Re: Assembly manual Rev 1.08
Hi Des?
Yes I think it is possible. If the I-Q pot has to compensate for usual amplitude imbalances but additionally has the trauma of having to deal with the additional imbalance caused by the R19/R25 reversal then it could run out of trimmer adjustment range. I think it's quite possible.?
Still, if your unwanted sideband is already excellent I think I'd be inclined to leave it as is!
73 Hans G0UPL? ?
On Dec 9, 2017 1:56 PM, "QRP_nut" < raspiham1973@...> wrote: Hi Hans and thanks for swift the reply,
Would R19 & R25 being reversed on the PCB possibly cause one of the I/Q trim-pots to run out of adjustment while setting-up the I/Q balance? I just checked my QCX80 and R19 & R25 are reversed.
While setting-up the I/Q balance I found one of the two pots' (dont remember which one but probably R27) ran out of adjustment and became "one ended" though image rejection by this time was allready excellent so I left it as it was.
But looking at the schematic again in light of the revalation regarding R19 & R25 it would seem that those two resistors being reversed in position might account for one of the adjustment pots being at the end of its adjustment range?
73,s
Des (M0AYF)
|
Re: Assembly manual Rev 1.08
Hi Hans and thanks for swift the reply,
Would R19 & R25 being reversed on the PCB possibly cause one of the I/Q trim-pots to run out of adjustment while setting-up the I/Q balance? I just checked my QCX80 and R19 & R25 are reversed.
While setting-up the I/Q balance I found one of the two pots' (dont remember which one but probably R27) ran out of adjustment and became "one ended" though image rejection by this time was allready excellent so I left it as it was.
But looking at the schematic again in light of the revalation regarding R19 & R25 it would seem that those two resistors being reversed in position might account for one of the adjustment pots being at the end of its adjustment range?
73,s
Des (M0AYF)
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Bob,
I've used a 'Connor Winfield D75F-027.0M' ? TCXO in two U3Ss as it
has an analogue feedback loop - avoiding jumps.? Suggested by
another poster on the group some months ago.
I haven't done any tests but the original poster was using one in
a 10GHz Rx setup after finding issues with the Fox unit.? Not
cheap though.
73
Dave
G3WUN
On 08/12/2017 21:39, Bob Sutton via
Groups.Io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Up and flying ... U3S firmware and QRP-Labs synth board (modified
and trimmed down! ... see pix). 10mW into a 20m dipole. Four 52 x
19mm solar cells, 3V3 boost regulator, no battery.
Tracking at
More info will appear on the QRP-Labs website in the 'Flights'
section when Hans has time.
73, Bob? ZL1RS
3V3 boost regulator ? - ? GP-02 GPS?? - ? ATmega328P-AU ? -??
TMP36 temperature sensor?? -?? QRP-Labs synth board with TCXO
90cm 'clear balloon' (same as U3B-12 is currently flying under)
Hydrogen gas, inflated to provide 3.5 to 4 grams of 'free lift'
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
It is very tiny don't know if it is possible to mount it on Hans board ?
Jan, Attached shows my Epson 26MHz, about the same size. "Dead bug". It is on an earlier board without the TCXO pads but it is probably easier without using them. 73 Alan G4ZFQ
|
Re: QCX freq/display calibration
I would like to say thanks to those who suggested I RTFM.? I just did... Menu 8.5 Ref frq default is 27,004,000.? So once I figured out which way to go I found my actual oscillation is 27,004,750. +/-.? This gets me close enough where both TX/RX freq are just about right on with my Yaesu FT-920.? It may not be 100% but maybe 99%.? I am pleased.? At this point my rig is complete.I just need to figure out what I'm going to do with a case for it.? I am so happy.? I'll be doing my happy dance after my first QSO.??
Now I just wish I can get some quality time on the air when 20m IS open...lol
72; Kurt - W2MW
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: QCX freq/display calibration
From: Kurt Zimmerman < kurt@...>
Date: Thu, December 07, 2017 7:28 am
To: QRP Labs < QRPLabs@groups.io>
Greetings all; ? So I put my QCX-20 on the air last night to check calibration. I am using my Yaesu FT-920 as my frequency standard. I noticed both TX/RX freq are a few kHz. I don’t recall anything written about calibration other than using the GPS RX to calibrate the XTAL.?
Has anyone else had a calibration issue? I haven’t seen any discussion about this unless I missed something. 72; Kurt-W2MW?
Get
|
Re: QCX freq/display calibration
Jan is right.? Use the instructions in the manual.? I was able to bring mine right on frequency in just a few minutes.?
73/72,
Dean K5DH
20m QCX msn 612
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Thanks Jan? (sorry for writing "Ian" last time, I didn't have my
glasses on),
The QRP-Labs board really suits something about 5mm x 3mm, but
anything is possible with some fine wires if one is not so
particular about the looks.
73, Bob
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Thanks Have you looked at the?
Abracon ASTX-H11-27.000MHZ-T
It is supposed not to jump in frequency, it is used on the etherkit.com
SI5351 breakout board.
It is very tiny don't know if it is possible to mount it on Hans board ?
Jan |
| ? |
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Thanks Ian,
It is a, ECS-TXO-5032 27 MHz TCXO (from Mouser).? It jumps like the
FOX does.? I have another type which will go on the next flight ...
when tested on the bench it seems to have smaller jumps than the
ECS, but lets see what the reality is in the wild.? I can't give you
a part number for that one because it came from China advertised as
a certain part, but physically it does not resemble the
picture/diagram in the spec sheet!? They have 27.00F D627 printed on
them, but I don't find any info for that ... anyone?
73, Bob
On 9/12/2017 12:52 PM, SM7ETW Jan
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Nice work Bob.
Are you using the?FOX924B-27.000 TXCO ? If so, any problem with
the TXCO doing frequency jumps.
Will be interesting to see where your flight ends up.
73 Jan SM7ETW
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Nice work Bob.
Are you using the?FOX924B-27.000 TXCO ? If so, any problem with the TXCO doing frequency jumps.
Will be interesting to see where your flight ends up.
73 Jan SM7ETW
|
I finished my 20m QCX this morning and my 1 st QSO with it was with a couple of brothers who were operating portable in AZ, one of whom is building his own 30m QCX. I know Hans has sold a lot of these kits but it surprised me that my first QSO would be with someone who was not only familiar with the kit but had a builder in the family as well. I did cheat though and used an external key...
73,
John AE5X
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Thanks for sharing your experiment with us Bob and good luck with your flight
73 Joe
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Bob Sutton via Groups.Io <zl1rs@...> wrote:
Up and flying ... U3S firmware and QRP-Labs synth board (modified
and trimmed down! ... see pix). 10mW into a 20m dipole. Four 52 x
19mm solar cells, 3V3 boost regulator, no battery.
Tracking at
More info will appear on the QRP-Labs website in the 'Flights'
section when Hans has time.
73, Bob? ZL1RS
3V3 boost regulator ? - ? GP-02 GPS?? - ? ATmega328P-AU ? -?? TMP36
temperature sensor?? -?? QRP-Labs synth board with TCXO
90cm 'clear balloon' (same as U3B-12 is currently flying under)
Hydrogen gas, inflated to provide 3.5 to 4 grams of 'free lift'
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Hi Bob
Big congrats on the successful launch!?
I have added your info to a QRP Labs tracking page and started the tracking (the first part of the flight is missing but I can fill that in later). See?
73 Hans G0UPL
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Bob Sutton via Groups.Io <zl1rs@...> wrote:
Up and flying ... U3S firmware and QRP-Labs synth board (modified
and trimmed down! ... see pix). 10mW into a 20m dipole. Four 52 x
19mm solar cells, 3V3 boost regulator, no battery.
Tracking at
More info will appear on the QRP-Labs website in the 'Flights'
section when Hans has time.
73, Bob? ZL1RS
3V3 boost regulator ? - ? GP-02 GPS?? - ? ATmega328P-AU ? -?? TMP36
temperature sensor?? -?? QRP-Labs synth board with TCXO
90cm 'clear balloon' (same as U3B-12 is currently flying under)
Hydrogen gas, inflated to provide 3.5 to 4 grams of 'free lift'
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
:-)????? Cut down with side cutters to save weight Jack.? The 3
boards in the pic weighed in at 5.8 grams after they were wrapped in
insulation foam.
73, Bob? ZL1RS
On 9/12/2017 10:57 AM, jjpurdum via
Groups.Io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Poor thing...it
looks like it was modified with a hand grenade! Still, as long
as it works...
Jack, W8TEE
|
If a low power FT8 signal can not get through the higher power station activity,that makes is less than QRM ?
I bet a 20mw Stanag 4285 continuous transmission would not be noticed let alone FT8.
Lets just hope 4285 never becomes some other groups "new" contest mode :)
Then what?
|
Re: ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Poor thing...it looks like it was modified with a hand grenade! Still, as long as it works...
Jack, W8TEE
From: Bob Sutton via Groups.Io <zl1rs@...>
To: QRPLabs@groups.io
Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 4:40 PM
Subject: [QRPLabs] ZL1RS balloon flight - BB01
Up and flying ... U3S firmware and QRP-Labs synth board (modified
and trimmed down! ... see pix). 10mW into a 20m dipole. Four 52 x
19mm solar cells, 3V3 boost regulator, no battery.
Tracking at
More info will appear on the QRP-Labs website in the 'Flights'
section when Hans has time.
73, Bob? ZL1RS
3V3 boost regulator ? - ? GP-02 GPS?? - ? ATmega328P-AU ? -?? TMP36
temperature sensor?? -?? QRP-Labs synth board with TCXO
90cm 'clear balloon' (same as U3B-12 is currently flying under)
Hydrogen gas, inflated to provide 3.5 to 4 grams of 'free lift'
|
Sorry that should have been QRO ?abuse!?
On 8 Dec 2017 21:28, "Roger G4IUP" < rogerlimbert14@...> wrote: Also it would be interesting to see how a really low power FT8 signal gets through in spite of the QRP abuse. Not sure that WSPR popularity is declining though, could it be lack of sunspots!
|
Also it would be interesting to see how a really low power FT8 signal gets through in spite of the QRP abuse. Not sure that WSPR popularity is declining though, could it be lack of sunspots!
On 8 Dec 2017 21:17, "TrueBlue" < 44-40@...> wrote: On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 02:21 am, David Bowman wrote:
To fill a band with automated beacons may be pleasing for an individual for a short period of time, but in the grand scheme of things it's QRM.
No it's not.? QRM is using 1000W transmitters on a QRPp-designed mode and blowing every other nearby signal out into oblivion with their backblast.? Anyway, the number of QRP beacons are hardly going to "fill" a mode this active (and this abused).? The misuse on FT8 is coming from QROo abusers, not QRP beacons, which are perfectly legitimate for FT8 use and few in number.
So, why is it "wrong" to use a U3S on FT8 and OK on JT65, JT9 and all the other "QSO" modes on its firmware???? Your objection just doesn't seem sensible to me.? It's certainly not consistent with current U3S usage.? As I've pointed out, there is no obligation to QSO, ever, if you didn't CQ in the first place.? That's why you preface your line with B instead of CQ.? Having QSO capabilities doesn't make anything QSO mode.
WSPR appears to be fading in popularity, and inferior to a faster mode in revealing propagation from weaker signals.
The U3S has as much right to use FT8 as anyone.? If you want to take the band cop view of this, maybe you should concentrate on the disruptions caused by those who are QROo-ing FT8 to death and creating all the real problems as opposed to imaginary ones.
|
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 06:10 am, James Zelazny jr wrote:
Should have mentioned also that the current U3S firmware does already have HELL/JT65 and JT9...also QSO modes.
I see no difference having FT8 for those that should like to experiment with it.
Exactly.? What's not to understand here?? I absolutely don't get the objection.? Aren't all those in the current U3S firmware "QSO modes" [sic] except WSPR? [See above re QSO capable modes never requiring QSOs]
|
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 02:21 am, David Bowman wrote:
To fill a band with automated beacons may be pleasing for an individual for a short period of time, but in the grand scheme of things it's QRM.
No it's not.? QRM is using 1000W transmitters on a QRPp-designed mode and blowing every other nearby signal out into oblivion with their backblast.? Anyway, the number of QRP beacons are hardly going to "fill" a mode this active (and this abused).? The misuse on FT8 is coming from QROo abusers, not QRP beacons, which are perfectly legitimate for FT8 use and few in number. So, why is it "wrong" to use a U3S on FT8 and OK on JT65, JT9 and all the other "QSO" modes on its firmware???? Your objection just doesn't seem sensible to me.? It's certainly not consistent with current U3S usage.? As I've pointed out, there is no obligation to QSO, ever, if you didn't CQ in the first place.? That's why you preface your line with B instead of CQ.? Having QSO capabilities doesn't make anything QSO mode. WSPR appears to be fading in popularity, and inferior to a faster mode in revealing propagation from weaker signals. The U3S has as much right to use FT8 as anyone.? If you want to take the band cop view of this, maybe you should concentrate on the disruptions caused by those who are QROo-ing FT8 to death and creating all the real problems as opposed to imaginary ones.
|
Kurt Zimmerman
Joe Pereira
jjpurdum
TrueBlue