Re: QDX on 2200 and 630 meter bands possible?
And whilst I'm thinking, the case would have to get bigger for the 2200\630m version to accommodate larger toroids no?..
|
Re: QDX on 2200 and 630 meter bands possible?
With the most recent firmware, now a must own shack item! Any reason why a four band limit? Not enough io lines, memory ect. Bi or rgb led for error codes or band selection?
Never got to build the v1 I have here, but defo finger on the button for v2 ;)
Dean ( G7EOB)
|
Re: QDX OVER VOLTAGE
#qdx
Update!!!! Listening to what Alan had said about L12, I just heated up the solder joints and tried it again.?
40M is now GREAT! 80 is working too (but the receive level seems a bit low. 30 and 20 appear dead.
So it very likely IS L12.? Can anyone tell me which of the taps relate to which band???
Start? 19 Turns = 30 Turns = 36 Turns = 41 Turns = End
|
Re: QDX on 2200 and 630 meter bands possible?
Demand must be in the thousands, and it soubds like you can at great expense source parts in the hundreds.?
We¡¯re all rooting for you!
73, Willie N1JBJ
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Dec 4, 2021, at 4:23 PM, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:
? Hi
QDX at the moment only supports 80, 40, 30 and 20m bands. It is fixed in the firmware and cannot be changed by the operator.?
In the future when we have managed to ramp up production to meet demand of the current model, I would certainly like to investigate other band options. That could mean for example, publishing modifications or supplying component kits for other bands, along with firmware configuration to specify what band components are installed (as in QCX now). Or perhaps three different versions of QDX: 1) 2200, 630 and 160m 2) 80, 60, 40, 30 and 20m 3) 20, 17, 15, 12 and 10m
Who knows? But first... I do need to focus on how to be able, in the current world situation, to produce enough of the current kit, to meet the demand. 2 years ago it would have been easy. But the world is a different place.?
73 Hans G0UPL http://qrp-labs.com -------- Original message -------- From: Milano274@... Date: Sat, Dec 4, 2021, 11:59 PM To: [email protected]Subject: [QRPLabs] QDX on 2200 and 630 meter bands possible? While waiting for the QDX availability I'm wondering if anyone tried or thought about running it on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands ?
|
Hold on, I hit send too soon!
I tried a different power bank and the trigger board kept a constant 12v even on transmit. I think the issue is not the board, but rather the battery bank.
Regardless, obviously your mileage may vary and you will have to try your battery banks to find one that will work.
I¡¯m am pleased with the experiment and now can hit the field with a phone battery bank, QCX mini and antenna, no need for an additional battery. Ok take care folks!
Rich
KQ9L
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Dec 4, 2021, at 4:22 PM, richlim11 via groups.io <richlim11@...> wrote:
Hi Folks, I wanted to follow up with you all. I tried the USB C trigger board on my KX3 and it failed. As stated previously by someone, when the current load it too high, it drops down to 9v power, bummer.
I¡¯m gonna look and maybe try another board to see if I can trigger 12v at the necessary current to run my rigs. Gwen which board did you settle on, do you have a link?
Rich
KQ9L
|
What battery bank are you using? The characteristics of that are gojng to be your limiting factor.
I can¡¯t tell for sure easily, but it looks like the KX3 can draw a couple of amps on transmit, so not surprising it could overload your battery bank.
73, Willie N1JBJ
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Dec 4, 2021, at 5:22 PM, richlim11 via groups.io <richlim11@...> wrote:
?Hi Folks, I wanted to follow up with you all. I tried the USB C trigger board on my KX3 and it failed. As stated previously by someone, when the current load it too high, it drops down to 9v power, bummer.
I¡¯m gonna look and maybe try another board to see if I can trigger 12v at the necessary current to run my rigs. Gwen which board did you settle on, do you have a link?
Rich
KQ9L
|
Hi Folks, I wanted to follow up with you all. I tried the USB C trigger board on my KX3 and it failed. As stated previously by someone, when the current load it too high, it drops down to 9v power, bummer.
I¡¯m gonna look and maybe try another board to see if I can trigger 12v at the necessary current to run my rigs. Gwen which board did you settle on, do you have a link?
Rich
KQ9L
|
Honestly, I¡¯m sick of China and try to avoid buying from China when I can. ? Today I received a package containing a SoloStove Smokeless Bonfire Kit.? It cost well North of $200 on-sale and is touted to be one of the best.? On the bottom of the box is stamped ¡®Made in China¡¯.? I¡¯ll be taking advantage of their ¡®Free Return¡¯ policy and when they ask why I¡¯m returning it, I¡¯ll tell them that it¡¯s because it¡¯s made in China.? ? I know we can¡¯t avoid them completely ¨C at least not at this juncture ¨C but if more of us refuse to buy their junk then the tide may gradually shift. ? I know that QPR-Labs stuff is sourced from China and I honestly wish it was not. ? Mike WM4B ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of R. Tyson via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, December 4, 2021 4:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] ATU-10 reliable eBay seller #antennatuner #ebay ? Don't think I will ever use Ali Express again. Bought two items off same seller, only one arrived. Contacted him and he asked for a 99 pence payment to send the missing part of the order. Smelling a rat I tried to open a claim ... now that is an exercise in frustration. Takes some ingenuity to get a reply from the site. When you do get a reply it makes no sense and they obviously don't seem to understand what you are saying. I went around and around on their roundabout for some time then gave up and vowed to go elsewhere in future.
For what you might save it is not worth the effort if it goes pear shaped.
Reg??????????????????????? G4NFR
|
Some of us have too many irons in the fire already.? Some of us don¡¯t feel like brewing our own anymore.? Some of us have been rolling our own for the past 45 years and now our time is worth more than our money.? Some of us band hop and want an autotuner.? Some of us don¡¯t want to listen to the XYL complaining about how much time we spend in the shop.? ? I agree with homebrewing when possible, but the fact is that the time it takes to research and order parts is often more expensive than just buying the damn thing in the first place.? ? Mike WM4B ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of R. Tyson via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, December 4, 2021 4:26 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] ATU-10 reliable eBay seller #antennatuner #ebay ? I am surprised at the number of people wanting an automatic ATU. Most of us are using QRP or relatively modest RF power output.
What is wrong with making a suitable ATU, there is nothing magic about them. If the RF output devices are subject to damage with a miss-matched antenna load then the time it takes for an auto ATU to hunt for the correct setting may well be too long and the output devices die a horrible death !
There should be circuits online, or, in the G-QRP Club book "QRP Basics", there is a great design which incorporates a resistive bridge. The bridge is switched in while tuning up so the Tx never sees too high a load. Once tuned up the bridge circuit is switched out for normal transmit. It's a great circuit and the components are easy to get.
If your Ebay super, duper automatic tuner goes wonky then your output devices will probably die before you realise there is a problem with the ATU.
Reg??????????????????? G4NFR
|
Re: QDX OVER VOLTAGE
#qdx
Hi All, Thanks for your patience with this. Please remember that I'm a CLUELESS BEGINNER, so it's no use thinking I'm capable of anything technical, LOL.
Willie N1JBJ : I am on firmware V1.02 and have tried power-cycling multiple times. to no avail.
Julian N4JO : I am in the UK but thanks for offering to look at it.
Robin G8DXQ : I have nothing other than a digital multimeter.
Alan G4FZQ : I will look at all the solder joints you mention, but the unit was working perfectly before the over-voltage and transistor blow-out. Yes, it was transmitting at time of over-voltage. And yes, I guess I got lucky replacing just the one transistor - but it's putting out a solid 5W with 9V input and 3V with 7V battery.
I have just made two short videos showing an Audio Filter Sweep and an RF Filter Sweep. I have no idea what these should look like, but hopefully, you guys do.
I've also done a quick video of the Input Analysis tes. All double-dutch to me, lol.
Take a look and let me know what you think.
? Test 1
? Test 2?
Below is a photo of the QDX and IC-705 sharing the same antenna. There is clearly something VERY wrong with the QDX but it does output a good 5W with 9V input.
Thanks again for your help guys - really appreciated! 73, Tom, M7MCQ
|
Don't think I will ever use Ali Express again. Bought two items off same seller, only one arrived. Contacted him and he asked for a 99 pence payment to send the missing part of the order. Smelling a rat I tried to open a claim ... now that is an exercise in frustration. Takes some ingenuity to get a reply from the site. When you do get a reply it makes no sense and they obviously don't seem to understand what you are saying. I went around and around on their roundabout for some time then gave up and vowed to go elsewhere in future.
For what you might save it is not worth the effort if it goes pear shaped.
Reg??????????????????????? G4NFR
|
Re: BBC news snippet mentions WSPRnet!
I think the group he is working with have used several methods and combined them to try and get a result. WSPR was only one of the methods used.
Be good if they could locate it and then it may be possible to find out what happened to this flight. I reckon the authorities will want to be fairly sure as the cost of a search will be very high.
Reg??????? G4NFR
|
I am surprised at the number of people wanting an automatic ATU. Most of us are using QRP or relatively modest RF power output.
What is wrong with making a suitable ATU, there is nothing magic about them. If the RF output devices are subject to damage with a miss-matched antenna load then the time it takes for an auto ATU to hunt for the correct setting may well be too long and the output devices die a horrible death !
There should be circuits online, or, in the G-QRP Club book "QRP Basics", there is a great design which incorporates a resistive bridge. The bridge is switched in while tuning up so the Tx never sees too high a load. Once tuned up the bridge circuit is switched out for normal transmit. It's a great circuit and the components are easy to get.
If your Ebay super, duper automatic tuner goes wonky then your output devices will probably die before you realise there is a problem with the ATU.
Reg??????????????????? G4NFR
|
Re: QDX on 2200 and 630 meter bands possible?
Hi
QDX at the moment only supports 80, 40, 30 and 20m bands. It is fixed in the firmware and cannot be changed by the operator.?
In the future when we have managed to ramp up production to meet demand of the current model, I would certainly like to investigate other band options. That could mean for example, publishing modifications or supplying component kits for other bands, along with firmware configuration to specify what band components are installed (as in QCX now). Or perhaps three different versions of QDX: 1) 2200, 630 and 160m 2) 80, 60, 40, 30 and 20m 3) 20, 17, 15, 12 and 10m
Who knows? But first... I do need to focus on how to be able, in the current world situation, to produce enough of the current kit, to meet the demand. 2 years ago it would have been easy. But the world is a different place.?
73 Hans G0UPL http://qrp-labs.com
-------- Original message -------- From: Milano274@... Date: Sat, Dec 4, 2021, 11:59 PM To: [email protected]Subject: [QRPLabs] QDX on 2200 and 630 meter bands possible? While waiting for the QDX availability I'm wondering if anyone tried or thought about running it on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands ?
|
Re: IS THE BS 170 MOUNTING SYSTEM IN THE MINI A GOOD IDEA?
Hello George?
I doubt mechanical expansion stress is a significant enough factor to be a concern.?
I don't see how adding a heatsink to the transistor could ever be a bad thing. Metal has to be a better conductor of heat than air. It expands the surface area from which heat can be lost.?
If you're comparing to a situation with forced air cooling then that is not a like for like comparison.?
Your experiment with standing up BS170s would be interesting. But I think you'd have to change one variable at a time. Why not try first with leaving the back off the mini, with the transistors still bolted down??
I'd also be interested in differences between the units. If the hot mini isn't quite optimally tuned up it could have quite different efficiency and hence power dissipation. Couldn't you measure the power output into a dummy load of each one, and measure the current consumption and supply voltage, hence the input DC power. The difference is power dissipation in the case. If they are substantially different then this could be an indication that all is not optimum in one of the units.
73 Hans G0UPL http://qrp-labs.com
-------- Original message -------- From: George Korper <georgekorper@...> Date: Sat, Dec 4, 2021, 4:45 PM To: [email protected]Subject: [QRPLabs] IS THE BS 170 MOUNTING SYSTEM IN THE MINI A GOOD IDEA? I use the Mini for high duty cycle WSPR. I also use the original QCX under exactly
the same conditions. I am experiencing high failure rate of the the BS 170's in the Mini.?
The finals are much hotter and stressed in the Mini than in the QCX.?
There is much less air circulation and being clamped down with the washer as heat is?
created the thermal expansion causes stress on the component.?
The BS 170's in the original QC are barely warm, the BS 170's in the Mini get hot as a pistol,?
and their failure rate is too high to live with.?
I am beginning to think that the mounting system needs much more testing and
may be a flawed design, that contributes to premature component failure. The Mini
case also has no free air circulation.?
Your comments please! Hans please chime in. Currently i will remove the washer, stand the components upright and
leave the back off the Mini....or drill holes in the case.
My assumptions need to be tested, but has anyone tested the basic design
assumption of the new mounting method under heavy use?
|
QDX on 2200 and 630 meter bands possible?
While waiting for the QDX availability I'm wondering if anyone tried or thought about running it on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands ?
|
Re: BBC news snippet mentions WSPRnet!
Hello Alan
Really I think it is all, at best, wishful thinking. One could be a lot more harsh than that too. I wish it was true too. But I don't see how. If anyone can see a way, please explain to me where I'm wrong...?
I read the DJ4FF write-up. End to end. Twice. I searched for ZL2005SWL. But I still don't get it. I don't see any proper explanation of how it is supposed to work. Let alone anything approaching a proof of anything.?
The document is written in a psuedo scientific style which invites you to believe. It's very similar stylistically to the document I saw a couple of months ago which if I recall was by Mr Godfrey. I'd assume they work together. There are a lot of nice pictures and diagrams and statements of what they show. But no actual explanations or why they show what is claimed. When you read the text you come across a lot of eventually, hopefully, maybe, could be, etc. There's nothing remotely convincing.?
Aircraft reflection is real. I've seen it myself. Look at http://hanssummers.com/qrssrx and scroll down to? "G0UPL/IW0HK QRSS mini-DXpedition in London!". My own home beacon was about 20km north and the aircraft descent path for Heathrow Final approach crosses right across the middle. It was easy to visually observe the aircraft flying past about one every minute. Each aircraft creates a ghost copy of the direct signal, with a frequency doppler shift caused by the relative motion of the aircraft. As the aircraft approaches, the frequency is shifted up around 5Hz; the shift decreases until the aircraft is right on the line between transmitter and receiver. There is then no relative velocity in the line of the signal and so the doppler shift is zero. Then as the aircraft starts to move away continuing its descent to the West, it starts to have an increasing relative motion away from the direct path, causing the negative frequency shift. It lasts about 10 seconds either side, beyond which the reflection is too weak.
That happens. But the idea that you could detect it happening thousands of km away, and have any clue where on the path the disturbance occurred, and be able to isolate that from all the ionospheric fluctuation that goes on all day every day, and be able to isolate it from the thousands of other aircraft also in the sky at the same time... Is just mind bogglingly ridiculous...?
So ZL2005SWL copies the Antarctic station a few times. As indeed have many of the rest of us. But somehow this is in this case, proof of detecting two helicopters off the Western Australian coast thousands of km away... Magic.?
Why is there no clear explanation? If it is a secret then why publish tantalizing documents until you've finished the research? If it isn't a secret then why not explain the methodology properly (rather than just "we studied it") and let a few more people think about it too. Presumably the aim is to find the plane.?
The document talks of anomalies such as unexpected SNR, frequency shift, and "shape".?
SNR variation... How could that ever be called a "detection"... Anyone who uses WSPR knows SNR fluctuates all over the place. If you use HF you're familiar with QSB. It's just a fact of HF. A WSPR transmission is 2 minutes. Long enough for multiple QSB cycles. I don't see how SNR anomalies could ever detect anything. The earlier paper 2 months ago talked about 0.25 and 0.5 Standard Deviation SNR anomalies being a detection. Though Standard Deviation of WHAT was never defined. SNR is affected by so many other factors too that further multiply the uncertainty.?
In one of the DJ4FF pictures there's a list of WSPR spots with 0 frequency drift and then one that has 1Hz drift. And this is a detection. But this happens all the time all day every day and isn't just due to the many cases where people have drifty VFOs but also WSPRs own drift analysis algorithm being affected by the noise on the signal its analyzing. If I transmit WSPR from my QDX and it's TCXO that is very stable, and 30 stations copy the transmission, most will report 0. Some will report 1. So what... Or are all those because it hits some aircraft enroute? Even if so... If I was to look at flight radar I'd see loads and loads of planes within a few degrees either side of the signal path. How would I begin to guess which one my signal bounced off? And why didn't all the ones that report zero drift bounce off one of all those planes??
One of my favorites in the DJ4FF document is where he talks about the moon shaped WSPR trace. Or another example showing a drunk WSPR trace. It's all a bit academic anyway since they don't decode in WSPR so don't get put in the WSPR database so if such things happened on that fateful day they would never have been decoded and recorded in the WSPRnet database anyway. But just supposing... How would aircraft scatter cause a moon shape like that? Doppler shift needs relative velocity of the reflecting object on the signal path. How can that occur in such a way to create such a moon shape? I've often seen such shapes here. Since they recur multiple times on the same frequency with the same shape I've always assumed that they're just another kind of drifty signal caused by someone's station having a drifty oscillator as it hears up during a transmission... Why would I need to invoke anything more magical?
What appears to us to be magic is just that which we don't understand. WSJT-X doesn't magically decode any signals below the noise. Because what does that mean anyway? Nothing unless you specify the noise bandwidth. If, as WSJT-X does, you reference everything to a familiar 2500Hz SSB bandwidth then yes a weak WSPR signal may well be below the noise in that channel bandwidth. But the 1.46Hz individual WSPR tone certainly isn't below the noise in its own 1.46Hz bandwidth. So WSJT-X isn't doing any magic. It's just a matter of definitions. Joe Taylor is a very clever chap but even he has to follow the rules. The laws of physics.?
As I said I'd really love to be wrong. A lot of bereaved families would love it too. This is a serious matter. So can someone please tell me where I'm wrong??
73 Hans G0UPL http://qrp-labs.com
-------- Original message -------- From: Alan G4ZFQ <alan4alan@...> Date: Sat, Dec 4, 2021, 11:19 AM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] BBC news snippet mentions WSPRnet! >The conclusion of the
> assembled expertise there was that the idea has no scientific merit
> whatsoever. The evidence being searched for is far far far below the
> noise level. So far as to be hopeless. I agree with them too.
? Hans,
I tend to agree.
I've followed the process, various links in this forum
https://www.wsprnet.org/drupal/node/8645.
I remain sceptical, I think Mr Godfrey is trying too hard. I guess we'll
never be really sure.
But there were some independent tests done that seem to have proved that
even over long distances low power WSPR signals can be influenced by
aircraft.
In this write up
https://hamsci.org/sites/default/files/publications/2021_HamSCI/20210320_1700z-Robert_Westphal_DJ4FF.pdf
(Search for ZL2005SWL) there seems to be proof of the WSPR concept. It
appears that movements of aircraft can be detected over a long WSPR path.
I do find this difficult to believe but do not have the means to test.
Mr Godfrey of course may be said to be picking out spots from a much
more congested situation.
73 Alan G4ZFQ
|
Re: BBC news snippet mentions WSPRnet!
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 04:17 PM, HF wrote:
I'm sad that several news outlets degraded their credibility further by promoting such gibberish.
Are their any credible news outlets these days ? They seem more concerned about celebrity news or promoting certain agendas more in keeping with click baity Yahoo news level garbage. As a professional writer myself I was dismayed that the item on the BBC broken a cardinal rule of not even explaining the several sets of data that were being used, and assumed that the reader understood what the four data sets were, and how they could be used. No wonder many of us have rejected the daily does of bile and switched off.
|
Re: IS THE BS 170 MOUNTING SYSTEM IN THE MINI A GOOD IDEA?
I add thermal paste between the transistors and both the PCB and the washer. Figured that it cannot hurt in any way.
Check the current flow of both rigs. Heat shows up within each bs170 and it relies on convection. The new QCX heat sink expands the radiating surface it would be ideal except for the plastic package of the bs170. This heat sink should be warmer sheen transmission if it is making nice contact with the devices. Since you don¡¯t have intentional high air flow it is not hindering cooling. It¡¯s a thoughtful addition and nearly the best that can be achieved without dissection of the bs170.?
curt
|
Re: IS THE BS 170 MOUNTING SYSTEM IN THE MINI A GOOD IDEA?
Check the current flow of both rigs. Heat shows up within each bs170 and it relies on convection. The new QCX heat sink expands the radiating surface it would be ideal except for the plastic package of the bs170. This heat sink should be warmer sheen transmission if it is making nice contact with the devices. Since you don¡¯t have intentional high air flow it is not hindering cooling. It¡¯s a thoughtful addition and nearly the best that can be achieved without dissection of the bs170.?
curt
|
Tom M7MCQ
Mike Besemer - WM4B
Tronald Dump