Date   

Re: Hamvention 2019

Fred Piering
 

Jack:
Never got close enough to thank you for your presentation at FDIM.
Your presentation "moved me off dead center", albeit a month later.
Having just celebrated my 75th birthday, I have committed to get good at CW (again).
I would like to build your Morse Code Tutor.
Could you please advise how to get all the data. As I remember it, at the time your website had been hacked and was down.
I know you addressed this some time ago, but I could not find the message on the groups.io.
If you would rather work outside the group as to not clutter up the site, feel free to contact me at fpiering@...
I suspect others would gain from your information.
Thanks
Fred
WD9HNU



On 5/1/2019 3:06 PM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Glad you'll make it! Also, next time check flights into Cincinnati and Columbus, as those are almost always cheaper than Dayton.

Jack, W8TEE

On Wednesday, May 1, 2019, 2:01:39 PM EDT, Fred Piering <fpiering@...> wrote:


Hi Jack:
Can't wait! In fact, if it wasn't for FDIM. I probably wouldn't come to Dayton. It was easy for the 15 years or so I lived in Ft, Wayne, but now, living in Florida, the Plane fare and Hotel take the place of a new transceiver.
I am looking forward to meeting you face to face also, as well as Hans.
73
Fred WD9HNU


On 5/1/2019 12:04 PM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
What do you mean: It means nothing? Hans is speaking at FDIM and we're getting together after our talks, so I know he's going to be there.

Jack, W8TEE

On Wednesday, May 1, 2019, 11:37:18 AM EDT, gerrykav via Groups.Io <gerrykav@...> wrote:


Just saw this in the 2019 vendor list...


I'm sure it means nothing though.
/ Gerry



Re: Antenna #antenna

Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...>
 


O.1 watts = SQRT(0.1 * 50) = 2.23 volts Avg.  2.23 * 1.4 = 3.22 volts Peak.
That should light almost any modern LED, since modern ones need less than
2V at 3 to 6 ma for adequate brilliance. 

There is a difference between resistive SWR bridges, current-transformer
based bridges, and balance-transformer type impedance bridges.  As noted by
others the resistive type will absorb around 50% of the inserted power.  Similar
result from balance-bridge type impedance transformer units.  Current-transformer
type units typically only require minuscule amounts of power to drive a rectifier and
meter or an LED.  You can also use an ADC (or the ADC inside an Arduino) to
read and display rectified RF (slightly forward bias the rectifier for more accurate
low level readings).  

Interestingly,  LEDs with HF drive seem to illuminate at very small voltages and
current.  Try connecting an LED across the output of your signal generator and
then increase output to the point where the LED just barely lights.   This could tell
you whether you need a rectifier and filter cap ahead of the LED or just use the
LED as its own detector.  OLEDs require even less power to light.  Older style
LEDs <1990's era are more power hungry than are recent designs.

Arv
_._


On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 9:48 AM Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:
Hi,

I have a PFR-3 with an SWR indicator that uses an LED and a 50 ohm
resistor in a bridge. The adjustable antenna matcher is separate
(althought it is built-in too). The SWR indicator can be switched out as
can the matcher. I have doubts whether 0.1 watt would light the LED.
With the SWR indicator inline the received noise and signals are
noticeably decreased. I have not bothered to measure how many decibels
down. It could be half. We switch the SWR indicator (and the resistors)
out of the circuit for operation. The statement about power loss with
that SWR indicator (using the series resistor) is valid but irrelevant.
We switch it out for on-air operation. There is no noticeable loss with
the adjustable matching circuit in use. Hints to that effect ARE bogus.
That doesn't mean *every* matching circuit is wonderful:) It also does
not account for each and every electron. None of the ham lore does that.

Hams who use those circuits already know all of that but not everybody
has hands-on experience with them.

73,

Bill  KU8H

On 6/28/19 7:39 PM, TrueBlue wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 11:46 AM, Joe Street wrote:
>
>     "that loss"  is going to be the same fraction regardless if you are
>     QRP with a few watts or at 1KW and it is a little misleading to say
>     it is "negligible in case of a few watts".
>
> I don't quite see that.  Here...if you are powering (even irrespective
> of other parts in the circuit) an LED running on a passive device, at a
> hypothetical 100W I can see that LED being unable to account for
> /significant/ signal loss.  If running a QRPp device at 0.1W, it seems
> to me that just that same device /alone/ could account for a
> disproportional net loss of signal.  I can't logically see how that
> could be avoided.  You're not getting that light for free, and it's
> dependent on /very/ much lower source of power to begin with.
>
> Yes?  No?
>
> --
>
> //
>
>

--
bark less - wag more




Re: Antenna #antenna

Bill Cromwell
 

Hi,

I have a PFR-3 with an SWR indicator that uses an LED and a 50 ohm resistor in a bridge. The adjustable antenna matcher is separate (althought it is built-in too). The SWR indicator can be switched out as can the matcher. I have doubts whether 0.1 watt would light the LED. With the SWR indicator inline the received noise and signals are noticeably decreased. I have not bothered to measure how many decibels down. It could be half. We switch the SWR indicator (and the resistors) out of the circuit for operation. The statement about power loss with that SWR indicator (using the series resistor) is valid but irrelevant. We switch it out for on-air operation. There is no noticeable loss with the adjustable matching circuit in use. Hints to that effect ARE bogus. That doesn't mean *every* matching circuit is wonderful:) It also does not account for each and every electron. None of the ham lore does that.

Hams who use those circuits already know all of that but not everybody has hands-on experience with them.

73,

Bill KU8H

On 6/28/19 7:39 PM, TrueBlue wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 11:46 AM, Joe Street wrote:
"that loss"  is going to be the same fraction regardless if you are
QRP with a few watts or at 1KW and it is a little misleading to say
it is "negligible in case of a few watts". I don't quite see that.  Here...if you are powering (even irrespective of other parts in the circuit) an LED running on a passive device, at a hypothetical 100W I can see that LED being unable to account for /significant/ signal loss.  If running a QRPp device at 0.1W, it seems to me that just that same device /alone/ could account for a disproportional net loss of signal.  I can't logically see how that could be avoided.  You're not getting that light for free, and it's dependent on /very/ much lower source of power to begin with.
Yes?  No?
--
//
--
bark less - wag more


Re: QCX - 9 days Delivery #qcx

Hans Summers
 

Hi Roger

Nothing to do with Friedrichshafen. I took 50 QCX kits and lots of other stuff to Friedrichshafen and sold them all. Yours is ordinary shipment from Turkey.

73 Hans G0UPL 


On Sat, Jun 29, 2019, 16:53 Roger Reeves <m0roj@...> wrote:
It was order from and delivered to the UK, and sent from Turkey.
I suspect it was from the stock that Hans had planned to take to Friedrichshafen.
Either way, terrific service.


Re: QCX - 9 days Delivery #qcx

Roger Reeves M0ROJ
 

It was order from and delivered to the UK, and sent from Turkey.
I suspect it was from the stock that Hans had planned to take to Friedrichshafen.
Either way, terrific service.


Re: I broke it, but it's not the finals

Alan G4ZFQ
 

Sounds like the standard Q1, 2, 3, 6 fix.
Jeffrey, Jim,

And possibly IC3 if it does not pass the test with Q1, 2, 3 removed.

Pins 12, 13 drop from +5V DC to +4V DC on Tx
Seems to indicate it will not AND makes IC1 seem another possible failure.
See what readings you get with the BS170s removed..

73 Alan G4ZFQ


Re: Antenna #antenna

Roger Steyaert
 

This is a copy with no credit given of Roy Lewallen's design. It is nicely done with good meter scale box etc but Roy should be given credit for the design.

Roger K7RXV

On 6/29/2019 7:36 AM, Mike Berg wrote:
Here's my personal favorite.  Not cheap, but it has served me well.

http://www.ohr.com/wattmeter.htm

Mike N0QBH


Re: Antenna #antenna

Mike Berg
 

Here's my personal favorite.  Not cheap, but it has served me well.

http://www.ohr.com/wattmeter.htm

Mike N0QBH


Re: QCX Party Another day besides Monday? #poll

Peter GM0EUL
 

Monday was originally decided by consensus and its also the only day I can do (a minor point in the great scheme of things).  It has also been in the FISTS, SKCC and CWops news letters and its on the WA7BNM contest calendar, QRPlabs website and 3830scores.  So its just becoming established and we'd be starting from scratch it it was moved from the last Monday.  An option might be to add in a second day per month on a different day/week.  It was decided to leave the weekends out because there is usually contest activity on and that means plenty of opportunity already to make contacts and work dx, by relying on the other fellow's kw and full-size 3-ele yagi!  On the flip side, contesters have little regard for the qrp frequencies and qcx to qcx would just get swamped. 

Incidentally, there is a world-wide week-long qrp event coming up from 1st to 7th July.  I hope you'll all join in and I look forward to working some of you then:

https://www.arimontebelluna.it/news/news_maratona_uk.htm


73
Peter
GM0EUL 


Re: I broke it, but it's not the finals

James Daldry W4JED
 

Hi, Jeffrey

If you have 9 volts on IC3 pin 3 at all times, that voltage has to come from the +12 in some way. The logical place would be by way of a punctured gate on Q1, 2, or 3, combined with a shorted always-on Q6. If you pull out Q1 thru Q3  or Q6 I bet the 9 volts goes away. Sounds like the standard Q1, 2, 3, 6 fix.

73

Jim W4JED

On 6/29/19 6:52 AM, JH via Groups.Io wrote:

Alan,

I neglected the troubleshooting page on the website and was instead going through the schematic and the chip datasheet. Comparing the expected voltages with mine reveal they are not ok. Pins 1, 2 are +5V, pin 3 is +9V. In transmit I get this modified square on pins 1, 2:

On pin 3 transmit I get +6.5V DC. Pin 4 looks normal. Pin 5 has +5V DC on Rx and Tx, with a tiny voltage change. Pin 6 goes from +5V DC to the modified square as in pin 1 (makes sense, pin 6 feeds both pins 1, 2).

Pin 8 goes from +5V DC to this ringing pattern on Tx:

Pins 9, 10 look normal. Pin 11 is also +5V DC on Rx and Tx. Pins 12, 13 drop from +5V DC to +4V DC on Tx.

I suspect I may have a short somewhere downstream from pin 3, given it has high voltage in Rx. I will need to double-check traces around Q1-Q3. I also started looking at the PA section of the troubleshooting page, but it's getting late and a more thorough investigation will take some time to figure out.

Thanks for pointing me in a direction. Since this is my first transceiver kit (and my first failure, hihi) I would like to learn as much as possible from it.


73 Jeffrey


On 6/25/19 1:31 PM, Alan G4ZFQ wrote:
IC3 seems to be functioning (I see logic high on the input pairs and see logic high on the outputs).

Jeffrey,

And you get 5V squarewave (meter usually reads 2.5V) on pin 6 as described on the troubleshooting page?

(Q5) seems to pass a basic mosfet test, but then I found the gate never drops voltage when I key down.

Possibly, but this is not really a PA check, it is isolated by C33.
Check all IC3 voltages according to that page.
There has been one case that a PA fault went right back to the 328 but you need to follow the sequence of checks.

73 Alan G4ZFQ

??The manual's circuit overview states that
Tx is low while Rx is high. In fact, in Rx it reads about 4.6-4.7V relative to the regulator's ground, and in Tx it goes /up/ to about 4.8-4.9V. Does this mean the 328 is not bringing the pin down?

So the switch never turns to Tx mode, so wouldn't that mean it's stuck in Rx mode? No, because I don't get any Rx audio, and if I key down I get a signal in my nearby SDR (but the amp transistors don't turn on, so my tuner's deflection meter doesn't move).

At this point my limited knowledge has reached an end. I've switched out the the transistors enough times to lift traces (due to one of my original mistakes of using lead-free solder, doh!) and it's getting to the point where I can't mess with it any more, lest I completely trash the PCB. The whole unit has been relegated to the cannibalism pile, but I would still like to know what exactly went wrong. I have a project in need of some parts, so I would be willing to tear it apart for other tests, unless someone knows what's up and how to fix it ;)





Re: Lost Package?

Stefan
 

Fabien,

my order was delivered today. So it took 12 days from Turkey to Germany (2019-06-18 till 2019-06-29).
Hope you will receive your order soon :-)

73s,
Stefan


Re: QCX Party Another day besides Monday? #poll

Greg Walters
 

Well, as my life goes...the top three days preferred at this point are Saturday, Sunday, and Monday. Precisely the only 3 days I work... Figures. Hi-Hi!
--
73,
Greg
KY4GW


Re: Antenna #antenna

James Daldry W4JED
 

Hi, Gang

Transformer type SWR meters use only a few percent of the signal passing through, enough to light the led's or push the meter needle. Resistive SWR meters always have a 50 ohm resistor in series with the antenna feed. That's why they are recommended for use with "fragile" transmitters, since the SWR at the transmitter end is never more than 2:1. However, since that 50 ohm resistor is always in series with the feedline, they always consume at least half the output power, converting it into heat. They also consume half the received signal. That's why they have a bypass switch.

73

Jim W4JED

On 6/29/19 1:41 AM, Kārlis Goba wrote:
I see where this comes from. While we were babbling about the losses in the bridge itself, Trueblue mentions one specific design which is batteryless and uses input RF power to light up a LED in case of bad SWR (or perhaps an another LED to indicate RF as well). In that case, YES, it will draw power and it will not be in proportion to input RF power, as there will be an increasing fraction necessary to light up the LED(s) at low RF levels. But to say that this generalizes to all SWR meters is wrong. As far as I can see now this only concerns passive LED meters like the TinySWR (https://github.com/mfhepp/tinyswr). Even passive needle meters consume power in proportion to RF levels. Another point is that if you only light up an LED for bad SWR, you don't consume anything for good SWR, so the reasoning does not really hold.

--
Karlis YL3JG


Re: I broke it, but it's not the finals

JH
 

Alan,

I neglected the troubleshooting page on the website and was instead going through the schematic and the chip datasheet. Comparing the expected voltages with mine reveal they are not ok. Pins 1, 2 are +5V, pin 3 is +9V. In transmit I get this modified square on pins 1, 2:

On pin 3 transmit I get +6.5V DC. Pin 4 looks normal. Pin 5 has +5V DC on Rx and Tx, with a tiny voltage change. Pin 6 goes from +5V DC to the modified square as in pin 1 (makes sense, pin 6 feeds both pins 1, 2).

Pin 8 goes from +5V DC to this ringing pattern on Tx:

Pins 9, 10 look normal. Pin 11 is also +5V DC on Rx and Tx. Pins 12, 13 drop from +5V DC to +4V DC on Tx.

I suspect I may have a short somewhere downstream from pin 3, given it has high voltage in Rx. I will need to double-check traces around Q1-Q3. I also started looking at the PA section of the troubleshooting page, but it's getting late and a more thorough investigation will take some time to figure out.

Thanks for pointing me in a direction. Since this is my first transceiver kit (and my first failure, hihi) I would like to learn as much as possible from it.


73 Jeffrey


On 6/25/19 1:31 PM, Alan G4ZFQ wrote:
IC3 seems to be functioning (I see logic high on the input pairs and see logic high on the outputs).

Jeffrey,

And you get 5V squarewave (meter usually reads 2.5V) on pin 6 as described on the troubleshooting page?

(Q5) seems to pass a basic mosfet test, but then I found the gate never drops voltage when I key down.

Possibly, but this is not really a PA check, it is isolated by C33.
Check all IC3 voltages according to that page.
There has been one case that a PA fault went right back to the 328 but you need to follow the sequence of checks.

73 Alan G4ZFQ

??The manual's circuit overview states that
Tx is low while Rx is high. In fact, in Rx it reads about 4.6-4.7V relative to the regulator's ground, and in Tx it goes /up/ to about 4.8-4.9V. Does this mean the 328 is not bringing the pin down?

So the switch never turns to Tx mode, so wouldn't that mean it's stuck in Rx mode? No, because I don't get any Rx audio, and if I key down I get a signal in my nearby SDR (but the amp transistors don't turn on, so my tuner's deflection meter doesn't move).

At this point my limited knowledge has reached an end. I've switched out the the transistors enough times to lift traces (due to one of my original mistakes of using lead-free solder, doh!) and it's getting to the point where I can't mess with it any more, lest I completely trash the PCB. The whole unit has been relegated to the cannibalism pile, but I would still like to know what exactly went wrong. I have a project in need of some parts, so I would be willing to tear it apart for other tests, unless someone knows what's up and how to fix it ;)





Re: Antenna #antenna

Kārlis Goba
 

I see where this comes from. While we were babbling about the losses in the bridge itself, Trueblue mentions one specific design which is batteryless and uses input RF power to light up a LED in case of bad SWR (or perhaps an another LED to indicate RF as well). In that case, YES, it will draw power and it will not be in proportion to input RF power, as there will be an increasing fraction necessary to light up the LED(s) at low RF levels. But to say that this generalizes to all SWR meters is wrong. As far as I can see now this only concerns passive LED meters like the TinySWR (https://github.com/mfhepp/tinyswr). Even passive needle meters consume power in proportion to RF levels. Another point is that if you only light up an LED for bad SWR, you don't consume anything for good SWR, so the reasoning does not really hold.

--
Karlis YL3JG


Re: Antenna #antenna

Joe Street
 

I'm not quite sure I understand your point with the LED example.  What I was trying to express is that power lost is usually expressed as a ratio like a percentage or more usually decibels.  If you put something in the line which adsorbs 10% of your power on the way through then that's ten percent of whatever is presented at the input.  It doesn't matter if you start with 100mW or 2Kw, in either case you only get 90% of it out the other end.

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 7:40 PM TrueBlue <44-40@...> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 11:46 AM, Joe Street wrote:
"that loss"  is going to be the same fraction regardless if you are QRP with a few watts or at 1KW and it is a little misleading to say it is "negligible in case of a few watts". 
I don't quite see that.  Here...if you are powering (even irrespective of other parts in the circuit) an LED running on a passive device, at a hypothetical 100W I can see that LED being unable to account for significant signal loss.  If running a QRPp device at 0.1W, it seems to me that just that same device alone could account for a disproportional net loss of signal.  I can't logically see how that could be avoided.  You're not getting that light for free, and it's dependent on very much lower source of power to begin with.

Yes?  No?
 
--
 


Re: Antenna #antenna

TrueBlue
 

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 11:46 AM, Joe Street wrote:
"that loss"  is going to be the same fraction regardless if you are QRP with a few watts or at 1KW and it is a little misleading to say it is "negligible in case of a few watts". 
I don't quite see that.  Here...if you are powering (even irrespective of other parts in the circuit) an LED running on a passive device, at a hypothetical 100W I can see that LED being unable to account for significant signal loss.  If running a QRPp device at 0.1W, it seems to me that just that same device alone could account for a disproportional net loss of signal.  I can't logically see how that could be avoided.  You're not getting that light for free, and it's dependent on very much lower source of power to begin with.

Yes?  No?
 
--
 


Re: QCX Party Another day besides Monday? #poll

Old Dog
 

Ok folks, I've got 32 responders to this poll.  That is enough to call it a valid statistical sample but out of 4k+ members, we should be able to get a little more feedback on this poll.  How about it?

Thanks
73
w4mhz


Re: Assembled QCX kits

dkwflight
 

Perhaps some notice before the next batch gets sol?


Re: Assembled QCX kits

dkwflight
 

looks like now out of stock