Date   

Re: Shipping: no more unregistered shipping

K2DB Paul Mackanos
 

Hopefully you won‚Äôt be accepting orders from this angry customer anymore. ūüėé

On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 10:55 AM Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:
Hi all

I have decided to disable the untracked, unregistered, uninsured, "your risk" shipping option in the QRP Labs shop - which I had anyway only made available for low weight items. I had introduced this untracked shipping service at the same time I introduced the FedEx Express (TNT) courier option). 

Sadly, a number of people evidently appear unable to parse the description of this lowest cost post office airmail shipping, and then they later email me asking for the tracking code, where is the package, when will it arrive, etc. Furthermore, and also sadly, during the Covid19 pandemic post office delivery to a lot of places has been unbelievably slow. All of which is outside my control.

I have become tired of explaining to people what "untracked, unregistered, uninsured, your risk" means, even though I wrote it all on the shipping FAQ... and recommending that they use FedEx Express (TNT) next time which takes around 4 business days and costs only a few $ more. But what tipped me over the edge, is a long chain of correspondence with a rather angry customer who wasn't a fan of the "coronavirus excuse" and who failed a PayPal claim for a refund. I repeatedly mentioned that we have had many reports of multi-week or even multi-month post office deliveries and he had not even waited the amount of time that it used to take, pre-pandemic... and I had to keep explaining we don't have a tracking number, because he chose the option without tracking. Then I had to explain all this again and again to the PayPal robots. I even provided and uploaded our proof of posting. 

But today I received PayPal's judgement on the case, which is in favour of the Buyer, because I had not provided proof of delivery. I filed an appeal stating again that there is NO proof of delivery, the Buyer chose unregistered untracked and he just needs to wait longer anyway already... but my appeal was rejected too. So they did the refund. And almost certainly the buyer will get the package too, when he's waited longer. 

So now there are two options: post office tracked, and FedEx Express (TNT). 

Makes me sad. But there it is. Life. Worst things happen, I guess. But I don't want to waste valuable scarce time and energy on that kind of stuff. 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com













Re: Shipping: no more unregistered shipping

Timothy East
 

Completely appropriate and justifiable. 

Thanks for the great kits and strong support. 

Tim
K0EMP 


On Oct 1, 2020, at 09:55, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:

ÔĽŅ
Hi all

I have decided to disable the untracked, unregistered, uninsured, "your risk" shipping option in the QRP Labs shop - which I had anyway only made available for low weight items. I had introduced this untracked shipping service at the same time I introduced the FedEx Express (TNT) courier option). 

Sadly, a number of people evidently appear unable to parse the description of this lowest cost post office airmail shipping, and then they later email me asking for the tracking code, where is the package, when will it arrive, etc. Furthermore, and also sadly, during the Covid19 pandemic post office delivery to a lot of places has been unbelievably slow. All of which is outside my control.

I have become tired of explaining to people what "untracked, unregistered, uninsured, your risk" means, even though I wrote it all on the shipping FAQ... and recommending that they use FedEx Express (TNT) next time which takes around 4 business days and costs only a few $ more. But what tipped me over the edge, is a long chain of correspondence with a rather angry customer who wasn't a fan of the "coronavirus excuse" and who failed a PayPal claim for a refund. I repeatedly mentioned that we have had many reports of multi-week or even multi-month post office deliveries and he had not even waited the amount of time that it used to take, pre-pandemic... and I had to keep explaining we don't have a tracking number, because he chose the option without tracking. Then I had to explain all this again and again to the PayPal robots. I even provided and uploaded our proof of posting. 

But today I received PayPal's judgement on the case, which is in favour of the Buyer, because I had not provided proof of delivery. I filed an appeal stating again that there is NO proof of delivery, the Buyer chose unregistered untracked and he just needs to wait longer anyway already... but my appeal was rejected too. So they did the refund. And almost certainly the buyer will get the package too, when he's waited longer. 

So now there are two options: post office tracked, and FedEx Express (TNT). 

Makes me sad. But there it is. Life. Worst things happen, I guess. But I don't want to waste valuable scarce time and energy on that kind of stuff. 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com



QCX+ on 6M?

David R. Hassall WA5DJJ
 

Dear group,

 

I heard a rumor that someone has a coaxed a QCX+ up to 6M.   I want to do the same thing here on the WA5DJJ’s HF ALL BAND QRSS GRABBER.   I  would like to know the secret of the number of windings and type of powdered iron core that was used to get T1 input transformer to work at 50MHz.   Any suggestions gratefully accepted.  ( I know that there will also be a requirement for a preamp, I already have that base covered with a really neat circuit using a 2N5179 transistor in fig. 1-3 of W1FB’s QRP NOTEBOOK)  Yes, I know that is an old book but mine is well worn and has taught me many lessons and gave me some great experiments.   

 

I have a spare QCX+ kit just begging to go on 6M, So, Come on and give me some T1 winding help.

 

Take care and have fun.   I hope to hear soon.

73 Dave Hassall WA5DJJ  Las Cruces, New Mexico

Website: http://www.zianet.com/dhassall/

QRSS SUPER GRABBER WEBSITE: http://www.qsl.net/wa5djj/

 


Shipping: no more unregistered shipping

Hans Summers
 

Hi all

I have decided to disable the untracked, unregistered, uninsured, "your risk" shipping option in the QRP Labs shop - which I had anyway only made available for low weight items. I had introduced this untracked shipping service at the same time I introduced the FedEx Express (TNT) courier option). 

Sadly, a number of people evidently appear unable to parse the description of this lowest cost post office airmail shipping, and then they later email me asking for the tracking code, where is the package, when will it arrive, etc. Furthermore, and also sadly, during the Covid19 pandemic post office delivery to a lot of places has been unbelievably slow. All of which is outside my control.

I have become tired of explaining to people what "untracked, unregistered, uninsured, your risk" means, even though I wrote it all on the shipping FAQ... and recommending that they use FedEx Express (TNT) next time which takes around 4 business days and costs only a few $ more. But what tipped me over the edge, is a long chain of correspondence with a rather angry customer who wasn't a fan of the "coronavirus excuse" and who failed a PayPal claim for a refund. I repeatedly mentioned that we have had many reports of multi-week or even multi-month post office deliveries and he had not even waited the amount of time that it used to take, pre-pandemic... and I had to keep explaining we don't have a tracking number, because he chose the option without tracking. Then I had to explain all this again and again to the PayPal robots. I even provided and uploaded our proof of posting. 

But today I received PayPal's judgement on the case, which is in favour of the Buyer, because I had not provided proof of delivery. I filed an appeal stating again that there is NO proof of delivery, the Buyer chose unregistered untracked and he just needs to wait longer anyway already... but my appeal was rejected too. So they did the refund. And almost certainly the buyer will get the package too, when he's waited longer. 

So now there are two options: post office tracked, and FedEx Express (TNT). 

Makes me sad. But there it is. Life. Worst things happen, I guess. But I don't want to waste valuable scarce time and energy on that kind of stuff. 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com



Re: BPF 80m

KI7MWA
 

This discussion has been very informative, but has failed (as I see it) to respond to the original question, which is, what are the potential sources of insertion loss for the QRP-Labs standard bandpass filter kit.

What are the potential sources of loss, and how would one identify them?  

One potential source mentioned is the T37-2 toroid.  How would you (anyone) go about testing this?

Are there other potenital sources of loss?  (Other than poor construction technique.)  And how would one go about testing them.

I have built a number of these bandpass filters, and, with the exception of the 80 meter filters, the insertion losses have all been below 2dB.  I have been unable to achieve a loss of less than 5dB on either of the two 80 meter filters I have built.


Re: QCX-mini update: solving the microphonics problem

Hans Summers
 

Hello Jerry
 
Your Japanese co-workers were probably just trying to avoid that weird gaijin.
They know all about tightly packed methods of transport.
For those that don't, do a google image search for "Tokyo Train Pushers".

I spent all of 1989 in Tokyo, making a transfer between trains in Shinjuku 
on my way to and from work.  Can't recall ever encountering any of those white
gloved pushers.  But did encounter many extremely crowded trains and subways.

In 5.5 years of daily subway commute, I never once saw anyone being pushed into trains with poles. I suppose they must exist somewhere and documentary makers know where to go and hunt for it hi hi. Rush-hour was crowded, yes. Not worse than London. 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com


Re: 10W linear amplifier #problem #linear

Kevin Polston
 

Bill, Curt, Geoff

All - Thanks for the advice.

@Geoff - Yes, Chelmsford ARS is indeed a fine club - but the trouble is with this pesky virus that meetings are suspended for the foreseeable future.

@Curt - No, visible damage.  I’m ordering a second amp - hopefully I’ll get that working.  Also, I’ve ordered some replacement IRF510’s for my original unit.  As my experience increases maybe I’ll eventually work-out how I killed-it and having a working bit (hopefully) will assist in the post-mortem.

Kevin


On 30 Sep 2020, at 14:48, Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:

Hi,

I have and use radios built for CW and SSB and they have linear output stages that serve without complaint in the CW mode. If it is what you have and it works just use it.

73,

Bill  KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 9/29/20 7:06 PM, geoff M0ORE via groups.io wrote:
Hi Kevin.
The 10 watt PA module is intended as part of the QSX SSB transceiver when it is released. As it is a linear  amplifier, it is not really suitable for a CW only rig. It will work but not very efficiently.
I see that you are a member of the Chelmsford RS, a club with a long history serving the amateur fraternity.  I suggest that you ask some of the members of the excellent club that you are a member of for assistance.
On 29/09/2020 19:11, wb8yyy via groups.io wrote:
Kevin

you have excellent advisors here already - and glad you are joining us in building.

you should spend a little time seeing what if anything went wrong with the linear PA.  note being linear it draws DC current without RF being fed into it (unlike some other examples like the QCX PA that require input RF to draw much current).

any visual damage?  if you want to check the mosfet final stages, you may need to disconnect a few parts - but if have had a similar device (okay I doubt you may have one) it could be compared to a fresh device.  often a serious issue involves too much current flow, then some parts may be 'smoked' so look carefully.

enjoy a patient build of that norcal40 - and do seek Allison's advice later in selecting a PA for it (like maybe the QCX PA with a mod to provide the TR control).  possibly the 10w linear amplifier could be repaired from parts from another amateur's 'junk box.'  this amplifier is intended for a future rig called the QSX.  if you get interested in modes like WSPR - the U3S is a fun device and its doesn't need an amplifier to cross oceans.  do exercise the community here - glad to have you with us.

Curt wb8yyy 




Re: Stripping spacers for QCX+ front panel

Mick Hall
 

Good job.

Where there's a will ............

73, Mick 2E0MMH

On Wednesday, 30 September 2020, 22:25:32 BST, Daniel Curtin KF4AV <danieljcurtin42@...> wrote:


I don't have a drill press, nor a steady hand with a power drill, so I rigged a jig to ream the spacers. Visegrip clamps a 1/8" drill bit, then put the nuts in a 5.5 mm nut driver and drive them onto the bit. Worked smoothly.

Probably not worth a patent application!!

73, Dan KF4AV


Re: QCX-mini update: solving the microphonics problem

Jerry Gaffke
 

Hans,

Your Japanese co-workers were probably just trying to avoid that weird gaijin.
They know all about tightly packed methods of transport.
For those that don't, do a google image search for "Tokyo Train Pushers".

I spent all of 1989 in Tokyo, making a transfer between trains in Shinjuku 
on my way to and from work.  Can't recall ever encountering any of those white
gloved pushers.  But did encounter many extremely crowded trains and subways.

Jerry, KE7ER


On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 12:13 AM, Hans Summers wrote:
I am minded at this point to mention my elevator theory. With all due apologies to all stoic native Englishmen reading this, who should refer to these as "lifts", but this theory was developed and honed during my Tokyo years and the Japanese typically learn American English. According to my theory, there's always room for another. So whilst that elevator in corporate headquarters may appear to be all full of Japanese business-persons shuffling anxiously to avoid proximity to each other, according to my theory all that's really required is a little compression to achieve a higher humanoid density in the elevator cabin. I proved this theory many times, much to the distaste of my fellow travellers on the vertical expressway to the 14F cafeteria. 
 


File /FIve Amp 14V PSU Design (Scaleable)/Weber_14V_PSU.pdf uploaded #file-notice

QRPLabs@groups.io Notification <noreply@...>
 

The following files have been uploaded to the Files area of the QRPLabs@groups.io group.

By: Timothy Fidler

Description:
14 V , 5A PSU design from Steve Weber that possibly has a few rough edges still. Usable as is.


Re: Stripping spacers for QCX+ front panel

Arthur Paton
 

Nice Dan
Maybe Hans will put that in an update to instructions.  
73
Art N9AEP

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 4:25 PM Daniel Curtin KF4AV <danieljcurtin42@...> wrote:
I don't have a drill press, nor a steady hand with a power drill, so I rigged a jig to ream the spacers. Visegrip clamps a 1/8" drill bit, then put the nuts in a 5.5 mm nut driver and drive them onto the bit. Worked smoothly.

Probably not worth a patent application!!

73, Dan KF4AV


Re: QCX-mini update 30-Sep-2020

geoff M0ORE
 

Santa will be late this year due to the two weeks self-isolation required as he travels between countries.

On 30/09/2020 21:04, Hans Summers wrote:
Hello Jean-Marc 

I think it will take about 4 weeks to produce the kits. I'm making 1,000 kits to start with. So should be in time for Santa!

73 Hans G0UPL 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020, 19:27 Jean-Marc Meessen (ON4KJM) <on4kjm@...> wrote:
:-)

I will always remember the analogy with the lift/elevator.... ;-)

I had already a chat with Santa. Would be nice if it could be synchronized to get loaded on time on his sledge.

73 de ON4KJM


Stripping spacers for QCX+ front panel

Daniel Curtin KF4AV
 

I don't have a drill press, nor a steady hand with a power drill, so I rigged a jig to ream the spacers. Visegrip clamps a 1/8" drill bit, then put the nuts in a 5.5 mm nut driver and drive them onto the bit. Worked smoothly.

Probably not worth a patent application!!

73, Dan KF4AV


Re: QCX-mini update 30-Sep-2020

Viktors Miske KC8CKZ
 

I normally don't chime in, but both QCX+ and the mini now on Santa's list here.

 


Re: QCX-mini update 30-Sep-2020

Al Clark
 

Nice job sorting this out, Hans.  And really great design and packaging for this mini-QCX.  A VERY cool little rig!  You're gonna sell a bunch of these.
--
Al W4KY


Re: QRP Labs #dummy load at 0dBm #dummy

Ben
 

Thank you for the notes about overloading the front end and the stub, really interesting!


Re: QCX-mini update 30-Sep-2020

Julian Rolfe
 

Another awesome kit, with a global audience waiting in expectation to order.

Hell yes.........

Cannot wait to get my hands on a mini.




On Wednesday, September 30, 2020, 9:30 pm, Dave <VE3GSO@...> wrote:

Thanks Hans.  Makes me shiver just thinking about it.  And just enough for a kit builder to enjoy.

I know someone who enjoys bicycle CW, and I’ll be letting him know ASAP!

Dave


On Sep 30, 2020, at 16:03, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:

ÔĽŅ
Hi Dave

On the layout drawing it appears that C1 and R17 are in conflict. And it appears there is a lot of board space where the low pass filter toroids are that might allow at least O.1 mm between capacitors, which would help with microphonics.

The silkscreen drawings on the PCB are often larger than the component actually is. There's often other discrepancies too, between the library component footprint and the real thing. I have my own edited libraries in many cases, where I've edited the official libraries to match the actual components. Which is where the prototyping comes in and is so important. 

C1 vs R17... the real C1 is a lot smaller than the silkscreen circle thinks it is. The three trimmer resistors are accurately represented sizewize by their silkscreen counterparts. However, the location of the adjustment screw is right at the bottom left corner. I carefully designed everything so that you can adjust the 24-turn trimmer resistors through the slot between the LCD PCB and the controls PCB. But because the screws is in not quite in the position indicated in the library component, it was a little hard to turn the screws; to fix this I enlarged the slot by 0.8mm and moved the three trimmers right 1.0mm. I had already noted from the prototype that there is sufficient clearance between C1 and R17 to allow this. So in summary, don't worry about it. 

The capacitors in the LPF are NP0 and aren't microphonic. Also they are smaller than the rectangle on the silkscreen. So there's no worry there either. 

As far as I can see it's as close to perfect as I can make it :-)

73 Hans G0UPL 


Re: QCX-mini update 30-Sep-2020

Dave VE3GSO
 

Thanks Hans.  Makes me shiver just thinking about it.  And just enough for a kit builder to enjoy.

I know someone who enjoys bicycle CW, and I’ll be letting him know ASAP!

Dave


On Sep 30, 2020, at 16:03, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:

ÔĽŅ
Hi Dave

On the layout drawing it appears that C1 and R17 are in conflict. And it appears there is a lot of board space where the low pass filter toroids are that might allow at least O.1 mm between capacitors, which would help with microphonics.

The silkscreen drawings on the PCB are often larger than the component actually is. There's often other discrepancies too, between the library component footprint and the real thing. I have my own edited libraries in many cases, where I've edited the official libraries to match the actual components. Which is where the prototyping comes in and is so important. 

C1 vs R17... the real C1 is a lot smaller than the silkscreen circle thinks it is. The three trimmer resistors are accurately represented sizewize by their silkscreen counterparts. However, the location of the adjustment screw is right at the bottom left corner. I carefully designed everything so that you can adjust the 24-turn trimmer resistors through the slot between the LCD PCB and the controls PCB. But because the screws is in not quite in the position indicated in the library component, it was a little hard to turn the screws; to fix this I enlarged the slot by 0.8mm and moved the three trimmers right 1.0mm. I had already noted from the prototype that there is sufficient clearance between C1 and R17 to allow this. So in summary, don't worry about it. 

The capacitors in the LPF are NP0 and aren't microphonic. Also they are smaller than the rectangle on the silkscreen. So there's no worry there either. 

As far as I can see it's as close to perfect as I can make it :-)

73 Hans G0UPL 


Re: QCX-mini update 30-Sep-2020

Hans Summers
 

Hello Jean-Marc 

I think it will take about 4 weeks to produce the kits. I'm making 1,000 kits to start with. So should be in time for Santa!

73 Hans G0UPL 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020, 19:27 Jean-Marc Meessen (ON4KJM) <on4kjm@...> wrote:
:-)

I will always remember the analogy with the lift/elevator.... ;-)

I had already a chat with Santa. Would be nice if it could be synchronized to get loaded on time on his sledge.

73 de ON4KJM


Re: QCX-mini update 30-Sep-2020

Hans Summers
 

Hi Dave

On the layout drawing it appears that C1 and R17 are in conflict. And it appears there is a lot of board space where the low pass filter toroids are that might allow at least O.1 mm between capacitors, which would help with microphonics.

The silkscreen drawings on the PCB are often larger than the component actually is. There's often other discrepancies too, between the library component footprint and the real thing. I have my own edited libraries in many cases, where I've edited the official libraries to match the actual components. Which is where the prototyping comes in and is so important. 

C1 vs R17... the real C1 is a lot smaller than the silkscreen circle thinks it is. The three trimmer resistors are accurately represented sizewize by their silkscreen counterparts. However, the location of the adjustment screw is right at the bottom left corner. I carefully designed everything so that you can adjust the 24-turn trimmer resistors through the slot between the LCD PCB and the controls PCB. But because the screws is in not quite in the position indicated in the library component, it was a little hard to turn the screws; to fix this I enlarged the slot by 0.8mm and moved the three trimmers right 1.0mm. I had already noted from the prototype that there is sufficient clearance between C1 and R17 to allow this. So in summary, don't worry about it. 

The capacitors in the LPF are NP0 and aren't microphonic. Also they are smaller than the rectangle on the silkscreen. So there's no worry there either. 

As far as I can see it's as close to perfect as I can make it :-)

73 Hans G0UPL 

12121 - 12140 of 65018