Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
I use the SB-50 dual connectors. They come in several colours which are a semi standard for the voltage used. John VE3AMZ - Original Message - From: Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 10:38 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2 I didn't see 50-amp ones on their site. Part number? Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Mike Naruta AA8K a...@comcast.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 10:27 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2 Ah, thank you John John J. Riddell wrote: Mike, don't use the little red / black plugsthey don't work so well. I have standardised on the 50 amp plugs...even in my car...they won't pull apart. I also use them on all my Son's farm machinery and he is very pleased with them. 73 John VE3AMZ Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
Thanks. Somehow I missed it. Chuck - Original Message - From: John J. Riddell ve3...@earthlink.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 4:48 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2 I use the SB-50 dual connectors. They come in several colours which are a semi standard for the voltage used. John VE3AMZ - Original Message - From: Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 10:38 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2 I didn't see 50-amp ones on their site. Part number? Chuck WB2EDV
[Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
In the past I've actually routed the shielded CTCSS endode audio source wire through chassis and cabinet/box holes and in this case I used the feed through-capacitor method. Yes, but if you run a wire into a box through a hole, you might as well take the lid off too, as that wire will act just like a coupling probe between the boxes. Depends on how the wires are done... I understand what you're trying to convey... but it's not been a problem/issue in this example. The Hamtronics Receiver COR/COS output is active high, which I don't like one bit. Oops - that should have been ...I used active low COS as well. I also used active low CTCSS, but I still do today - that never changed because the RLC-1 controller only works with active low CTCSS. In cases where I run into active high logic... I change them to active low before they leave the box for the big world. I've run into a number of Ham devices (the above mentioned Hamtronics Receiver and the CAT Auto RLS/RBS-1000 unit) with active high logic and it's just more sane to convert everything over. I like active low logic for a number of reasons and personal preference. In a situation where the controlling device loses power, there is a potential for the transmitter to key up. If the RX loses power, the logic outputs could pull to ground as well - depends on the design. In my case, using opposing polarities on COS CTCSS appears to eliminate the possibility of both becoming spuriously valid. If power goes away... the active low device normally would stay high impedance (high isolated state) and I can be more easily assured the trailing controller remains in a resting state. For this project... I only used the feed-through capacitors for everything. The wires at the rear of the controller get into the controller via a DB-9 plug but nothing on the chassis or RF deck. I stopped using small Anderson Power Pole connectors because of all the grief they caused me on the commercial radio side of my life. A lot of people like and use them but I don't trust or use them anymore after a few 10 hour days sourced back to intermittent small power-pole connectors. Uh oh, I hope I don't run into that problem. I began to standardize on the PowerPole a few years ago have about 80% of my equipment converted. Before that I direct-wired everything, but that just got too painful every time I needed to swap something out. For a short time I started using Molex but the current rating of the easily-obtainable versions was only 8 A - not enough even when doubled up. Some people seem to have decent results with the Power-poles... and I can and do sometimes use them in legacy (already installed) situations... but I have my own way of ensuring they don't go intermittent, which I don't apply/use in the commercial radio world. I don't normally like or use Molex connectors for any serious current requirement. Up to now the only negative comments I've heard regarding the PowerPole are related to their non-locking nature. I've found their inherent retention force to be more than sufficient for all my applications, both repeater mobile. I know that PowerPoles ( probably almost all other DC connectors) are NOT designed to be hot-mated, which could cause contact problems. Sometimes it's unavoidable, but I try to prevent it whenever I can. I just end up removing them from the path and do as much direct wire as possible. I haven't had to revisit a cranky intermittent power-pole since. Unless I'm sure there's going to be a lot of shear RF at the repeaters location... I take the simple and easy route. Even with a broadcast station nearby (but not in the same value) I didn't feel the advanced filtering techniques were required and so far, so good. When I box a RX, it's usually because I'm having an interference problem due to insufficient shielding. So I want to be darn sure I don't have to do it again. Bob NO6B This example used a supplied bare receiver and transmitter boards. I put them in to acceptable boxes and wired things up. Lo and behold it all works very well and I'm on to the next cluster ___ . I'll hopefully be posting part 3 of this saga in the near future. Smell the Dayton Brats (Brauts) defrosting... cheers, s.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
Hi Joe, There should not be a problem using RF Coax for audio in many fairly short length examples. One RG-174 coax data sheet I just looked at on the web states a 100pf per meter C value. In this case certainly not enough C to get excited about. RG174 and many other small diameter coaxial lines are quite lossy to RF, especially above the VHF low band. So except for very short runs I don't even like to use it much except for space restricted requirements. I should put more pictures of the completed repeater in the folder. One might note the transmitter to external RF Amplifier cable is small diameter coax, but not RG174. I have some surplus high quality brown Teflon type 50 ohm coax so a section, which included a pre-mounted BNC connector was used. And of course there is no part number on the side of the mini Teflon coax to tell you what it is. Maybe someone else here on the group has the Teflon RG-174 coax equivalent part number handy. The hardest part of interfacing to the Hamtronics transmitter was finding a one-piece RF rated RCA connector. They seemed to have gone poof from the US Market... nay with Digi Key, Mouser, and similar sources. Some coax types also work fairly well for high voltage lead. I and many others have used the center conductor of non-foam RG-8 type/size coax for RF Amplifier high voltage lead for many decades. cheers, skipp Joe k1ike_m...@... wrote: This brings up an interesting question. I have always used small diameter coax for my audio leads, as I have a lot of it around. I remember a discussion about audio wire in the past. Is there any problem with using coax for audio? Capacitance, maybe? I've always had this question in the back of my mind. 73, Joe, Kike skipp025 wrote: A shielded audio quality wire is routed out of the receiver box to the transmitter board at the proper CTCSS connection point.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. n...@... wrote: Thanks for posting this, Skipp. It's always fun to see another angle on repeater building. Threaded are my $0.02: Thank you Bob, it would be great to see other examples of how people build repeaters and why they use certain construction techniques and equipment. In this example, someone requested a repeater be quickly placed in service before a sanction application deadline passed, not knowing the final repeater package had not even been constructed. Many of us build repeaters using different techniques based on what is supplied or available at the time of construction. I thought about a surplus commercial radio conversion... but the delay in having crystals cut made the frequency synthesized Hamtronics RF Decks much more attractive. Any idea what Hamtronics chose for the loop bandwidth of the PLL (I assume it's not a direct DDS synth.)? If very low, it could have very good phase noise characteristics. Not that that's important on 220, but could be good for a 2 meter version @ 15 kHz spacing. A very good question with a non-technical reply. Rather than get into the gritty details of the PLL operation before the purchase... I will say that I jumped in and bought the Hamtronics modules on trusting faith from my decades of using Jerry's (of Hamtronics) kits and pre-made units. I've seen a relatively small number of reported horror stories related to the synthesized Hamtronics transmitter and receiver strips (module). The reported problems I saw posted were related to PLL Stability in relation to mechanical and physical chassis movement. I'm fairly sure the Hamtronics PLL circuits have been modified (tweaked) from the original design, but where, when and what I have not compared in detail. I was not disappointed with choosing the Hamtronics Equipment, the modules seem to function very well. The PLL performance is noticeable in very detailed measurements and the end result is nothing bad anyone is going to be able to hear or detect in normal operation. Nothing objectionable or unexpected in regards to the previously mentioned PLL mechanical stability issue reared its ugly head. The R302-6 Receiver Manual with diagrams is available for free download at the Hamtronics web site. I had concerns about the receivers front end performance based on the number of (or lack of) tune circuits helical resonators. I placed the repeater on a site antenna combiner system and it's working very, very well. The receiver is red hot and the repeaters performance is much better than expected. New old stock (NOS) Com Spec TS-32 CTCSS (PL) tone boards are very nice Ebay sleeper deals. Yeah, but I don't like them. They do decode reliably, but the encoders have harmonics that need to be externally filtered if fed to a phase modulator. I had not ever noticed the harmonics and related them to a problem... but I'll fire one up and check it out. Easy enough to deal with using a low pass filter. Some exciter (transmitter) circuits run external sourced CTCSS through a basic filter, but not all... They also don't respond to reverse burst. Again, not a big deal if we're talking 220 a direct FM TX. While reverse burst and muted CTCSS during the repeater tail/hang time is a wonderful thing... I took the simple and less time consuming path of wiring the constant on CTCSS encoder direct to the transmitter strip (module). CTCSS is on (encoding) anytime the transmitter is up (on the air) and that for me is just fine versus not having any Tx CTCSS at all. I felt it's better to at least provide for CTCSS enabled receiver operation. One option would be to shunt mute the CTCSS line based on the receiver COR/COS or CTCSS detect line... but that might be a future project if the need was really there (required). My favorite is the Sigtone C1116. Unfortunately they've been out of production for a few years, but fortunately for me I made a bulk purchase at a local swap meet many years ago still have a couple of them left today. They decode release faster than the TS-32 have a better HPF (see below). Now you let the cat out of the bag... we'll all be sharking Sigtone equipment at the flea markets and of course Dayton next week. Of course the TS-32 is out of production but any similar device would fit the bill. I believe the TS-64 or a similar animal is still being made if someone wanted to go retail (buy one new). The problem with the TS-32 tone filter is that it has poor transient response, ringing around 400 Hz. To me, a system that uses one in the audio path sounds boxy. I have seen the above posted comment before, but have not experienced it myself. I will say the filter performance does change with source and termination impedance but again for me using standard techniques I've not experience any ringing issues and so far the repeaters overall audio reports
[Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, skipp025 skipp...@... wrote: I stopped using small Anderson Power Pole connectors because of all the grief they caused me on the commercial radio side of my life. A lot of people like and use them but I don't trust or use them anymore after a few 10 hour days sourced back to intermittent small power-pole connectors. Re your problem with the Power Pole Connectors: Was the contact itself intermittent or the wire / contact crimp? I have yet to have a prblem with them in DC service, however for signal and data, I generally use Amp CPC series. Martin
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
I read about the Anderson Power Pole connectors in QST and thought, What a great idea. I started using them in our county's com van for the portable 800 MHz repeater and ham gear, and was I disappointed. Even the coiled cord for the cigarette lighter plug pulled them apart. Now I'm supposed to buy a plastic clip to hold them together? Bah! I think that my toaster has a better plug on its cord. rahwayflynn wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com, skipp025 skipp...@.. . wrote: I stopped using small Anderson Power Pole connectors because of all the grief they caused me on the commercial radio side of my life. A lot of people like and use them but I don't trust or use them anymore after a few 10 hour days sourced back to intermittent small power-pole connectors. Re your problem with the Power Pole Connectors: Was the contact itself intermittent or the wire / contact crimp? I have yet to have a prblem with them in DC service, however for signal and data, I generally use Amp CPC series. Martin
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
Mike, don't use the little red / black plugsthey don't work so well. I have standardised on the 50 amp plugs...even in my car...they won't pull apart. I also use them on all my Son's farm machinery and he is very pleased with them. 73 John VE3AMZ - Original Message - From: Mike Naruta AA8K a...@comcast.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 9:48 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2 I read about the Anderson Power Pole connectors in QST and thought, What a great idea. I started using them in our county's com van for the portable 800 MHz repeater and ham gear, and was I disappointed. Even the coiled cord for the cigarette lighter plug pulled them apart. Now I'm supposed to buy a plastic clip to hold them together? Bah! I think that my toaster has a better plug on its cord. rahwayflynn wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com, skipp025 skipp...@.. . wrote: I stopped using small Anderson Power Pole connectors because of all the grief they caused me on the commercial radio side of my life. A lot of people like and use them but I don't trust or use them anymore after a few 10 hour days sourced back to intermittent small power-pole connectors. Re your problem with the Power Pole Connectors: Was the contact itself intermittent or the wire / contact crimp? I have yet to have a prblem with them in DC service, however for signal and data, I generally use Amp CPC series. Martin Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
Ah, thank you John John J. Riddell wrote: Mike, don't use the little red / black plugsthey don't work so well. I have standardised on the 50 amp plugs...even in my car...they won't pull apart. I also use them on all my Son's farm machinery and he is very pleased with them. 73 John VE3AMZ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
At 5/7/2009 08:03, you wrote: The hardest part of interfacing to the Hamtronics transmitter was finding a one-piece RF rated RCA connector. They seemed to have gone poof from the US Market... nay with Digi Key, Mouser, and similar sources. Sorry Skipp, I scarfed up every one I could find @ Dayton last year. Didn't find very many, but found a few more here there at various swap meets since so I'm stocked OK now. If you need a couple I can probably spare that much. Some coax types also work fairly well for high voltage lead. I and many others have used the center conductor of non-foam RG-8 type/size coax for RF Amplifier high voltage lead for many decades. We have some RG-214 power cables at work made for a carcinotron that runs up to 11 kV on the anode. Bob NO6B
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
I didn't see 50-amp ones on their site. Part number? Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Mike Naruta AA8K a...@comcast.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 10:27 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2 Ah, thank you John John J. Riddell wrote: Mike, don't use the little red / black plugsthey don't work so well. I have standardised on the 50 amp plugs...even in my car...they won't pull apart. I also use them on all my Son's farm machinery and he is very pleased with them. 73 John VE3AMZ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
At 5/7/2009 09:35, you wrote: Don't panic, the TS-32 also provides a separate tone generation encoder section for your transmitter CTCSS requirement. A shielded audio quality wire is routed out of the receiver box to the transmitter board at the proper CTCSS connection point. I assume this is done using feed-through capacitors - you don't want to plumb any wires straight through the case. In the past I've actually routed the shielded CTCSS endode audio source wire through chassis and cabinet/box holes and in this case I used the feed through-capacitor method. The holes in the direct wired version was already there so I used it. Through hole direct wiring can make servicing by box swapping a bit more difficult. In very short wire lengths I have not experienced a problem with stray RF or Ground Loops bringing a gremlin on board. Yes, but if you run a wire into a box through a hole, you might as well take the lid off too, as that wire will act just like a coupling probe between the boxes. Similar situation: I mistakenly used an isolated BNC feedthrough on a shielded box with feedthrough caps on all other I/O. Inside the box was a scanner being used as a sig. gen. The scanner's LO leaked out as if the lid was off the box because the BNC bulkhead was isolated. Replaced it with a standard BNC feedthrough the signal went from FQ all over the room to no detectable leakage, at least a 60 dB change. The Hamtronics Receiver COR/COS output is active high, which I don't like one bit. When I first started building repeaters, I used active low CTCSS as well. Oops - that should have been ...I used active low COS as well. I also used active low CTCSS, but I still do today - that never changed because the RLC-1 controller only works with active low CTCSS. The main reason was that it was convenient to use as a cheap way to key the TX when a controller wasn't available back in those lean college days. When I started using G.E. radios with their active high CAS RUS outputs, I switched to active high as my standard. I like active low logic for a number of reasons and personal preference. In a situation where the controlling device loses power, there is a potential for the transmitter to key up. If the RX loses power, the logic outputs could pull to ground as well - depends on the design. In my case, using opposing polarities on COS CTCSS appears to eliminate the possibility of both becoming spuriously valid. So what do you use for a connector? In my latest RX boxing project I decided to put a DB9 doghouse on the box. The doghouse is a cheap plastic box since shielding isn't necessary. I plan to install the feedthroughs in a manner similar to what you describe, but then mount a DB9 Anderson PowerPole on the doghouse so all the connections are connectorized. I may even add some switching circuitry inside the doghouse so this receiver can be grafted into a existing system using a single-port controller (2 RXs on one port). For this project... I only used the feed-through capacitors for everything. The wires at the rear of the controller get into the controller via a DB-9 plug but nothing on the chassis or RF deck. I stopped using small Anderson Power Pole connectors because of all the grief they caused me on the commercial radio side of my life. A lot of people like and use them but I don't trust or use them anymore after a few 10 hour days sourced back to intermittent small power-pole connectors. Uh oh, I hope I don't run into that problem. I began to standardize on the PowerPole a few years ago have about 80% of my equipment converted. Before that I direct-wired everything, but that just got too painful every time I needed to swap something out. For a short time I started using Molex but the current rating of the easily-obtainable versions was only 8 A - not enough even when doubled up. Up to now the only negative comments I've heard regarding the PowerPole are related to their non-locking nature. I've found their inherent retention force to be more than sufficient for all my applications, both repeater mobile. I know that PowerPoles ( probably almost all other DC connectors) are NOT designed to be hot-mated, which could cause contact problems. Sometimes it's unavoidable, but I try to prevent it whenever I can. and while the value is not ultra critical, you don't want the capacitance value large enough to impact the information passing through. I found and used surplus 100pf (pico farad) feed-through capacitors although I'm sure higher values will work. To make sure that the shunt capacitance blocked any RF, I added some series resistance to form an RC. On lines like the RX audio, adding 470 ohms in series with a source that was already several k-ohms didn't affect the audio at all. Same for COS CTCSS decode logic outputs if the controller's input impedance is much higher than the series
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: A Home Brew 224 MHz Repeater Project. - Part 2
If they were pulled apart, they were not put together properly. Joe M. Mike Naruta AA8K wrote: I read about the Anderson Power Pole connectors in QST and thought, What a great idea. I started using them in our county's com van for the portable 800 MHz repeater and ham gear, and was I disappointed. Even the coiled cord for the cigarette lighter plug pulled them apart. Now I'm supposed to buy a plastic clip to hold them together? Bah! I think that my toaster has a better plug on its cord. rahwayflynn wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com, skipp025 skipp...@.. . wrote: I stopped using small Anderson Power Pole connectors because of all the grief they caused me on the commercial radio side of my life. A lot of people like and use them but I don't trust or use them anymore after a few 10 hour days sourced back to intermittent small power-pole connectors. Re your problem with the Power Pole Connectors: Was the contact itself intermittent or the wire / contact crimp? I have yet to have a prblem with them in DC service, however for signal and data, I generally use Amp CPC series. Martin Yahoo! Groups Links
