+++++++++++++++++++ From: "Don Brown" To: "Vic Rosenthal" , "Elecraft" Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KAT100 LED assembly Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 13:42:02 -0600 Hi The manual is correct they need to be all the way down on the board. You may need to push a little to get past the little nub on the lead. Don Brown ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vic Rosenthal" To: "Elecraft" Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 1:20 PM Subject: [Elecraft] KAT100 LED assembly > The KAT100 manual says the front-panel LEDs must be flat against the board. The > leads of the LEDs have little crimps that stop them from being inserted all the > way. Is the manual correct and I should force them in all the way (or file the > crimps), or should I just go as far as the crimp? > > I think they need to go in all the way, but I just want to be sure. > > Vic K2VCO +++++++++++++++++ Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 13:03:59 -0800 From: Wayne Burdick Organization: Elecraft To: Vic Rosenthal Cc: Elecraft Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KAT100 LED assembly Vic, It's probably easier to stop at the epoxy coating on the leads and not force them down. Just equalize the height of all of the LEDs if some of them have such a coating. 73, Wayne N6KR ++++++++++++++++ Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 13:05:47 -0800 From: Wayne Burdick Organization: Elecraft To: Don Brown Cc: Vic Rosenthal , Elecraft Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KAT100 LED assembly I didn't realize there were crips on the leads. I thought the issue was epoxy on the leads near where they attach to the body of the LED. As long as it isn't hard to push the LEDs down onto the board, go ahead and push them past the "crimps" until they are flat. Wayne Don Brown wrote: > > Hi > > The manual is correct they need to be all the way down on the board. You may > need to push a little to get past the little nub on the lead. > > Don Brown ++++++++++++++++++ Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 17:48:33 -0600 To: Vic Rosenthal , Elecraft From: Tom Hammond =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=D8SS?= Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KAT100 LED assembly Vic: I noticed this, BUT with only a SMALL amount of 'urging' I was able to get them to pass thru the holes with little, if any, complaint. Carefully PULL the leads... DON'T PUSH them. Tom At 01:20 PM 11/11/02, Vic Rosenthal wrote: >The KAT100 manual says the front-panel LEDs must be flat against the >board. The leads of the LEDs have little crimps that stop them from being >inserted all the way. Is the manual correct and I should force them in >all the way (or file the crimps), or should I just go as far as the crimp? > >I think they need to go in all the way, but I just want to be sure. +++++++++++++++ Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 09:22:51 -0800 From: Wayne Burdick Organization: Elecraft To: Vic Rosenthal Cc: Elecraft Subject: [Elecraft] Re: ery happy with KAT100! But one little question... Vic Rosenthal wrote: > > Now that I understand it, I am REALLY happy with my KAT100. What I especially > like is the way it stores the settings for eaach band AND antenna.... Just like our KAT2. Glad you like it! > My little question: I put my RF Applications VFD swr/power meter in line > between the K2 and the KAT100. The VFD tends to show a slightly higher SWR than > the KAT100 on all bands, but on 24 and 28 MHz it shows 1.5:1 while the KAT100 > says 1.1:1. I would like someone with a Bird to try this and see what they > get. I wonder if there is some slight inaccuracy in the SWR bridge that could > be compensated for (or maybe my VFD is off)? When you aligned the KAT100, did you re-adjust the REFL potentiometer as explained in the manual errata sheet? Here's what it says to add, on page 28, right column, bottom of the page: With power still disconnected from the KAT100, measure the resistance from pin 5 of U5 to ground. Multiply this value by 1.2 (120%). Adjust the REFL pot, R4, until the resistance measured at pin 5 equals this calculated value. This step compensates for an inherent DC measurement error in Bruene-style bridges that use a resistor at the center tap of the transformer. If you performed this step but SWR measurements are still somewhat inaccurate, it could indicate a problem with either the bridge circuit or, much more likely, the null adjustment. The null adjustment must be made into an exact 50-ohm load if you plan to do comparisons against another 50-ohm instrument. Use the shortest possible coax cable. If the null is off just slightly, SWR measurements may be slightly less accurate for either high- or low-impedance loads. But the simple fact of the KAT100's slight disagreement with another in-line meter is not necessarily something to worry about. The tuner is probably doing its job well--which is to cancel out the reactance of the load to keep the K2 or K2/100 happy. 73, Wayne N6KR +++++++++++++++ Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 10:36:40 -0800 From: Wayne Burdick Organization: Elecraft To: Peter Halpin Cc: "Elecraft at Mailman. Qth. Net" Subject: [Elecraft] Re: Max distance KAT100 - K2? Hi Pete, We have only tested the KAT100 in the lab with 5' and shorter control cables, which work fine. However, we recommend using the shortest possible length (1 to 3') because the cable can pick up RF, which may make power and SWR readings unstable. The KAT100 is not really intended to be a remote tuner, as you can see from all of those useful LEDs, but it should work this way. Don't leave it outside, though, as it's not environmentally sealed. If you want to use a longer cable, there are a few things to keep in mind: 1. Doing auto-tunes at QRP levels is strongly advised (POWER control set for 10W or less, or KPA100 turned off). 2. If you're using a KPA100 in your K2, and you do find that power readings are unstable with the long KAT100 control cable, you can disconnect the "VRFDET" wire at both ends of the control cable. This is because the KPA100 itself provides the VRFDET signal to the K2, not the KAT100. If you have no KPA100, though, you'll have to keep the VRFDET line connected, since the KAT100 supplies the VRFDET signal in this case. But of course power levels are much lower without the KAT100, and chances are there would be no RFI problem. 3. If you try both of the above and still have problems with RF getting into the cable, you may have to substitute a more heavily-shielded type of multiconductor cable. Please let us know the results of your experiments. If a number of KAT100 builders successfully remote the tuner, we can add a note about this to the KAT100 manual. (In fact if you want to experiment with a much longer control cable, feel free. If you're going over about 10' I'd recommend the use of a high-quality RF cable, too.) 73, Wayne N6KR Peter Halpin wrote: > > Hi all, > > I've crawled through the builder's resources page but I can't find an answer > to a simple question: what is the MAXIMUM possible separation between a K2 > and the KAT100 (it hasn't arrived yet 'cos it's being held at customs - > grrr) ? Has anybody tried something like 25' or more? I'd like to be able > to put the KAT100 at the rear of the house and use just a foot or so of coax > to link it to a current balun for use with open line. > > 145, Pete PE1MHO - G7ECN - M3ECN K2 #2768 +++++++++++++ From: "Lyle Johnson" To: , "Elecraft Reflector" Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Adj. C31 on KAT100 - question Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:01:45 -0800 > ...When I rotate C31 it brings the analog meter needle to zero (1st zero > point"), then as I continue it rises a little bit and then returns to zero > ("2nd zero point"). If I continue it then starts to rise continuously. I'm > stumped as to where I'm supposed to set it. Set it to the middle of either of the two zero points. Either represents the same capacitance. 73, Lyle KK7P +++++++++++++ From: To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Tom_Hammond_N=D8SS?= Cc: "Elecraft Reflector" Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Adj. C31 on KAT100 - question Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:12:27 -0700 Tom, Dave, and Lyle - Thanks guys - I get the idea now. The manual means that the needle will STAY at zero for a very, very slight bit of travel - and I should try to center it within that travel. OK - time for bed and finish up tomorrow night!!!!!!!! Thanks again. 73/Tim NZ7C +++++++++++++++ From: "Lyle Johnson" To: , "Elecraft Reflector" Subject: RE: [Elecraft] KAT100 - confused on R3 and R4 adjustment Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 19:51:05 -0800 Hello Tim! > When I set the K2 to 5 watts, I then adjust R4 so that the analog meter > reads the proper voltage. I then change the K2 to 10 watts and > again adjust.... What am I missing? The table on page 28 shows nominal voltage for 3 different power levels. You just set for one of them. If you have a KPA100, use the 20 watt level; otherwise use 5 or 10 watts, your choice. Don't worry if you set it at 10 and find the voltage from 5 watts isn't exactly 1.3. It doesn't matter. Don't let the fact that your DMM has 3 or more digits of resolution fool you into thinking you need that much accuracy; you don't. The wattmeter section of the tuner is there to let the tuner do its job, and to get you in the ballpark for power setting. If you check the specifications in the back of the manual, you will find there is *no* specification for power accuracy or SWR accuracy... Hope this helps! 73, Lyle KK7P ++++++++++++++++ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:21:57 -0800 From: Wayne Burdick Organization: Elecraft To: Peter Halpin Cc: Elecraft Subject: [Elecraft] Re: KAT100 alignment: a DOH! moment Hi Peter, Yes, this is what you need to do. Advancing the pot 20% improves SWR measurement accuracy. It compensates for an inherent underestimation of reflected power by any Bruene-style bridge with a resistor at the center tap of the transformer. 73, Wayne Peter Halpin wrote: > > Hi all, > > Now that I have recovered my KAT100 from the Christmas tree I am faced by a > small problem. > > I don't quite understand the KAt100 manual errata sheet (dated 7 Nov 2002 > rev A-2) where it says: > > "With power still disconnected from the KAT100, measure the resistance from > pin 5 of U5 to ground. Multiply this value by 1.2 (120%). Adjust the REFL > pot, R4, until the resistance measured at pin 5 equals this value." > > Now it's down to me not understanding this properly - but does this mean > that I align it as per the instructions then disconnect everything and just > measure the pre-aligned resistance and bump it up 20%? That's the way I > understand it, but I don't understand just WHY... > > Please help! +++++++++++++++++++ Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:48:10 -0800 From: Wayne Burdick Organization: Elecraft To: Elecraft Cc: DK7zh at aol.com, Gary Surrency Subject: [Elecraft] KAT100 ATU Builder Alert: Anti-Slide Bracket installation Duane, K7ZH, brought this to our attention: Figure 20b in the KAT100 manual, which shows Anti-Slide bracket installation, is incorrect. (See page 29 or 30 depending on your manual revision.) The center hole (of 3) on the bracket should be positioned over the rear-most hole in the 2-D fastener. This will align the standoffs on the bracket with the feet on the K2. If the brackets are installed as shown in the Figure, the K2 will sit too far forward when stacked on top of the KAT100. 73, Wayne N6KR +++++++++++++++++++ Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:32:14 -0800 From: Wayne Burdick Organization: Elecraft To: Vic Rosenthal Cc: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Subject: [Elecraft] Re: KAT100-1 with v.1.04 Chip Vic Rosenthal wrote: > I recall you saying something about when VRFDET is used or not. Could you > explain the circumstances under which it's OK to disconnect this line? Seems to > me that would solve the problem as well. Hi Vic, The VRFDET line to the KAT100 can be disconnected if a KPA100 is installed, but only if it is installed inside the K2 itself. (If the KPA100 is installed in the cover of a KAT100-2, you'll still need the VRFDET line.) 73, Wayne N6KR +++++++++++++++++ Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 23:18:38 +1200 From: Ron Willcocks To: Elecraft Reflector Subject: [Elecraft] Mounting the ETS15 stand on the KAT100 Hi All, Tonight I installed the ETS15 stand onto my KAT100 and while the job was easy enough, I found that one of the mounting bolts was actually touching the pins of U1 when the lid was re-installed. Luckily I was a bit suspicious of the amount of clearance, and had taken the side panels off to make sure. During construction of the KAT100 I hadn't bothered trimming the leads of U1's socket, but it was certainly nescessary with the stand installed. Perhaps something to be aware of if you intend installing the stand? In case I am asked "why the stand on the KAT100"?......With the 1.5" stand under the ATU, the K2 sits flat on top (with its bale folded) and the result is a K2/ATU module at a nice operating height. I like it. 73......Ron ZL1TW +++++++++++++++++