Re: FT8 for U3?

#33691

Hi All,

   I have an interest in making QCX and other QRP-LABS products send JS8.

   The idea being that you send ASCII characters to the QCX and it forms JS8 packets and sends them as long as there are characters in the buffer.

   I that way your typing goes out maybe a different antenna and you can receive JS8 with your normal XCVR and computer at the same time :).

   You can also easily experiment with remote JS8 data collection sorts of things by just sending ASCII to the remote QCX.

   There is source code already on the web that runs in the QCX though off hand I don't remember where and haven't compiled and run it myself yet.

   Generating JS8 directly with the 5351 should give a very clean RF signal since the RF is created directly by that chip.

   Is anyone else interested?

   John

Show quoted text

On Sat, 20 Apr 2019, Andy Brilleaux via Groups.Io wrote:

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 12:46 PM, Alan G4ZFQ wrote:
      Serves you right:-) Built for Windows so you can have some of
      the updating pain we have?
Ironically, pre-built binaries for Raspberry Pi's (including v2.01) work
fine ;-)
But for those of us using our daily work machines, on stable and LTS support
code bases were completely disowned in favour of OS versions that are barely
out of beta testing.
- Andy -

Re: U3S transmitting through the case

#33690

...i also had an open circuit track on the PCB (link wire to relay #1). Once fixed (added a wire to the PCB to fix the track), the relay board started working.

--
Best regards,
Chris
M0XFL

Re: U3S: Apparent WSPR frequency error

#33689

On 20/04/2019 12:35, Hans Summers wrote:
Hi Alan
The change wasn't done, the U3S still transmits the specified frequency as
the WSPR's lowest tone, which is 2.19Hz below the center frequency.Hans,

Thanks, shows my check was pretty close!

73 Alan G4ZFQ

Re: QCX Rev 4 Build

#33688

Al, by any chance did you do a parts inventory before starting your build? I always start with a sort and inventory count just to make sure nothing is missing. I measure and sort first and my favorite material for holding part is a medium size piece of anti static foam that I insert the parts into. It’s my method of pluck and insert.

Skip Davis, NC9O

Re: U3S: Apparent WSPR frequency error

#33687

Hi Alan

The change wasn't done, the U3S still transmits the specified frequency as the WSPR's lowest tone, which is 2.19Hz below the center frequency.

73 Hans G0UPL?

?

Show quoted text

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019, 13:05 Alan G4ZFQ <alan4alan@...> wrote:

>From version 3.04 (of the old AD9850 DDS based U3), the U3S was changed to match the behaviour of the WSPR decoder (i.e. centre frequency). However, on migrating to the Si5351A this change got lost.

So I will try and put it also into the next U3S firmware version

Did this get done?
No problem. I was just wondering. Using v3.12a and WSPR is showing ~2 Hz higher on my test RX. I do not think it shows on Firmware history.

73 Alan G4ZFQ

?

?

Stock QCX-17 just scored its very first 15m CW QSO !

n4qa at_hotmail.com

#33686

Having been stoked by RBN reports of the stock QCX-17 on 15m from skimmer EA8BFK in the Canary Islands and PJ2A on Curacao yesterday, I thought I'd fire up on 15 a bit earlier today.
Tuning around, I found Jack, W4TJE down there along the Blue Ridge Parkway, a distance of some 35 miles south from me, as the crow flies.
Have a look at Jack's bio on QRZ. He runs some power and his antenna farm is a thing of beauty !
We had a pleasant QSO on 21007 kHz. We wished for each other good DX and, then, continued elsewhere.
OK, QSOs now successful on 30, 20, 17 and 15m using the stock QCX-17 !
Onward !
72 / 73,
Bill, N4QA

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33685

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 12:46 PM, Alan G4ZFQ wrote:

Serves you right:-) Built for Windows so you can have some of the updating pain we have?

Ironically, pre-built binaries for Raspberry Pi's (including v2.01) work fine ;-)

But for those of us using our daily work machines, on stable and LTS support
code bases were completely disowned in favour of OS versions that are barely out of beta testing.

- Andy -

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33684

I wonder what the default setting is, on or off ?
Andy,

The default is indeed "ON". Said to give a 1% improvement in decodes, |I think, by using the hashtable to identify previous decodes. Unfortunately it seems to work too hard and although the false decodes are mostly reasonably obvious they do stand out. Most find this annoying..

I just tried to install the latest WSJTX on Linux to find out, but the dev team insist on using
a new C library, and expect everyone to do a new OS upgrade just to run it.
Serves you right:-) Built for Windows so you can have some of the updating pain we have?

73 Alan G4ZFQ

Re: QCX Rev 4 Build

#33683

Getting those plastic threads to mesh can be very frustrating and take a whole lot of fiddling. Some times when you are ready to give up it will suddenly for no good reason work.

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33682

Hi Hans,
I think your last two reasons make most sense;

3) how many stations are active in each mode?

?

4) propagation conditions may favour shorter transmission bursts rather than a minute transmission?

Beaconing is fine but QSOs are what make life more interesting. WSPR15 is supposed to even better on SNR but I really hear anyone using it. I also found where WSPR on 2m yields nothing here, the band is alive with FT8 dx, of which some could be short term aircraft scatter.

73 ?Ken g4apb?

Re: a new QCX 20 begins

#33681

Yep, page 54 “The four windings on T1 must all be in the same “sense”. There are two ways to wind toroids. You might call them left-handed and right-handed; clockwise and counter-clockwise; whether the wire goes through the toroid from top to bottom, or from bottom to top. Whatever you call it, all the four windings have to be the same, to be sure to get the phasing to the quadrature sampling detector correct.” In my photo I had very carefully installed the windings with the three small ones one way but incorrectly with the large one the opposite and had to redo it .

Re: a new QCX 20 begins

#33680

Make sure the phasing is right on each and all of those coils
Not 100% sure it matters but I redid mine...

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33679

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 11:46 AM, Alan G4ZFQ wrote:

Yes the latest WSPR Deep decoder is prone to impossible decodes.
I find it better when I set Decode to normal.

Hi Alan,

I wonder what the default setting is, on or off ?

I just tried to install the latest WSJTX on Linux to find out, but the dev team insist on using
a new C library, and expect everyone to do a new OS upgrade just to run it.

That's pretty much p'd off 90% of Linux users who want to stick to a stable OS code base ;-)

- Andy -

Re: Will the VFO/Signal Generator + 12M LPF be suitable as LO for QO-100 LNB use?

#33678

I 'am very interested to use the QRP-Labs VFO/Signal Generator + the QLG1 as a affordable GPSDO for my ES'Hail 2 / QO-100 (Qatar Oscar 100) satellite LNB (LO 25 ~ 25.8 MHz.), Frank,

I left my reply waiting for someone who used Es'hail like that. My PLL is just about stable enough with sun screening but I'd think the QRP Labs VFO would do a good job.
 I expect you know some LNBs are reported not to work if the LO is set too far from standard.

73 Alan G4ZFQ

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33677

I may be talking cobblers here, but I *thought* the WSJT-X decoder allowed? AP (a priori) / deep decode.
Andy,

Yes the latest WSPR Deep decoder is prone to impossible decodes.
I find it better when I set Decode to normal.

Could explain why FT8 seems to keep breaking the laws of propagation physics.It depends who sets the laws:-)

73 Alan G4ZFQ

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33676

I may be talking cobblers here, but I *thought* the WSJT-X decoder allowed? AP (a priori) / deep decode.

As witnessed elsewhere on another mode, deep decode allowed the propagation mysterons to magically create
contacts that were previously deemed totally impossible, except when playing a game of Chinese Whispers
by through the internet ;-)

Could explain why FT8 seems to keep breaking the laws of propagation physics.

- Andy -

Re: QCX Rev 4 Build

#33675

Hi Al

The colour codes are 5-band. Did you measure 38 ohms? That is the while 5-band code?

73 Hans G0UPL?

Show quoted text

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019, 03:59 Al Lipinski <lipinski.al@...> wrote:

Is there a reason I am left with one resistor that measures 38 ohms (Orange/White/Black)???

All the white spacers in the kit will accept the screw in one end.? The screw wont fit in the other end of the spacer.?

Al Lipinski?

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 8:50 PM Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:
Hi Al

Yes. Non-critical. The most non-critical place for the low one would be C21 or C22.

73 Hans G0UPL?
?

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 05:48 Al Lipinski <lipinski.al@...> wrote:
Section 3.16 of manual?

Install 1uF capacitors (3).??

I measured two caps at 0.978 uF
I measured one cap at 0.775uF? ?.? About - 22% tolerance
Should I install the low cap?????

Thanks,?

--
Al Lipinski

--
Al Lipinski

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33674

All

WSPR *should* have much higher SNR than FT8.?

WSPR: 50 bit payload, sent in 2 minutes, 6Hz bandwidth.?

FT8: 75 bit payload, sent in 15 seconds, 50Hz bandwidth?

FT8 sends more info, and 8x faster, and 8x more bandwidth. These aren't the only factors. But if all else was equal, by quite a wide margin, WSPR ought to provide more copy (or at lower power) than FT8.

I think that other factors might influence spot rate; for example

1) how good are WSPR station's receiving capabilities and antennas? It is my impression that a lot of WSPR receiving stations are using wideband SDR dongles and such solutions - which typically don't give high performance.

2) congestion: if more WSPR signals are on top of each other, that could mean the weaker ones aren't getting copied. Same applies to FT8

3) how many stations are active in each mode?

4) propagation conditions may favour shorter transmission bursts rather than a minute transmission?

Just ideas.?

73 Hans G0UPL?

?

Show quoted text

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019, 10:24 Alan G4ZFQ <alan4alan@...> wrote:

, BUT, if I run a couple of CQs on FT8, I
> get reports at MUCH greater range and spots stations in The USA, deep
> into Russia and even South Arfrica. Clearly conditions are much better
> than WSPR predicts?

Ken,

OK, I cannot answer that, you tell me.
There are several questions.
Are the same antennas used each end? Many WSPR setups seem to use
compromise multiband antennas.
The same power as WSPR?
Is there similar levels of activity?

I have seen claims that the effectiveness of FT8 is because of greater
power, some that say WSPR gets through with less power. Have there been
definitive tests?

FT8 uses 15 seconds of 50Hz bandwidth, WSPR nearly 2 minutes of 6Hz
bandwidth with error correction. About the same time/bandwidth product
(if there is such a thing:-) but I'd think WSPR would be better, less
information.

73 Alan G4ZFQ

Re: FT8 for U3?

#33673

开云体育

Hi Alan,

I have used WSPR many times and have had reports from most continents ( not Antarctica ) using a few watts. The Racal ex-military rig I use for digital modes is currently undergoing a faulting issue.? As you rightly say it is only a one way mode so not used for communication. I was surprised to see you refer to it in your previous mail as a communication mode.

HAGWE

Geoff

On 20/04/2019 03:46, Alan de G1FXB via Groups.Io wrote:

Show quoted text

Hi Geoff,

(From the WSJT / WSPR modes home page.

Description
WSPR implements a protocol designed for probing potential propagation paths with low-power transmissions.? Normal transmissions carry a station's callsign, Maidenhead grid locator, and transmitter power in dBm.? The program can decode signals with S/N as low as -28 dB in a 2500 Hz bandwidth.? Stations with internet access can automatically upload their reception reports to a central database called WSPRnet, which includes a mapping facility.? To see a live version of the map pictured at top right, click here.)

My take is....
WSPR is useful as an own use propagation tool, I have used it since approx 20I0 having seen the work of W3PM / GM4YRE (?)
In all that time I have never used the WSPR mode intentionally for the purposes of communication for which it is not suited.
WSPR was conceived / is used as a one way RF based uplink mode having reserved allocations on specified Amateur Bands, with confirmation back from a remote RX station to the TX station provided via IP / internet?
As a by-product of acepting these terms of use, a database entry is available for free use to anyone having an interest, not necessarily restricted to licenced Radio Amateurs.
Alan

On 19/04/2019 23:46, geoff M0ORE via Groups.Io wrote:

Alan, is WSPR a communication mode?

Re: Will the VFO/Signal Generator + 12M LPF be suitable as LO for QO-100 LNB use?

#33672

Hi Frank

I don't know enough details about your application. What frequency stability is required at the operating frequency? Is the VFO output to be mixed with something to a higher frequency? Or multiplied to something? Or a reference? More details needed....?

73 Hans G0UPL?

?

Show quoted text

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019, 11:30 Frank de Wilde <ph2m@...> wrote:

Until now I received no more replies on my question, I 'am very interested to use the QRP-Labs VFO/Signal Generator + the QLG1 as a affordable GPSDO for my ES'Hail 2 / QO-100 (Qatar Oscar 100) satellite LNB (LO 25 ~ 25.8 MHz.), so please could someone including Hans (Summers) give me an advice if this will work?

73 de Frank PH2M