[Flexradio] July 1
Post deleted by admin.
Re: [Flexradio] Potential purchaser questions
Dana Although I don't want to say anything about the UCB project at this point, there are discussions to jump start this project again. As N4HY mentioned the possibility of some one to manufacture it. I have been discussing it with a number of folks, and also Reflector folks responded to me regarding the project, volunteering help. I will post when something is decided. Initially designed by Tony - KB9YIG with Terry - W0VB and Mike - KM0T, this is a great project, which needs some modifications and polishing. I would also like to see the Poor Man's UCB make progress, and Wally - M0ZAZ would be happy to have someone 'pick up' the project. More on all later. Thanks Eric2 - AA4SW -- Original message -- From: N1OFZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just wanted to say thanks to everyone who responded to my questions. I think at this point I am going to wait until a run of the UCB happens before I purchase a SDR-1000. Unfortunately, unless I can get a UCB or similar product the SDR-1000 is not going to work for my application. If any of the original list of pre-orderers backs out I'd be happy to take their place in line. In anticipation of my future purchase I'm going to sell my D800 laptop and buy a FireBox, PowerMate and an external reference. I'll still be on the list hopefully absorbing everything I can about this great radio. Again thanks, Dana N1OFZ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20060501/8e9e5e90/attachment.htm
Re: [Flexradio] RoHS was Re: July 1
Post deleted by admin.
[Flexradio] FlexRadio Official Position on RoHS
Dear FlexRadio customers, FlexRadio is actively in the process of certifying all components for RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances). Our contract manufacturer is fully compliant and has been building RoHS certified boards for other customers for a number of months. Assuming there are no major parts shortages due to the massive industry shift, we should be able to begin RoHS production in the month of July. Regards, Gerald Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR President FlexRadio Systems Ph: 512-535-5266 Fax: 512-233-5143 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.flex-radio.com http://www.flex-radio.com/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20060501/2229fd8b/attachment.htm
Re: [Flexradio] FlexRadio new address
GOOD! To paraphrase GE's old motto Profit is our most important product. We'll keep pushing the product, you guys keep building. 73, Larry K2LT Gerald Youngblood wrote: Dear FlexRadio customers, This is to announce that FlexRadio has a new physical address. We are now co-located with our contract manufacturing supplier, PenTech Assembly. Please use the new physical address for any shipments to FlexRadio as follows: FlexRadio Systems c/o PenTech Assembly 12100 Technology Blvd. Austin, TX 78727 The new location is allowing us to improve efficiency and communications with our strategic partner, PenTech. FlexRadio is enjoying significant growth, thanks to you our customers and ambassadors. Thanks to each of you for your contribution. 73, Gerald Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR President FlexRadio Systems Ph: 512-535-5266 Fax: 512-233-5143 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.flex-radio.com http://www.flex-radio.com/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20060501/04f672a2/attachment.htm ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
Re: [Flexradio] RoHS Tin Whiskers was Re: July 1
I have been following the RoHS requirements and one issue I see rarely discussed is the Tin Whiskers issue. For those that are not familiar with it please see the following WEB site: http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/background/index.htm It appears that with the switch to no-lead that the reliability of the equipment will be substantially reduced. This appears to be what happens when politics drive science. 73, Bill Bordy NJ1H
Re: [Flexradio] RoHS was Re: July 1
At 07:28 AM 5/1/2006, Lyle Johnson wrote: I assume you're talking about RoHS, which bans lead (except in certain very narrow situations, not applicable here) in electronics. I don't know much about how Gerald makes the boards for the SDR1000, but I wouldn't think that changing to no-lead solder is a big issue... Actually, it is a big issue. Turns out that no-lead solder manufacturing processes require more heat, and normal FR-4 PCBs tend to delaminate, so you must use high-temperature fiberglass. This is available, just more expensive -- 20% to 50% higher cost per board. I have heard that it depends a lot on what approach you're taking to RoHS. You can spend more on low melting solder alloys and keep the board the same (important for things where, for instance, the dielectric properties of the board are important), or, you can use the high melting point solders, and redesign the board. In some devices, the board itself isn't a big fraction of the cost of the total bill of materials, so even if the board cost 3 times as much, it's not a huge driver of total manufacturing cost. Fewer facilities are available to manufacture assemblies in a RoHS compliant way, and willing to certify same, so those costs go up. Yes... there is a certification cost, but I expect that it will come down fairly quickly, except for manufacturers aiming at huge volumes with offshore production. Those folks haven't ever been particularly concerned about paper trails and regulatory compliance anyway, just cranking out those $15 DVD players. In the case of my DSPx, the quotes I have for the raw PCB cost are double and the assembly costs will more than double what I am currently paying. But what fraction of the total cost is that, compared to the component cost, non-recurring-engineering, testing, shipping, support? RoHS hits hard on small volume, thin margin (e.g. the low budget ham widget, where the NRE is essentially free, low marketing costs, etc.). The components used in the product must all be RoHS compliant. Indeed.. but most manufacturers saw this coming, and actually, getting non-RoHS parts is sometimes harder than RoHS. There are some anomalies, though. Some popular parts are in short supply for RoHS compliant versions. Tesla coilers use a lot of 2000V, 0.15 uF high current low esr polypropylene capacitors, which are also used in other things.. the lead time on RoHS parts is many weeks, but stock on the non RoHS ones... A year from now, it will probably be reversed, as the manufacturers go to all RoHS. And it isn't just about lead. There are six commonly used substances that are banned or severely proscribed. Normal passivation processes used for aluminum, for example, contain banned substances, so even the case may be affected. The passivation issue probably arises more from the waste stream (what happens when you throw the passivated thing away): http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/waste/weee_index.htm is a related rule, which covers the list lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls, polybrominated diphenyl ethers. I have been given to understand that Cr6+ processes DO result in parts that exceed the 0.1% limit, so that IS an issue. 73, Lyle KK7P In any case, it's not like RoHS has suddenly appeared. Most manufacturers (and contract manufacturers), certainly those in the U.S. that have customers selling overseas, have been thinking about this for quite a while. There will be hiccups, prices will rise (a little) for some things, but overall, I wouldn't expect Flex-radio to have any significant problems. It's those zillions of little fab shops in the far east making a few container loads of boards at a time to stuff into talking teddy bears that will have trouble. (or, alternately, they'll just print up the certifications they need, figuring that by the time someone bothers to check, they'll have moved on to something else) James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
Re: [Flexradio] RoHS Tin Whiskers was Re: July 1
At 09:28 AM 5/1/2006, William Bordy wrote: I have been following the RoHS requirements and one issue I see rarely discussed is the Tin Whiskers issue. For those that are not familiar with it please see the following WEB site: http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/background/index.htm It appears that with the switch to no-lead that the reliability of the equipment will be substantially reduced. Problems with tin whiskers have been around a lot longer than RoHS (perhaps as far back as WW II?). It presents a problem with reliability of equipment designed for low cost production, with no budget for re-engineering, sure. But for the rest, it's not so clear. This appears to be what happens when politics drive science. No science involved here. Lead has been known as a toxin for centuries. It's just that society, as a whole, has decided that it's worth reducing the amount being discarded, much as they've decided that the societal costs of air pollution or persistent pesticides were greater than the cost of reducing it. In general, reducing waste in any form has a long term benefit because it provides more efficient resource utilization: in the sense that more of the value goes into the eventual product use, as opposed to being discarded during manufacturing or at product EOL. Not so much politics, but the race to the bottom for low cost production, driven by the capital market's expectations of short term returns on investment. In the long run, we DO benefit, even if we suffer from short term fixes. Consider, for instance, emissions controls on cars. The quick fixes of the 70s were pretty lame. Today, however, cars are more efficient, less expensive (in constant dollars), and last a lot longer, and run a lot better (because of electronic engine controls). Back in the 60s 70s, a car that lasted more than 100k miles was unusual, and a car that went 200k miles was something special (remember a print ad campaign about a VW or Toyota that had 250+k miles... the distance to the moon). Today, there's lots and lots of cars with more than 100,000 miles running just fine. And, what about muffler replacement (unleaded gas required reducing the sulfur in gasoline, which in turn reduced the amount of sulfuric acid that accumulated in the muffler.. further, the requirement that exhaust systems not leak for 50,000 miles prompted improvements in design to make them last longer) 73, Bill Bordy NJ1H James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
[Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
Hi Everyone, I'm interested in getting back into the software defined radio area = again. The last thing I did was the R2-DSP, and it looks like there = have been some good strides made since then. It looks like the SDR-1000 = is an open design, but I'm still looking for the schematic and possibly = source code of the control circuitry board. I'm also looking for the = source code and the description of the protocol used to communicate with = the DDS and relays (or possible micro-controller that controls them). = Can someone direct me to all that information? I don't want to just purchase an SDR-1000, and play with the software; I = would like to play with the hardware a little more this time, than I did = with the R2-DSP. Analog Devices is sampling the AD9954 now, and it = looks possibly more attractive than the AD9854. First, it has 14 bits = on the D/A, and I think it should have lower phase noise; third, it = dissipates about 1/4 the power, which is really nice because the AD9854 = some special requirements when it came to the circuit board design = because of the heat dissipation. Down sides are that you will need to = use two AD9954's or perhaps you could use a Johnson divider and drop 6 = meters, and the supply voltage is 1.8 volts, and I suppose there may be = some issues with the serial programming instead of parallel and syncing = the two DDS devices. What other things should I consider? Are there better reference oscillators available now? Are there other = tweaks to the circuit that you would recommend? Why has nobody made Gerber files available for the PC boards for the = SDR-1000? If I did a revised design, in keeping with the open nature of = this project, I would want to make those available under GPL. In our = lab at school, we have had very good luck with using surface mount = components and the toaster oven method of applying them. It is so much = faster than soldering through hole parts in, and a lot less tricky than = soldering surface mount components by hand. We have also been making = our own boards using a direct printing method on thin PCB material using = a Xerox wax ink printer and acid etch. The cost of producing a couple = of sets of boards using these methods is appealing to me at least, and I = think I could use them in at a couple of classes I teach. 73, Rob, KL7NA -- = Rob Frohne, Ph.D., P.E. E.F. Cross School of Engineering Walla Walla College 100 SW 4th Street College Place, WA 99324 (509) 527-2075 http://www.wwc.edu/~frohro -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: frohro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 318 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachm= ents/20060501/17dc9d8a/frohro.vcf
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
Rob Check with Marc, N2UO. He may be able to help you out. http://www.qsl.net/n2uo/sdr.html Phil, K3IB - Original Message - From: Rob Frohne [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Everyone, I'm interested in getting back into the software defined radio area again. The last thing I did was the R2-DSP, and it looks like there have been some good strides made since then. It looks like the SDR-1000 is an open design, but I'm still looking for the schematic and possibly source code of the control circuitry board. I'm also looking for the source code and the description of the protocol used to communicate with the DDS and relays (or possible micro-controller that controls them). Can someone direct me to all that information? I don't want to just purchase an SDR-1000, and play with the software; I would like to play with the hardware a little more this time, than I did with the R2-DSP. Analog Devices is sampling the AD9954 now, and it looks possibly more attractive than the AD9854. First, it has 14 bits on the D/A, and I think it should have lower phase noise; third, it dissipates about 1/4 the power, which is really nice because the AD9854 some special requirements when it came to the circuit board design because of the heat dissipation. Down sides are that you will need to use two AD9954's or perhaps you could use a Johnson divider and drop 6 meters, and the supply voltage is 1.8 volts, and I suppose there may be some issues with the serial programming instead of parallel and syncing the two DDS devices. What other things should I consider? Are there better reference oscillators available now? Are there other tweaks to the circuit that you would recommend? Why has nobody made Gerber files available for the PC boards for the SDR-1000? If I did a revised design, in keeping with the open nature of this project, I would want to make those available under GPL. In our lab at school, we have had very good luck with using surface mount components and the toaster oven method of applying them. It is so much faster than soldering through hole parts in, and a lot less tricky than soldering surface mount components by hand. We have also been making our own boards using a direct printing method on thin PCB material using a Xerox wax ink printer and acid etch. The cost of producing a couple of sets of boards using these methods is appealing to me at least, and I think I could use them in at a couple of classes I teach. 73, Rob, KL7NA
Re: [Flexradio] RoHS Tin Whiskers was Re: July 1
Bill, You are right, at least partially. There is a big risk of tin whiskers shorting the narrow gaps between the fine pitch lead-free solder joints, unless the manufacturers know exactly their materials and can strictly control the process. There are positive examples since several years when some leading Japanese manufacturers voluntarily changed over to lead-free assembly in their consumer electronics. So far no alarming reports. It is true, higher temperatures put a lot more stress to the material and components, but that is not the fault of politicians. The industry itself made wrong decisions when selecting the alloying materials for the lead-free solders used now generally in the RoHS process. There is a material and soldering process that would work riskless and even at much lower temperatures. It is called Transfusion Bonding that is using bismuth instead of lead for alloying the solder joint. In this process you tinplate the solderpads and componets and then add a thin layer of bismuth over tin. Reflow at +180 deg C, bismuth starts to melt already at 139 deg C, it diffuses quickly into the tin forming a thin alloy layer. All the time bismuth continues its diffusion into the tin matrix, thus the molten mix becomes very lean Bi-Sn alloy that forms reliable bonds. Also, as the ally becomes leaner, its melting temperature increases. Actually, even after the temperature is lowered the bismuth diffusion continues until the alloying is uniform across the whole solder joint. The remelting temperature of resulting bond is very close to the melting temperature of pure tin, +132 deg C! This about 1% content of bismuth in the alloy can relax the internal energy of the crystal structure and prevent tin whisker formation. Why this process is not used generally in the industry? The answer is, it was invented 10 years ago in the wrong place and hurted interests of big international companies that already invested huge amounts of dollars, yens, pounds, etc in tin-silver-zinc alloys. Seldom the best technolgy wins, only big money talks. Those who are interested, may read more in the publications of the IEEE. Look for Professor Jorma Kivilahti, Helsinki University of Technology. Unfortunately those articles are not freely available, unless you are a subscriber of the IEEE publications. I found only one free article that shortly mentions this method: http://www.ept.tkk.fi/Research/Publications/55_Paper.pdf 73, Ahti OH2RZ On 01/05/06, William Bordy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been following the RoHS requirements and one issue I see rarely discussed is the Tin Whiskers issue. For those that are not familiar with it please see the following WEB site: http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/background/index.htm It appears that with the switch to no-lead that the reliability of the equipment will be substantially reduced. This appears to be what happens when politics drive science. 73, Bill Bordy NJ1H -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lyle Johnson Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 10:28 AM To: Jim Lux Cc: FlexRadio Subject: Re: [Flexradio] RoHS was Re: July 1 Bob, I assume you're talking about RoHS, which bans lead (except in certain very narrow situations, not applicable here) in electronics. I don't know much about how Gerald makes the boards for the SDR1000, but I wouldn't think that changing to no-lead solder is a big issue... Actually, it is a big issue. Turns out that no-lead solder manufacturing processes require more heat, and normal FR-4 PCBs tend to delaminate, so you must use high-temperature fiberglass. This is available, just more expensive -- 20% to 50% higher cost per board. Fewer facilities are available to manufacture assemblies in a RoHS compliant way, and willing to certify same, so those costs go up. In the case of my DSPx, the quotes I have for the raw PCB cost are double and the assembly costs will more than double what I am currently paying. The components used in the product must all be RoHS compliant. And it isn't just about lead. There are six commonly used substances that are banned or severely proscribed. Normal passivation processes used for aluminum, for example, contain banned substances, so even the case may be affected. 73, Lyle KK7P ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
At 10:54 AM 5/1/2006, Rob Frohne wrote: Hi Everyone, I'm interested in getting back into the software defined radio area again. The last thing I did was the R2-DSP, and it looks like there have been some good strides made since then. It looks like the SDR-1000 is an open design, but I'm still looking for the schematic and possibly source code of the control circuitry board. Schematics are on the Flex-radio website (the QEX articles have the schematics, and I think there is a separate file with just the schematics). There's no processor on any of the boards.. the various latches are all decoded from bits on the parallel printer interface. Take a look at http://home.earthlink.net/~w6rmk/sdr1000/index.htm and follow the link to either the pdf or gif version. I'm also looking for the source code and the description of the protocol used to communicate with the DDS and relays (or possible micro-controller that controls them). Can someone direct me to all that information? All hardware latches. The DDS protocol is just the standard AD9854 registers, in the datasheet. I don't want to just purchase an SDR-1000, and play with the software; I would like to play with the hardware a little more this time, than I did with the R2-DSP. Analog Devices is sampling the AD9954 now, and it looks possibly more attractive than the AD9854. First, it has 14 bits on the D/A, and I think it should have lower phase noise; third, it dissipates about 1/4 the power, which is really nice because the AD9854 some special requirements when it came to the circuit board design because of the heat dissipation. Down sides are that you will need to use two AD9954's or perhaps you could use a Johnson divider and drop 6 meters, and the supply voltage is 1.8 volts, and I suppose there may be some issues with the serial programming instead of parallel and syncing the two DDS devices. The SDR1000 doesn't lend itself to hardware modifications of that scale. However, you could probably build up a board with a couple 9954s that you could connect up to the TRX of the SDR1000, after removing the 9854. As you say, there are some subtleties on synchronizing the DDSes, and that's something that the SDR1000 doesn't make easy. In my own work with 4 SDR1000s, I made use of the fact that once they're running, you can measure the phase offset between them, and it will remain the same. You can then either move the DDS phase offset register around to line them up, or take it out in software processing of the I/Q streams. I did the latter. What other things should I consider? Are there better reference oscillators available now? Are there other tweaks to the circuit that you would recommend? The standard oscillator is pretty darn good in terms of phase noise, it's just not stable over temperature. You could feed in an external reference (and accept the multiplication noise increase), or, calibrate against a reference periodically. Why has nobody made Gerber files available for the PC boards for the SDR-1000? James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
Hi Rob, On 5/1/06, Rob Frohne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Why has nobody made Gerber files available for the PC boards for the SDR-1000? If I did a revised design, in keeping with the open nature of this project, I would want to make those available under GPL. The only thing open about the SDR-1000 is the PowerSDR software. The hardware design of the SDR-1000 is not open. Flex is a for-profit business so giving away the Gerbers of their PC boards would be kind of silly. You can get the schematics to the SDR-1000 if you purchase one, otherwise the best you can do is check out the original QEX series of articles. If you are interested in experimenting with SDR, check out the HPSDR project at http://hpsdr.org Both the hardware and software design for this project are open sourced. We could always use another contributor to this project, especially since you are interested in (maybe) a DDS project. 73 de Phil N8VB In our lab at school, we have had very good luck with using surface mount components and the toaster oven method of applying them. It is so much faster than soldering through hole parts in, and a lot less tricky than soldering surface mount components by hand. We have also been making our own boards using a direct printing method on thin PCB material using a Xerox wax ink printer and acid etch. The cost of producing a couple of sets of boards using these methods is appealing to me at least, and I think I could use them in at a couple of classes I teach. 73, Rob, KL7NA -- Rob Frohne, Ph.D., P.E. E.F. Cross School of Engineering Walla Walla College 100 SW 4th Street College Place, WA 99324 (509) 527-2075 http://www.wwc.edu/~frohro
[Flexradio] Need audio cable info
What is the recommended type of audio cable from a santa cruz card to the sdr-1000? I've found at least one 1/8 audio cable I cut open for another project wasn't shielded. I assume you would recommend shielded, and I would like to know a good part and vendor for this. When and where to use ferrites on the cables? What would be the best vendor for the clamp-on type?
[Flexradio] cables and beads
Hi Paul, I suggest that you buy some good quality microphone cable and Neutrik connectors and make your own cables. That way they will be of excellent quality and just the length you need them. Neutrik brand connectors can purhased from Mouser (www.mouser.com). Bob Heil markets excellent mike cable (Heilwire) and will sell it to you in small quantities: www.heilsound.com. If you don't want to roll your own, Whirlwind (www.whirlwindusa.com) makes about the best cables for audio use and they can custom manufacture a set for you. Digikey and several other big outlets sell clamp-on ferrite beads. However, I got mine from an outfit called Electronic Plus: http://www.electronicplus.com/content/ProductPage.asp?maincat=rfsubcat=rfe Have fun with your radio. 73, Craig W3CRR
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
The software is open but I don't believe the hardware is, someone correct me if I'm incorrect. As far as I've been able to see you can only get the schematics if you own the radio. In regards to the documentation of the software, there is the old saying the code is the documentation, I have never believed that saying. Welcome to the fold. At 12:54 PM 5/1/2006, you wrote: Hi Everyone, I'm interested in getting back into the software defined radio area again. The last thing I did was the R2-DSP, and it looks like there have been some good strides made since then. It looks like the SDR-1000 is an open design, but I'm still looking for the schematic and possibly source code of the control circuitry board. I'm also looking for the source code and the description of the protocol used to communicate with the DDS and relays (or possible micro-controller that controls them). Can someone direct me to all that information? I don't want to just purchase an SDR-1000, and play with the software; I would like to play with the hardware a little more this time, than I did with the R2-DSP. Analog Devices is sampling the AD9954 now, and it looks possibly more attractive than the AD9854. First, it has 14 bits on the D/A, and I think it should have lower phase noise; third, it dissipates about 1/4 the power, which is really nice because the AD9854 some special requirements when it came to the circuit board design because of the heat dissipation. Down sides are that you will need to use two AD9954's or perhaps you could use a Johnson divider and drop 6 meters, and the supply voltage is 1.8 volts, and I suppose there may be some issues with the serial programming instead of parallel and syncing the two DDS devices. What other things should I consider? Are there better reference oscillators available now? Are there other tweaks to the circuit that you would recommend? Why has nobody made Gerber files available for the PC boards for the SDR-1000? If I did a revised design, in keeping with the open nature of this project, I would want to make those available under GPL. In our lab at school, we have had very good luck with using surface mount components and the toaster oven method of applying them. It is so much faster than soldering through hole parts in, and a lot less tricky than soldering surface mount components by hand. We have also been making our own boards using a direct printing method on thin PCB material using a Xerox wax ink printer and acid etch. The cost of producing a couple of sets of boards using these methods is appealing to me at least, and I think I could use them in at a couple of classes I teach. 73, Rob, KL7NA -- Rob Frohne, Ph.D., P.E. E.F. Cross School of Engineering Walla Walla College 100 SW 4th Street College Place, WA 99324 (509) 527-2075 http://www.wwc.edu/~frohro -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: frohro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 318 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20060501/17dc9d8a/frohro.vcf ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com Cecil Bayona KD5NWA www.qrpradio.com Windows the worlds most successful software virus
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
Philip Covington wrote: If you are interested in experimenting with SDR, check out the HPSDR project at http://hpsdr.org That results in a completely blank page, both with Firefox and IE... Tried also www.hpsdr.org, same result... 73 Alberto I2PHD
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
On 5/1/06, Alberto I2PHD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Philip Covington wrote: If you are interested in experimenting with SDR, check out the HPSDR project at http://hpsdr.org That results in a completely blank page, both with Firefox and IE... Tried also www.hpsdr.org, same result... 73 Alberto I2PHD Hmmm, works here in Firefox... and IE Try it again... maybe they were updating the webpage or something... http://hpsdr.org 73 de Phil N8VB
[Flexradio] Flex Radio contract manufacturer/ EU certification
I had the pleasure of touring Gerald's contract manufacturer today. They are building certified units and have a fantastic facility with all of the necessary approvals to build the lead free boards for European approval. They are prepared to build and deliver certified lead free units to meet the new certification process. Gerald started this process some time ago in anticipation of the July deadline. Bob N4HY -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20060501/80cc1140/attachment.htm
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
Both work for me with Firefox V1.5. Alberto, I received my copy of CBuilder V6.0 on this afternoon's mail, I will be compiling your code in a little bit after I make copies for safe keeping. Thanks again. At 03:34 PM 5/1/2006, Alberto I2PHD wrote: Philip Covington wrote: If you are interested in experimenting with SDR, check out the HPSDR project at http://hpsdr.org That results in a completely blank page, both with Firefox and IE... Tried also www.hpsdr.org, same result... 73 Alberto I2PHD ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com Cecil Bayona KD5NWA www.qrpradio.com Windows the worlds most successful software virus
[Flexradio] Level Calibration
We just checked in a fix for the Level calibration on SVN. With this fix, we are declaring this revision (461) to be a v1.6.1 release candidate. For those of you that are willing, please check out this latest release for any bugs that are not already reported in the Bug Tracker (support.flex-radio.com). Thanks for your continued help in hunting these last few buglets down. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems
Re: [Flexradio] RoHS Tin Whiskers
Problems with tin whiskers have been around a lot longer than RoHS (perhaps as far back as WW II?). It presents a problem with reliability of equipment designed for low cost production, with no budget for re-engineering, sure. But for the rest, it's not so clear. Yes, as the listed WEB explains, tin whiskers have been around a lot longer than RoHS. But, as the below excerpt from the WEB site, http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/background/index.htm , explains, it is believed that no-lead solders will increase the risk of tin whiskers. Why the Recent Attention to Tin Whiskers? The current worldwide initiative to reduce the use of potentially hazardous materials such as lead (Pb) is driving the electronics industry to consider alternatives to the widely used tin-lead alloys used for plating. For example, the European Union has enacted legislation known as the Restriction of certain Hazardous Substances (RoHS) and Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directives which have set June 2006 as deadlines for electronic equipment suppliers to eliminate most uses of Pb from their products. It is widely believed (though reasons remain somewhat of a mystery) that Pb when alloyed with tin imparts whisker-inhibiting attributes to the final finish. With respect to factors such as solderability, ease of manufacture and compatibility with existing assembly methods, pure tin plating is seen by the industry as a potentially simple and cost effective alternative. In fact, many manufacturers have been offering pure tin plated components as a standard commercial (and in some cases high reliability) product for years while others are exploring pure tin alternatives for the very first time. Many electronics manufacturers have never heard of the phenomenon of tin whiskers and therefore, may not consider the risks of tin whisker growth during the validation of new plating systems. Continuing reports of tin whisker-induced failures coupled with the lack of an industry accepted understanding of tin whisker growth factors and/or test methods to identify whisker-prone products has made a blanket acceptance of pure tin plating a risky proposition for high reliability systems. Still, organizations such as NASA and the DoD may soon be faced with few options other than pure tin plating since the desires of the commercial market for environmentally friendly components carry far more weight than the infinitesimally small market share of the high reliability user. There is a wealth of information on the tin whiskers problem at the NASA URL I listed. I won't repeat it here, but I would suggest that those, (I suggest anyone who buys consumer electronics should be), who are interested read the information at the URL and resources suggested. To simply say it has existed, does not resolve the believed increase of tin whiskers due to the use tin plated only components and the use of no-lead solder. Another posting by Ahti Aintila to the reflected has suggested an alternative, but if the components are tin plated only, then the formation of tin whiskers will occur. The NASA WEB site does not propose a sure fire solution and in fact, exceptions are made for mission critical systems to meet RoHS by the EU. Obviously, the removal of lead is a good thing, but the introduction of a new problem without a known solution is short sighted. I discussed RoHS with a US distributor representative expressing my concerns of product reliability. His response was products are obsolete in a few years anyhow. My response is I really wouldn't like to replace a $3000 piece of consumer electronics equipment in 2 years or less. I have discussed this with manufacturers also. They are concerned with the shelve life of products, as tin whiskers are a result of time, not environment. In fact, one has mentioned changing his warrantee to reflect time from factory shipment. Although goods sold in the US do not currently require no-lead components, the EU RoHS requirements are rippling into the distribution chains. Regardless, tin whiskers appear to be a real problem that is being sweep under the rug in the rush to no-lead solutions. 73, Bill Bordy NJ1H -Original Message- From: Jim Lux [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 1:40 PM To: William Bordy; 'Lyle Johnson' Cc: 'FlexRadio' Subject: RE: [Flexradio] RoHS Tin Whiskers was Re: July 1 At 09:28 AM 5/1/2006, William Bordy wrote: I have been following the RoHS requirements and one issue I see rarely discussed is the Tin Whiskers issue. For those that are not familiar with it please see the following WEB site: http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/background/index.htm It appears that with the switch to no-lead that the reliability of the equipment will be substantially reduced. Problems with tin whiskers have been around a lot longer than RoHS (perhaps as far back as WW II?). It presents a problem with reliability of equipment designed for low cost production, with no budget
Re: [Flexradio] Homebrew Hardware Upgrade?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That results in a completely blank page, both with Firefox and IE... Tried also www.hpsdr.org, same result... Well, now it works here too... thanks all who replied.. Must have been some space-time tunnel effect... or more simply a DNS propagation delay... Thanks guys 73 Alberto I2PHD
Re: [Flexradio] Spur Reduction Observation...
Pete, The Spur Reduction algorithm is a passive algorithm that is very simple. It simply keeps the DDS away from the worst known spur frequencies. So instead of doing tuning at 1Hz increments, we do tuning at 3.051kHz on the DDS and do tuning below that in software. Given all of that, the fact is that the spur that we are moving is really just being adjusted up to 3.051kHz in software according to the algorithm. The spur reduction is not active in the sense that it sense spurs in DSP and does anything intelligent as a result. This is something that I expect to eventually end up in our software at some point. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of N3EVL Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 9:23 AM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] Spur Reduction Observation... I noticed while listening on 40m on 7.209MHz that there is a spur (actually what appears to be a spur reduction artifact, since spur reduction is ON) at 7.208Mhz. This is, of course, withing the passband for LSB. With spur reduction turned off, the spur relocates to 7.2606. I'm wondering if it is normal behavior for the spur reduction algorithm to apparently correctly identify a spur and relocate it withing the desired passband. Notice that if I was listening on USB, the relocated spur would not be a problem since it would be well outside the chosen passband. Assuming that USB vs LSB is even a factor, is it possible that the spur reduction algorithm is assuming the desired passband is USB, even on bands such as 40m where the convention is LSB? Pete, N3EVL Sdr-100, 100w, ATU, Dell P4 2.8MHz 512MB, Win XPpro/SP2 ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex- radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
Re: [Flexradio] Searchable archieves
When this came up the last time on the reflector, I sent a message to our host about doing this. The response was that they would do it when they got a chance, but not to hold our breath. I'll send another message and see what I can find out. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of Lee A Crocker Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 10:14 AM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] Searchable archieves How come the flex-radio archieves are not set up like this sites archieves? http://lists.hpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-hpsdr.org/ Note these archieves are searchable. These people are certainly flex radio friendly, it would seem they might be willing to share a little advice on how to do this. 73 W9OY __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex- radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
Re: [Flexradio] RoHS Tin Whiskers
At 02:59 PM 5/1/2006, William Bordy wrote: Problems with tin whiskers have been around a lot longer than RoHS (perhaps as far back as WW II?). It presents a problem with reliability of equipment designed for low cost production, with no budget for re-engineering, sure. But for the rest, it's not so clear. Yes, as the listed WEB explains, tin whiskers have been around a lot longer than RoHS. But, as the below excerpt from the WEB site, http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/background/index.htm , explains, it is believed that no-lead solders will increase the risk of tin whiskers. There is a wealth of information on the tin whiskers problem at the NASA URL I listed. I won't repeat it here, but I would suggest that those, (I suggest anyone who buys consumer electronics should be), who are interested read the information at the URL and resources suggested. To simply say it has existed, does not resolve the believed increase of tin whiskers due to the use tin plated only components and the use of no-lead solder. Indeed. It IS a problem, but only for pure tin (and pure zinc). The pure tin thing was a quick fix, that, as you note, has been thoroughly discredited as a solution. Obviously, the removal of lead is a good thing, but the introduction of a new problem without a known solution is short sighted. There are known solutions, they're just not as cheap as tin/lead, nor is there decades of experience with them. Most manufacturers, being fairly short term bottom line oriented would prefer to keep things the way they are, rather than spend NRE money on redoing the process engineering and RE money on more expensive substrates and/or solder. There IS an exemption for the tiny amount of lead used inside the semiconductor package. The exemption for mission critical isn't forever, either. I believe it expires in 2010. Besides, the space industry is so tiny, compared to the commercial industry, that we in the space biz have to figure out how to use what's commercially available, since they're not going to run two different production lines. The same is true, in the longer run, with military stuff. Their volumes are higher, so they have a bit more clout. I discussed RoHS with a US distributor representative expressing my concerns of product reliability. His response was products are obsolete in a few years anyhow. My response is I really wouldn't like to replace a $3000 piece of consumer electronics equipment in 2 years or less. Your distributor was right, though. The vast volume of consumer electronics (in a dollars, and pieces basis) is disposable/consumable stuff: cellphones, MP3 players, computers, etc. There's actually relatively little volume in the $3K and up range with expected life 3 years. For equipment in that range, one can expect that the cost of RoHS is a much smaller fraction of the total unit cost, and so, a mfr can afford to invest in the needed reengineering to make it work, or, to cover warranty returns. There's also a huge difference between the design use life for piece of consumer electronics (typically 1-2 yrs) and the actual life (which could be much longer). This is why, for instance, consumer computers are much cheaper than real server computers (at least, when the mfr is taking the risk of failure). In the consumer market, sell price is everything, because most consumers don't factor in the largely speculative future costs. In the commercial/industrial/professional market, life cycle cost (TCO) is what they buyer looks at, and gear is designed and priced accordingly. This comes up a lot for people building things like server farms or cluster computers, where the cost of a failure is known, and includes things like the time for the administrator to figure out it's broken, pull it out of the rack, the time to rerun the job from a checkpoint, etc. The all-in cost of a single failed cluster node could be several thousand dollars. It's not too hard to figure out how much more you can afford to pay for changing the failure rate from 5% in the first year to less than 1%. I have discussed this with manufacturers also. They are concerned with the shelve life of products, as tin whiskers are a result of time, not environment. In fact, one has mentioned changing his warrantee to reflect time from factory shipment. This sort of thing is why I think that what you'll see is more of a stratification between throwaway consumer electronics and commercial/professional electronics. Where it will get ugly is in that pro-sumer sort of regime, where people are expecting consumer type pricing, but also expect long-lived, durable designs. Kind of like the difference between an inexpensive imported machine tool at Harbor Freight and a watchmaker's lathe from Germany. Although goods sold in the US do not currently require no-lead components, the EU RoHS requirements are rippling into the distribution chains. Regardless, tin whiskers appear
