise figure,? low conversion loss and IMD?? Kindly share your experience of AD831 as the first mixer in HF.



Looking forward to your valued experiences on Linear Mixers.

Cheers & 73s / AP2RF / RIFFAD?

?
--
----
IW4AJR Loris


Re: AD831 Mixer vs ADE-1-24

 

Hi Riffad

I have played a little with the AD831 mixer and in general it is a nice device, I used a couple of the mixers in a dual conversion receiver and they performed okay.

Being an active device there is no conversion loss unlike a typical Level 7 diode ring mixer which exhibits 5dB loss.

The AD8361 device does have a fairly high noise figure of 10.3dB but the IP3 is quoted as +24dBm which is better than a diode ring mixer @ 15dBm

One thing to be aware of is the local oscillator level which must be set correctly, to much drive and you will end up with distortion products.

I would certainly buy one of the ready made mixer boards using this device as it is a great module to have to hand.

I have built H-Mode mixers and am using one as the 1st mixer stage in my Irwell transceiver and that has an IP3 of 45 to 50dBm so it really is in a different league.

Hope this helps

Regards

Andy (G6LBQ)


Re: AD831 Mixer vs ADE-1-24

 

Ad831 mightvwell work for qo100? upconversion. I saw people using it.? Ade1- ask is working well upto 800mhz


Regard
Sarma vu3zmv?

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021, 09:10 R-TEK, <riffad@...> wrote:
Hi Friends, Its AP2RF Here,?

Did anyone try AD831 Mixer Kit for HF Bands?? Any comparison with ADE-1-24 Mixer?

Which one has a better Low noise figure,? low conversion loss and IMD?? Kindly share your experience of AD831 as the first mixer in HF.



Looking forward to your valued experiences on Linear Mixers.

Cheers & 73s / AP2RF / RIFFAD?


AD831 Mixer vs ADE-1-24

 

Hi Friends, Its AP2RF Here,?

Did anyone try AD831 Mixer Kit for HF Bands?? Any comparison with ADE-1-24 Mixer?

Which one has a better Low noise figure,? low conversion loss and IMD?? Kindly share your experience of AD831 as the first mixer in HF.



Looking forward to your valued experiences on Linear Mixers.

Cheers & 73s / AP2RF / RIFFAD?


Re: Irwell STM32 Digital VFO

 

I have now uploaded the JA2GQP source software for the STM32 Si5351 VFO into the files section.

This is the software that I have used as a base for the Irwell Transceiver VFO.

Regards

Andy (G6LBQ)


Re: Irwell STM32 Digital VFO

 

Hi Rahul

I used the TCA9548A Multiplexer IC in my VFO which has 8 channels, the PCA9540B only has two channels which is not enough for my VFO as I am using 3.

Still the PCA9540B is a useful IC so thanks for the suggestion.

Regards

Andy (G6LBQ)