开云体育

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 开云体育
Date

Re: #qmx QMX and waste heat from the finals #qmx

 

Hey, Cliff. How did you mount the plate under your finals?

Wayne KB4DSF


Re: QMX - smoke - another C107/Q108 failure

 

Hi Kees
?
What a complete detailed response and education for everyone. I am impressed with your bandwidth and expertise relative to this wonderful QMX product.

Hi hi, bandwidth and expertise? You should ask my family, how often I showered, shaved, even SPOKE to them in the last few months! It's by far the biggest project I've ever done. So yeah I know every resistor and every line of code! I could probably write it all out from my head with very few errors!

73 Hans G0UPL


Re: QMX - smoke - another C107/Q108 failure

 

Hans,

What a complete detailed response and education for everyone. I am impressed with your bandwidth and expertise relative to this wonderful QMX product.

73 Kees K5BCQ


Re: #qmx QMX and waste heat from the finals #qmx

 

Hey, Cliff. How did you mount that plate under the finals?

Wayne KB4DSF


Re: CAT port returns ` ` ` on QCXmini

 

Putty can be configured to wait for carriage return to send message.? Just set "local line editing" and "local echo" to "force on"?in the terminal options.


--
Cheers,
Chuck


Re: QMX thoughts

 

Hans, ok, I understand your point of view.
By win-win I meant a better and less risky MC supply. A bit more mAmps doesn't hurt much either.

GL with your upcomming new challenges.
73 Bojan S53DZ


Re: QMX - smoke - another C107/Q108 failure

 

Thank you, Hans, for your detailed reply.

For my own part, I've been reassured as I measured my 9V QMX build. ?I posted the scope screenshots in the hope of sharing that reassurance with others and to deepen my understanding of the QMX's design. ?I've definitely been successful in the latter.

Jonathan KN6LFB


Re: QDX-M on 6 meters?

 

TNX Ross!? That would be really helpful.? ?I have an unbuilt QDX R2 that I can build up as an M.? Just leave out the multiband stuff and go for 6M
I'm trying to get on 6M now with a TenTec 1208 transverter and 20M Phaser ( or QDX ).? I'd like?a stand alone 6M rig though.

BTW, do you use any RF gain (preamp) on the 8 or 6M versions?? I'd think sensitivity is lacking at 50MHz and above.

Bob
WA1EDJ
EM83du

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 1:02?AM Afghan Kabulldust via <kabulldust=[email protected]> wrote:
Jim and Bob, and I’m sure others,

I’ve done QDX-Ms for 8m, 8&6m and 6m, I’ll write up all the stuff and post it here. I was considering 4m but I think that’ll be pushing it.?

73
Ross
EX0AA

6

On 28 Aug 2023, at 15:24, WA1EDJ <bobc784@...> wrote:

?
I too would be interested in the details for QDX 6M.??

TNX!
Bob
WA1EDJ

On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 10:47?AM Jim WB2LHP in MI <jmarco1955@...> wrote:
Has anyone tried to move the QDX-M to 6-meters? What changes had to be made to the firmware and the LPF? I know the performance may not be perfect but I'm looking to experiment with it. Any help would be appreciated. Many thanks in advance. Jim WB2LHP


Re: QMX thoughts

 

Hello Bojan

Operation of the volume?control is a known firmware issue I need to address.?

Yes one could have designed it with a single SMPS regulator, at the expense of higher supply current. Though this is a "trade-off" not a win-win (higher supply current being a bad thing!). It would simplify the circuit but it would not achieve much else; the two SMPS are synchronous anyway so on the same interference?schedule.?

73 Hans G0UPL



On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 4:02?PM Bojan Naglic <bojan.naglic@...> wrote:
Hi Hans,

I see my QMX as a very well thought out rig. Works nice. FT8 and CW. I built it for +12V.
But the "too" small PCB means there is no place for an additional dedicated GPS connector for instance. And also no place for some improvements on BPFs and LPFs if needed. OK, this is perhaps marginal.?But about the two SMPSs, I think you could live with just one.
If you would supply the MC?permanently with the 3V3 LDO and than switch its input from +12V at powerup to a stable +5V SMPS it would be beneficial. Than you would have to deal with just one SMPS's interference. On a cost of a bit larger supply current. A win-win. Just my thoughts.

73 Bojan S53DZ

PS: Why do I have a feeling that the QMX Volume control encoder would be better to work counter-wise and not the opposite?
The frequency is increasing in that direction and the volume is decreasing.


Re: QMX - sockets for BS170s

 

开云体育

?I use two rows of 6 machine pin sockets on all my QDX and QMX and 4 pairs for the BPF caps.?

See attached HB QMX prototype.?

73

Ross

On 30 Aug 2023, at 11:51, Cliff <ae5zaham@...> wrote:

?The sockets work out great on the QDX. I'm about to try them on a QMX so can't say how that works. Space may be tight.

73,
Cliff, AE5ZA



On Aug 30, 2023, at 05:54, Graham Whaley <graham.whaley@...> wrote:

Aha, I knew I'd seen a photo with pin headers under the BS170's recently - check out the picture of the heatsinking on message /g/QRPLabs/message/108109
Might want to ask Cliff, AE5ZA how that is working out ;-)

Graham, M7GRW

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 at 11:40, Jerry <Jerryh47@...> wrote:
After repairs done multiple times replacing FET Q9 in my QDX transceivers the pads are getting “tired.” ?I used some small brass tube stock (~1 mm outer diameter) to make eyelets or grommets to reinforce the pads. A short length of the tubing goes through the pad and is swaged with a center punch on both sides of the PCB. They are not sockets but do strengthen the pads so the pads don’t lift off the board so easily after several soldering cycles.?




Re: CAT port returns ` ` ` on QCXmini

 

On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 03:56 PM, David Markovitch wrote:
Besides having higher voltages, a USB to RS232 signal will be inverted compared with a RS232 TTL signal.
Not to mention that TRUE RS232 levels swing + and - at those higher voltages.? So your 6V RS232 logic is very likely switching between +6V and -6V.
There is a good explanation here:??of?

-------
Rob KB8RCO


Re: CAT port returns ` ` ` on QCXmini

 

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 02:23 AM, Hans Summers wrote:
Yes, QCX has a timeout. You can't type a command in one character at a time at human speed. You need to prepare the command elsewhere, then copy-and-paste it in so that all the characters are sent one after another, and the timeout doesn't get triggered.?
Have you tried Termite?? Current version is rather old and may even I have is 3.4:?
?Very simple terminal program with a separate "line input with send button" for this type of transmission.
There are others (including variations of Termite like Termie).
-------
Rob KB8RCO


QMX thoughts

 

Hi Hans,

I see my QMX as a very well thought out rig. Works nice. FT8 and CW. I built it for +12V.
But the "too" small PCB means there is no place for an additional dedicated GPS connector for instance. And also no place for some improvements on BPFs and LPFs if needed. OK, this is perhaps marginal.?But about the two SMPSs, I think you could live with just one.
If you would supply the MC?permanently with the 3V3 LDO and than switch its input from +12V at powerup to a stable +5V SMPS it would be beneficial. Than you would have to deal with just one SMPS's interference. On a cost of a bit larger supply current. A win-win. Just my thoughts.

73 Bojan S53DZ

PS: Why do I have a feeling that the QMX Volume control encoder would be better to work counter-wise and not the opposite?
The frequency is increasing in that direction and the volume is decreasing.


Re: SMD 10k resistor, 103 replacement for QCX mini

Brad McDowell
 

Question answered.? Per Hans, pretty much any SMD 10k resistor as long as it is 0603 size.


Re: BS170 Fail

 

On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 02:27 PM, Evan Hand wrote:
An alternative is an SWR indicator based on the same resistor setup.? Here is one from QRPGuys:
Has anyone tried replacing the switch with a relay and worked out a "tune button" (or tune output) that would pull this into the circuit for ## seconds, then release it?
It seems this kind of thing could then be built into the firmware of transmitters like the U3S (or unattended modes of about ay radio) to activate an output for ## seconds before transmission.
This output could then be used to:
? ?a) Switch in the tuning-indicator
? ?b) Activate the auto-tuner (in cases where it requires an input rather than RF sense)
? ? ? ?NOTE: some may not like the input "ON" for that long.???I am thinking of tuners like the LDG Z-100.
Anyway, the first step would be an output that can start the process.
-------
Rob KB8RCO


Re: QDX rev 5 Troubleshooting

 

Others have posted to Chris as the original poster so I will direct my apology there.

Chris,

I needed to look at the posting message title to see that the board in question is a Rev 5.? That is an error on my part.? I apologize for my oversight.

Low Pass Filter Diode cathode (Banded) receive voltages
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Band ? D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
80 ? 0 Vs Vs 0 Vs Vs
40 ? Vs 0 Vs Vs 0 Vs
30 ? Vs Vs 0 Vs Vs 0
20 ? Vs Vs 0 Vs Vs 0
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?

Vs = Vinput to QDX less some component voltage drops

When transmitting, the forward bias supply voltage is a pulse-width modulated voltage that maintains the configured bias current in the band configuration screen.?

If the receive selection works, the transmit selection should work.? The selection is not changed during transmission.? The voltage to keep the unused filter diodes reversed biased increases as the transmitter's power increases.? Verify that the voltage doubler provides greater than the input voltage to the QDX while transmitting to keep the unused filter diodes reversed-biased.? The best way to verify is to measure the peak voltage at the input to the LPF input diode anode with an oscilloscope and verify that the voltage on C27 is greater than that voltage by at least a diode drop.

The most common problem with failing to select the filter is a cold solder joint on one or both LPF toroids.? The next most likely is that the diodes are reversed.?

I am an early adopter of the QDX, so I do not have the Rev 5 board to verify voltage.? The above is based on my Rev 1 QDX and schematic analysis.

73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: QMX - sockets for BS170s

 

开云体育

The sockets work out great on the QDX. I'm about to try them on a QMX so can't say how that works. Space may be tight.

73,
Cliff, AE5ZA



On Aug 30, 2023, at 05:54, Graham Whaley <graham.whaley@...> wrote:

Aha, I knew I'd seen a photo with pin headers under the BS170's recently - check out the picture of the heatsinking on message /g/QRPLabs/message/108109
Might want to ask Cliff, AE5ZA how that is working out ;-)

Graham, M7GRW

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 at 11:40, Jerry <Jerryh47@...> wrote:
After repairs done multiple times replacing FET Q9 in my QDX transceivers the pads are getting “tired.” ?I used some small brass tube stock (~1 mm outer diameter) to make eyelets or grommets to reinforce the pads. A short length of the tubing goes through the pad and is swaged with a center punch on both sides of the PCB. They are not sockets but do strengthen the pads so the pads don’t lift off the board so easily after several soldering cycles.?




Re: QDX-M on 6 meters?

 

That would be great Ross...I'm looking forward to building one for 6-meters...Many thanks in advance...Jim WB2LHP


Re: QMX - sockets for BS170s

 

Aha, I knew I'd seen a photo with pin headers under the BS170's recently - check out the picture of the heatsinking on message /g/QRPLabs/message/108109
Might want to ask Cliff, AE5ZA how that is working out ;-)

Graham, M7GRW


On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 at 11:40, Jerry <Jerryh47@...> wrote:
After repairs done multiple times replacing FET Q9 in my QDX transceivers the pads are getting “tired.” ?I used some small brass tube stock (~1 mm outer diameter) to make eyelets or grommets to reinforce the pads. A short length of the tubing goes through the pad and is swaged with a center punch on both sides of the PCB. They are not sockets but do strengthen the pads so the pads don’t lift off the board so easily after several soldering cycles.?


Re: QMX - smoke - another C107/Q108 failure

 

Hi Stephen. I was probably a bit harsh in responding to you. Your idea is a good one, and there might be a great part out there that reduces parts count at low cost and is repairable by the average purchaser. A second source would be a big plus. That would be a winner.? I have been bitten every which way in the points I brought up in my previous design life. A single source component is my biggest issue.? Here's an example I experienced.? Many aerospace companies build custom processor boards using industry standard chips.? A new high performance/low power Power PC processor chip had been developed by a a particular company, who had been in business for many years.? All the aerospace companies started designing processor boards around that chip.? When the boards designs were just about complete by many companies, In a surprise move, Apple Computer bought out the entire design team to make processor chips for Apple products!? The chip's availability became unobtanium. All the aerospace companies were left holding the bag.? This caused massive amounts of wasted development costs, destroyed schedules, and beginning all over in these design efforts.

In the aerospace industry, things had to work reliably, and cost was not a big issue, within reason.? We used BGAs all the time but sometimes had sourcing issues and BGAs had to be removed from defective boards to use on new boards.? This was an expensive process, as it required re-balling the BGA with new solder balls before it could be re-used on a new board.? A few companies do this. BGAs are out of the question in the QMX type application unless you are willing to scrap the board when the BGAs fail. Even so, they would have prohibitive manufacturing costs as this is a relatively low volume endeavor.

Best of luck in your search.
-Steve K1RF?


------ Original Message ------
From "Stephan Ahonen KE0WVA" <stephan.ahonen@...>
Date 8/29/2023 8:40:41 PM
Subject Re: [QRPLabs] QMX - smoke - another C107/Q108 failure

Those are all good reasons the LTM8078 won't be the best choice for this particular application, I really just picked it by going on the Analog Devices web site and filtering for a dual-output regulator with integrated inductors. There are tons of parts out there, some more cost effective and/or practical than others. My basic point is that switching regulators are a problem that has been solved and packaged into off-the-shelf components by companies with more engineering resources than the entire amateur radio community combined. There's very little reason to roll your own solution unless you have very unique needs.

I don't think that "it's a single source part" is a strong argument in the context of a product that contains an ARM CPU, which I can personally attest to being frustratingly unobtainable during the semiconductor shortage. I also see an ADC from Texas Instruments and a DAC from Cirrus Logic, also not generic parts. At least the power supply boards are modular. If Analog Devices' foundry burned to the ground and they stopped manufacturing switching regulators overnight, it's not a huge deal to just spin up a different power supply board that occupies the same area and produces the same voltages, without needing to touch the design of the main PCB.

As far as BOM cost, if every dollar of BOM adds two dollars to retail price (this is my formula for things I build and sell), I'd have paid an extra $20 for a QMX with that extra $10 of BOM in the power supply... And spent several fewer hours troubleshooting my dead radio. That time is worth so much more than $20 to me. I actually ended up deciding it was more worthwhile to spend $100 on another kit than gamble on the possibility that the same event that killed my IC403 didn't also damage other parts in less obvious ways, forcing me to spend even more time (and shipping costs from the local Digikey warehouse) troubleshooting. Take my $20 instead, please.

>Of all the QMX I have yet seen, other than the Q103/Q104 Drain short (manufacturing problem) I have yet to see a failure that is not attributable to shorts, damaged components or other construction errors.

I do remember reading about at least one other person who killed their QMX by toggling their power supply between 6 and 12 volts, in order to toggle their transmit power. This is similar to my own scenario, where I forgot to raise the current limit on my power supply, which went into current limit when I keyed the radio into a dummy load, then came out of limit when I released the key, putting a similar voltage transient into the power supply input. Should I have been more diligent about making sure my current limit was set correctly? Yes. Is halving and doubling your input voltage a relatively extreme condition to subject a power supply to? Also yes. However, simply switching the thing on is a power supply transient from 0 to 12 volts, so a transient between 6 and 12 should be well within what it should be expected to tolerate. I don't think there is a single DC-powered device in my house that would be harmed by subjecting it to voltage transients within its specified input range. So I would have to disagree that this phenomenon should be categorized as a "constructor error."