Date   

Re: Unexpected clock reset when unplugging QLG1 from QC+

Shane Justice
 

Tony,

Just in case you missed it, look at the schematic diagram off the audio jack- verify that as you pull the plug, that there is not an opportunity to short the tip to the ring of the wiring scheme you are using. That is a typical "feature" of these spring-style audio jacks to be aware of when implementing them in interconnect schemes.

73,
Shane
KE7TR


On Aug 2, 2020 at 23:00, Tony McUmber <tmcumber@...> wrote:

I checked the possible shorting problem by watching to see if a reset occurred when I inserted the plug.  It did not.  Also, unless I have done something wrong in installing the jack (which is a possibility, albeit a slim one) then it seems to me that it should should short out for anyone who hooked up that way.  Also, I have hard-wired the connections on the QLG1 end, so not easy to disconnect that way,

Thanks!
Tony N0BPA


Re: Unexpected clock reset when unplugging QLG1 from QC+

Tony McUmber
 

I checked the possible shorting problem by watching to see if a reset occurred when I inserted the plug.  It did not.  Also, unless I have done something wrong in installing the jack (which is a possibility, albeit a slim one) then it seems to me that it should should short out for anyone who hooked up that way.  Also, I have hard-wired the connections on the QLG1 end, so not easy to disconnect that way,

Thanks!
Tony N0BPA


Re: Unexpected clock reset when unplugging QLG1 from QC+

Tony McUmber
 

I actually connected to the 4-pin header (with 2 pins) with exactly the same results as I described.
Thanks!
Tony N0BPA


Re: How about an ultra-portable "QCX mini" version? #qcx

Kees T
 

I say let Hans do what he wants to do and what makes him feel good. I can see how thinking about a "QCX-mini" would be a welcome and technically simple break in the hard and much less fun day to day activity. 

Stay safe and healthy ....and hug your wife and kids. They are going through all this too.

73 Kees K5BCQ


Re: QCX+ Audio Problem

Ronald Taylor
 

N1SP (sorry o couldn’t find your name in the post) - well it looks like IC10 is probably alright at this point from a voltage standpoint. One check you can make is to turn the volume up and touch the high side of the volume pot with your finger. This should produce a loud buzz in the headphones. If it doesn’t, look all around the area of the volume pot and IC10B input to see if something is wrong. If it does produce a buzz, then the problem is probably prior to that in the CW filter section. First check the voltages around ICs 8 and 9. You should see about 2.5 volts on IC8 pins 1,2,3,5,6&7 and on IC9 pins 5,6&7. IC9 pins 1,2&3 should show something like 4.8 volts. 

Since you don’t have a scope you could use a small amplifier/speaker (signal tracer) to probe IC8 pin 5 (input) and 7 (output) and likewise IC8 pins 3&1 followed by IC9 same pins. In the alignment mode with the BPF adjustment selected you should have a very strong 700 Hz note to look for at these pins. 

Good luck ... Ron


On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 17:04 N1SP <randyn1sp@...> wrote:
Please forgive an often asked question, but in doing a search I only found folks with low voltages on IC10, which is different than my results...

Symptom: No audio tone when doing the BPF alignment, which was successful. Attempting IQ Balance indicated an audio level of 0 so could not be completed.

Using a 12.31 power supply (battery) and an external high impedance DVM I performed the following tests...
1) Voltage measurements of IC 10 pins. Pins 1,2,3,4,7,8 all within specs, Pins 5 and 6 higher than spec by 1 and 2 volts (5.94 vdc on each).
2) Resistance measurements on component side around IC10. All seem reasonable compared to schematic-  pin 5 to ground =10k (after cap C24 charged), pin 5 to B+ =10k, pin 6 to pin 7= 119k, pin 3 to pin 7 =0, pin 1 to pin 2 =0.

Without an o-scope I don't know how I can look for the signal from the CW Filter, and don't know how to check that audio muting from Q7 is not on. But most of all, I can't find a reason why pins 5 and 6 are high unless this indicates they are not conducting.

Any thoughts greatly appreciated!!! Kit was built very carefully with each joint inspected after soldering- but yes- "it" happens.


Re: Unexpected clock reset when unplugging QLG1 from QC+

Gregg Myers
 

Hi Tony,

When you are powering the QLG1 via the PTT and remove the PTT plug, I bet you are briefly shorting out the +5v power line of the QCX+ and this is causing the processor reset. This is hard to avoid when removing a plug like this. Can you instead disconnect from the QLG1 side (at the 4 pin connector)and leave the PTT connection in on the radio side? Then I think you will see the processor is not reset.

If that works, you can look to find a better way to pick off the +5v power from the QCX+.

Good luck & 73,
Gregg W7GRM

On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 7:16 PM N3MNT <bob@...> wrote:
I don't think the paddle input on the QCX is meant to support the QLG1 even though the gps input shares a pin with the straight key.  I wired up a 4 pin socket  and connect to the 4 pin header on the board and have never had an issue removing it once am finished with it.


Re: How about an ultra-portable "QCX mini" version? #qcx

Jim Painter
 

My thoughts exactly.

Kq3s


On Aug 2, 2020, at 6:32 PM, K2DB Paul Mackanos <paul.mackanos@...> wrote:


How about letting Hans get finished with the QXS ?
Paul K2DB


On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 12:45 PM Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:
Hi all

As I said earlier on this thread, back in June... I would give it some consideration. Options could include bringing back a batch of the original QCX, and as an alternative, designing a smaller, SMD version of the QCX. 

So now, for the purposes of attenuation of speculation...

On careful consideration I didn't feel enthusiastic about another batch of QCX, it would be insufficiently different to the new QCX+ for me to be confident of enough sales; and smaller batch would not get the necessary economies of scale so prices would increase. And I'm not psychologically well adjusted to what I would see as looking backwards... I have to keep moving forwards. 

I am a lot more enthusiastic about an SMD version of QCX which could be somewhat smaller even than the original QCX. Yet with the same circuit and the same firmware and operational features. So one firmware version for the new QCX+, the almost 10,000 original QCX out there, and a new SMD version. 

The kit will be a mix of SMD and through-hole components. In particular, band specific components should be through-hole. All SMD components ready-assembled. 

I understand the comments about including batteries and speaker and antenna tuner and who knows what else. I'd like it that way too, personally. But two factors are against that. First is that in order to avoid a lengthy new product development when there are already too many projects. The second is that the majority of portable operators I have discussed this with, would prefer a QCX to be the radio on it's own. The don't want the choice of antenna tuners batteries etc made for them. Doubtless there will be plenty of operators on both sides, but this is my impression of the majority view on a smaller version of QCX. The larger QCX+ does have space for all that. And anyone who by now has physically held a QCX+ in their hand will be able to testify that it really is not all that enormous. 

I shall put this project in motion. It isn't a huge project since the schematic, firmware etc remain the same. Just a different physical implementation. Nevertheless it will be necessary to go through a couple of rounds of PCB layout, prototype, test etc., both for the radio and enclosure. So you can expect it to take a couple of months, before I have this ready to fly off the shelves. 

73 Hans G0UPL 


On Sun, Aug 2, 2020, 18:17 jjpurdum via groups.io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
I wonder if an existing company might license the QCX design from Hans and build/market the SMD version? I'd do the financials like a book: pay an upfront advance against royalties and then pay Hans so much per unit. I did something like this on a software package I wrote back in the 1980's. I gave exclusive distribution rights for the software to the company and received an advance plus royalties. The contract was perpetual, provided $XX/year in total royalties were paid. It worked fine for about two years, after which the company went belly-up. (Not my fault, honest.) The software reverted back to me...I still have it!

I think that approach could be a win-win for Hans without draining his coffers and time, plus a win for those of us who would like such a version of the QCX.

Jack, W8TEE

On Sunday, August 2, 2020, 10:08:22 AM EDT, Torbjorn Skauli <tskauli@...> wrote:


I appreciate all the interesting discussions here. To Razvan, just a reminder that your self-contained dream rig can become reality with the QCX if some effort is put into that, for example with my 3D printed enclosure that you find in the Builders' gallery, shown here on the top of the ski jump with sunglasses for scale. After reading all the well-thought posts about processors, displays and SMD kits, I think we must remember that QRP Labs is just Hans and his few assistants of various sizes. I am still most tempted by my original proposal to use the current QCX design with SMD preassembled, as the Si5351 is already, leaving only the band-specific parts for the user to build. Using large SMDs is probably a good thing, to make servicing easier. I see a potential for fitting two of those rigs in my pockets, to have one for WSPR while I practice CW on the other.
Stay safe, and have a nice summer everyone!
73 de Torbjorn, LA4ZCA


Re: How about an ultra-portable "QCX mini" version? #qcx

Jim Manley
 

Hi Paul,

NO!!!  He has to finish the Q_S_X first!!  He doesn't need to be distracted by yet-another model design, whatever the QXS would be!  A QSX for dyslexics, maybe?  😉

73_Morse_Animated_GIF.gif

Jim  KJ7JHE
Lame Deer Montana High School Amateur Radio Club  KJ7JKU


On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 3:33 PM K2DB Paul Mackanos <paul.mackanos@...> wrote:
How about letting Hans get finished with the QXS ?
Paul K2DB


Re: Unexpected clock reset when unplugging QLG1 from QC+

N3MNT
 

I don't think the paddle input on the QCX is meant to support the QLG1 even though the gps input shares a pin with the straight key.  I wired up a 4 pin socket  and connect to the 4 pin header on the board and have never had an issue removing it once am finished with it.


Unexpected clock reset when unplugging QLG1 from QC+

Tony McUmber
 

I have not seen this problem addressed in the trouble shooting pages for QCX, so I am hoping someone here will have some insight.

When I unplug the power plug for the QLG1 from the PTT jack on the QCX, this causes QCX to re-start, thus resetting the clock to 00:00.  This does not seem correct, since one main purpose of the QLG1 is to set the clock on the QCX to the correct time.

  • I have double-checked my connections; the hookup cables are wired as shown on page 100 of the QCX manual and according to the instructions in the QLG manual
  • The QCX does not restart and the clock does not reset to 0:00 when I plug in the cables from the QLG1, only when I remove the PTT power plug.
  • When I unplug just the data line from the QXC the radio does not re-start and the clock does not reset, but I can hear the 1-sec pulse in my earphones with the data line unplugged.
  • I can use the keyer by plugging it back into the keyer jack, but I still hear the pulse with the data cable disconnected.
As noted, all connections are correct on both ends of both cables at both devices according to the instructions and diagrams.  In the instructions we are told to connect the shield (ground) of the data cable to the radio end only, not to the QLG1.  No such admonition is given for the +5 cable from PTT, so I have used the shield for ground in the conventional manner.  This is supported by the diagrams.

I am not aware of any modifications needed to connect the QLG1 to the original QCX (I have board version 3 and the latest firmware), so I plugged the data cable into the paddle jack as on the QCX+.  Since these connections are paralleled with the header pin connections, it seems that this should work.  In this case the QLG1 randomly modifies the Sys freq and Ref freq and does not set the time.  The GPS display shows no data information.

I would welcome any information from anyone who has had similar experiences or constructive ideas.

Thanks!

Tony N0BPA


Re: QCX+ unable to balance IQ, volume saturates quickly, and voltage oddities

JP KN6DVC
 

N3MNT, I didn't bend the leads during install, but opted to use cut-off resistor leads instead. As you suggested, I tested resistance between all three volume control leads. Across the outer two leads, I measured 5.25K, and between one of the outer leads and the center lead, I measured 0K, 2.71K, and 5.25K when I move the volume control from minimum, to middle, and then to maximum. I made these measurements three times: at the volume control leads, at the solder pads on the front PCB, and then on the right angle connector on the main PCB.


Re: How about an ultra-portable "QCX mini" version? #qcx

jjpurdum
 

Wow! Pretty fancy. I put my paste on with a used dental pick that I get free from my dentist. I'll trade you a really cool dental pick for your dispenser...deal?

Jack, W8TEE

On Sunday, August 2, 2020, 4:28:46 PM EDT, Gwen Patton <ardrhi@...> wrote:


I use an I-Extruder stepper-motor driven solder paste applicator when I have a lot to do. I ordered a small, manual solder paste applicator from Tindie a couple of weeks ago, but it isn't here yet. I have a reflow hot-air pencil for small jobs and a computerized reflow hot plate for bigger jobs. But for only a few parts, I just use my TS100 iron with the long, narrow ILS tip.


On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 2:49 PM The Crunchbird <pulsedevil@...> wrote:
A heat gun works great. Apply solder paste to the component pads and place the parts on the board. Apply heat to melt the paste. The parts will magically, automatically align. For a board with a lot of parts you simply populate one area at a time. As long as one uses large SMD devices such as 1206 R's and C's the job is easier and cleaner than building using thoughhole components. Here is a link explaining why the components self align


Dave. N2SN ex G4FEB


Re: QCX+ unable to balance IQ, volume saturates quickly, and voltage oddities

N3MNT
 

Remove power and check operation of volume control ( check resistance and wiper)  It is easy to damage the control when bending the leads to solder.  Make the measurements at the solder pads on the board.


QCX+ unable to balance IQ, volume saturates quickly, and voltage oddities

JP KN6DVC
 

Hi, I'm having a post-build issue with my 40m QCX+. Specifically,

1. While I'm able to tune the BPF to its peak, the rest of the alignment is not working. Turning the variable resistors many turns has little impact on the IQ balance,
2. Volume control goes from 04-12 in less than a few degrees of rotation.

So, I investigated the receive path with some of the pointers from other similar threads; however, I'm still stuck. I did notice that some of the voltages are significantly different from what's listed in the manual. For example, while the voltage on pins 1 and 7 of IC5-10 are correct, pins 3 and 5 seem to always be equal to pins 1 and 7. However, in the manual, as you move from IC5 through IC7, the voltage should drop on pins 3 and 5. Consequently, I traced the circuit backwards towards T1. T1 has the correct voltages, but then the voltages of C43/44/45/46 are all 2.50V or 2.48V and do not vary slightly as indicated in the manual.

I haven't found any issues with continuity along the receive path yet, but I'm willing to check and double-check any suggestions you send my way.

All the best,

JP KN6DVC


Re: How about an ultra-portable "QCX mini" version? #qcx

namerati@...
 

Pluggable filter and SMA connector footprint are both excellent ideas!

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:07:39PM -0700, Kees T wrote:
..........and an SMA connector footprint inside the BNC connector footprint.

73 Kees K5BCQ



QCX+ Audio Problem

N1SP
 

Please forgive an often asked question, but in doing a search I only found folks with low voltages on IC10, which is different than my results...

Symptom: No audio tone when doing the BPF alignment, which was successful. Attempting IQ Balance indicated an audio level of 0 so could not be completed.

Using a 12.31 power supply (battery) and an external high impedance DVM I performed the following tests...
1) Voltage measurements of IC 10 pins. Pins 1,2,3,4,7,8 all within specs, Pins 5 and 6 higher than spec by 1 and 2 volts (5.94 vdc on each).
2) Resistance measurements on component side around IC10. All seem reasonable compared to schematic-  pin 5 to ground =10k (after cap C24 charged), pin 5 to B+ =10k, pin 6 to pin 7= 119k, pin 3 to pin 7 =0, pin 1 to pin 2 =0.

Without an o-scope I don't know how I can look for the signal from the CW Filter, and don't know how to check that audio muting from Q7 is not on. But most of all, I can't find a reason why pins 5 and 6 are high unless this indicates they are not conducting.

Any thoughts greatly appreciated!!! Kit was built very carefully with each joint inspected after soldering- but yes- "it" happens.


Re: USBASP programmer for sale - SOLD

Podolsky A
 

Thanks to all who responded to my post. This item has been sold.
GL de Arnie W8DU


Re: How about an ultra-portable "QCX mini" version? #qcx

K2DB Paul Mackanos
 

How about letting Hans get finished with the QXS ?
Paul K2DB


On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 12:45 PM Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:
Hi all

As I said earlier on this thread, back in June... I would give it some consideration. Options could include bringing back a batch of the original QCX, and as an alternative, designing a smaller, SMD version of the QCX. 

So now, for the purposes of attenuation of speculation...

On careful consideration I didn't feel enthusiastic about another batch of QCX, it would be insufficiently different to the new QCX+ for me to be confident of enough sales; and smaller batch would not get the necessary economies of scale so prices would increase. And I'm not psychologically well adjusted to what I would see as looking backwards... I have to keep moving forwards. 

I am a lot more enthusiastic about an SMD version of QCX which could be somewhat smaller even than the original QCX. Yet with the same circuit and the same firmware and operational features. So one firmware version for the new QCX+, the almost 10,000 original QCX out there, and a new SMD version. 

The kit will be a mix of SMD and through-hole components. In particular, band specific components should be through-hole. All SMD components ready-assembled. 

I understand the comments about including batteries and speaker and antenna tuner and who knows what else. I'd like it that way too, personally. But two factors are against that. First is that in order to avoid a lengthy new product development when there are already too many projects. The second is that the majority of portable operators I have discussed this with, would prefer a QCX to be the radio on it's own. The don't want the choice of antenna tuners batteries etc made for them. Doubtless there will be plenty of operators on both sides, but this is my impression of the majority view on a smaller version of QCX. The larger QCX+ does have space for all that. And anyone who by now has physically held a QCX+ in their hand will be able to testify that it really is not all that enormous. 

I shall put this project in motion. It isn't a huge project since the schematic, firmware etc remain the same. Just a different physical implementation. Nevertheless it will be necessary to go through a couple of rounds of PCB layout, prototype, test etc., both for the radio and enclosure. So you can expect it to take a couple of months, before I have this ready to fly off the shelves. 

73 Hans G0UPL 


On Sun, Aug 2, 2020, 18:17 jjpurdum via groups.io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
I wonder if an existing company might license the QCX design from Hans and build/market the SMD version? I'd do the financials like a book: pay an upfront advance against royalties and then pay Hans so much per unit. I did something like this on a software package I wrote back in the 1980's. I gave exclusive distribution rights for the software to the company and received an advance plus royalties. The contract was perpetual, provided $XX/year in total royalties were paid. It worked fine for about two years, after which the company went belly-up. (Not my fault, honest.) The software reverted back to me...I still have it!

I think that approach could be a win-win for Hans without draining his coffers and time, plus a win for those of us who would like such a version of the QCX.

Jack, W8TEE

On Sunday, August 2, 2020, 10:08:22 AM EDT, Torbjorn Skauli <tskauli@...> wrote:


I appreciate all the interesting discussions here. To Razvan, just a reminder that your self-contained dream rig can become reality with the QCX if some effort is put into that, for example with my 3D printed enclosure that you find in the Builders' gallery, shown here on the top of the ski jump with sunglasses for scale. After reading all the well-thought posts about processors, displays and SMD kits, I think we must remember that QRP Labs is just Hans and his few assistants of various sizes. I am still most tempted by my original proposal to use the current QCX design with SMD preassembled, as the Si5351 is already, leaving only the band-specific parts for the user to build. Using large SMDs is probably a good thing, to make servicing easier. I see a potential for fitting two of those rigs in my pockets, to have one for WSPR while I practice CW on the other.
Stay safe, and have a nice summer everyone!
73 de Torbjorn, LA4ZCA


Re: Source for replacement parts in small quantities?

Mark Dallner
 

https://www.radioshack.com/

Still out there

Mark

Ac9de 

On Aug 2, 2020, at 4:17 PM, Leland L. Bahr <w5drc@...> wrote:

Personally I buy the needed parts from suppliers having the needed part.  Today, finding the part is the goal and not which supplier to buy it from.  (Just saying!)

Lee, w0vt





Re: No 5 volts

Jim Painter
 

Jim, I checked out the two areas circled in red. The lower left is the earphone jack. From one angle it looks like there might be a short but changing the angle they are clearly OK. The pins in question are normally shorted in the head phone jack anyway ( normally closed). The four pins in the upper right  are JP3. Pins 7-8 and 9-10 are each joined by a foil. So they’re OK. Though it doesn’t look like in the photo. Good idea about the switch. Unfortunately I don’t have a current limiter but I may be able to borrow one from someone in the club (Skyview).

Thanks again...Jim...kq3s

P.S. I should be able to find a 12 volt short with an ohm meter.


On Aug 2, 2020, at 4:59 PM, N3MNT <bob@...> wrote:

S1 is not critical at this point as you can jump it .  The QCX has no switch.  Based on D3 blowing up and the damaged switch, it points to a 12V side major short.  I would not apply power until you find the short.  Do you have access to a current limited power supply.  If so I would use that for the next power application.