Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
Locked
Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
 
Administrator
|
Hi all,
We just posted a new beta-test release of KAT500 firmware (rev 1.63) that does a better job on initial tunes than the previous release (1.58). We'd really like to get this firmware into production quickly, but to do that we'll need some testing help. If you can spare a few minutes, please do the following: 1) Save your current configuration so that you can return to it if necessary 2) Install KAT500 rev. 1.63 (follow instructions for beta releases) 3) Erase memories on at least one band where the tuner has to work to find solutions (that’s 160 through 40 meters for most of us) 4) Do some full-search tunes. The KAT500 should find very good tuning solutions (within its specified impedance-matching limits, of course). Please send me your results. Thanks-- Wayne N6KR ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
|
In trying to load this new FW version, I discovered that there appears to be an interaction between the proper operation of the serial interface and the "Sleep When Idle" option. If the oscillator is not running due to the timeout enabled by this option, as can be seen on my P3 at 28.004 MHz, then a serial command does not work reliably and firmware updates produce an error message about an incorrect device.
From a quick and dirty experiment, it looks like the first typed "an;" command restarts the oscillator but produces no output. The second command also produces no output. The third "an;" produces the expected "AN1;" response. After disabling the "Sleep When Idle" option, the firmware load was successful. Has anyone else seen this?
73, Stan - KR7C
|
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
|
Apparently, the KAT500 Utility (v1.14.2.20) doesn't send the requisite "wake up" commands.
As far as the coarse tuning speed, I would say that it is much faster than 1.58. I erased all memories and tried tuning antennas where the SWR is over 5 (e.g. 18 on my 80 dipole) and the KAT500 was really quick in finding a good match.
73, Stan - KR7C
|
|
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
> Apparently, the KAT500 Utility (v1.14.2.20) doesn't send the requisite "wake > up" commands. > > As far as the coarse tuning speed, I would say that it is much faster than > 1.58. I erased all memories and tried tuning antennas where the SWR is over > 5 (e.g. 18 on my 80 dipole) and the KAT500 was really quick in finding a > good match. Could you define 'really quick'? Gary - AG0N ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
|
Really quick, hmm....
I guess I'd say a couple of seconds tuning 17m using my 80m dipole; it is faster than the KAT3 by comparison. Both yielded a 1.0:1 match.
73, Stan - KR7C
|
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
|
Same result here. All good
Gary On 26 February 2014 10:59, Stan Gibbs, KR7C <[hidden email]> wrote: > Really quick, hmm.... > > I guess I'd say a couple of seconds tuning 17m using my 80m dipole; it is > faster than the KAT3 by comparison. Both yielded a 1.0:1 match. > > > > > > ----- > 73, Stan - KR7C > -- > View this message in context: > http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Need-volunteers-to-try-an-even-better-version-of-KAT500-firmware-rev-1-63-more-accurate-initial-tunes-tp7584707p7584729.html > Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > -- *Gary - VK1ZZ, K3NHLSkype: Gary.VK1ZZhttp://www.qsl.net/vk1zz <http://www.qsl.net/vk1zz>Motorhome Portable* *"Grumpy's House"* *Elecraft K3KPA500FTKAT500FT* ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
Installed the new KAT500 beta rev. 1.63. Erased all memories for my 80 metres broadband dipole. Was able to get 1.0 to 1 or 1.1 to 1 with training every 20 Kcs across the entire band. Some intervals did not even try a long tuning cycle, just a couple of clicks and done, others required a couple of seconds or so.
Doug, VE3VS Wayne said: 3) Erase memories on at least one band where the tuner has to work to find solutions (that’s 160 through 40 meters for most of us) 4) Do some full-search tunes. The KAT500 should find very good tuning solutions |
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
Administrator
|
Thanks for the report (Doug and many others). Much appreciated.
73, Wayne N6KR On Feb 25, 2014, at 7:53 PM, Doug VE3VS <[hidden email]> wrote: > Installed the new KAT500 beta rev. 1.63. Erased all memories for my 80 > metres broadband dipole. Was able to get 1.0 to 1 or 1.1 to 1 with > training every 20 Kcs across the entire band. Some intervals did not even > try a long tuning cycle, just a couple of clicks and done, others required a > couple of seconds or so. > Doug, VE3VS > > > Wayne said: > 3) Erase memories on at least one band where the tuner has to work to find > solutions (that’s 160 through 40 meters for most of us) > > 4) Do some full-search tunes. > > The KAT500 should find very good tuning solutions ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
|
Hi Wayne
I also did this and found that rev. 1.63 comes to a solution much faster than the previous versions - almost instantly - It is a very big improvement. It is very fast on almost all bands and on both my two antennas (80m loop and a 17m dipole, both with open feeder). However on 17m where the dipole is resonant it is still going through a very long sequence (but its fast on the loop). The K3 ATU is much faster on this band/antenna which I don't understand. In the process I saw something noteworthy: transmitting out of band does produce a carrier (!) while you hear the warning signal. It continues for as long as you keep the key down but will not come back on after key release. It does not transmit if you use the TUNE button. May be it's always been like that - you won't notice on CW. Paul/OZ4UN > Den 26/02/2014 kl. 06.12 skrev "Wayne Burdick" <[hidden email]>: > > Thanks for the report (Doug and many others). Much appreciated. > > 73, > Wayne > N6KR > >> On Feb 25, 2014, at 7:53 PM, Doug VE3VS <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Installed the new KAT500 beta rev. 1.63. Erased all memories for my 80 >> metres broadband dipole. Was able to get 1.0 to 1 or 1.1 to 1 with >> training every 20 Kcs across the entire band. Some intervals did not even >> try a long tuning cycle, just a couple of clicks and done, others required a >> couple of seconds or so. >> Doug, VE3VS >> >> >> Wayne said: >> 3) Erase memories on at least one band where the tuner has to work to find >> solutions (that’s 160 through 40 meters for most of us) >> >> 4) Do some full-search tunes. >> >> The KAT500 should find very good tuning solutions > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
Hello,
Just had the time to install the new firmware and test it this evening. From what I observe, it works very well : tuning is really faster and much more accurate! A really good improvement, from my window... 73 Jean F4GXG |
|
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
I updated to KAT500 1.63 and latest KPA500 and K3 firmware. I like the way the KAT500 follows the VFO on the K3 but I noticed something odd when the VFO is set near a boundary between two KAT500 stored band slice memories. When RIT is enabled, the KAT500 follows the frequency set by the RIT offset. That is, I hear the relays click after crossing the memory boundary using RIT and stopping on a new listening frequency. If I press CLR to reset the RIT offset, the relays click again as the KAT500 follows the VFO back to the original frequency and recalls the settings for that band slice. However, When XIT is enabled, the KAT500 does not follow the frequency set by the XIT offset. That is, I hear no relay clicking after crossing the boundary using XIT and stopping on a new transmit frequency in the adjacent band slice, for which different settings are normally recalled. Shouldn't it be the other way around, to optimize the match for the transmitter, not the receiver? It's late, maybe I'm missing something. Bob NW8L On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Wayne Burdick wrote: > Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:31:16 -0800 > From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> > To: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>, > "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> > Subject: [Elecraft] Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 > firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes > > Hi all, > > We just posted a new beta-test release of KAT500 firmware (rev 1.63) that does a better job on initial tunes than the previous release (1.58). We'd really like to get this firmware into production quickly, but to do that we'll need some testing help. > > If you can spare a few minutes, please do the following: > > 1) Save your current configuration so that you can return to it if necessary > > 2) Install KAT500 rev. 1.63 (follow instructions for beta releases) > > 3) Erase memories on at least one band where the tuner has to work to find solutions (that?s 160 through 40 meters for most of us) > > 4) Do some full-search tunes. > > The KAT500 should find very good tuning solutions (within its specified impedance-matching limits, of course). Please send me your results. > > Thanks-- > > Wayne > N6KR > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > > [hidden email] SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
In addition to confirming this happening, I did another quick check. It DOES operate properly and follow VFO B when SPLIT is on, whether or not you have the sub receiver enabled, just not with the XIT.
If SPLIT is off, the KAT500 follows the main receiver and the sub-receiver tuning has no effect on it. Jim - W0EB > > I updated to KAT500 1.63 and latest KPA500 and K3 firmware. I like > the way the KAT500 follows the VFO on the K3 but I noticed > something odd when the VFO is set near a boundary between two > KAT500 stored band slice memories. > > When RIT is enabled, the KAT500 follows the frequency set by the > RIT offset. That is, I hear the relays click after crossing the > memory boundary using RIT and stopping on a new listening > frequency. If I press CLR to reset the RIT offset, the relays click > again as the KAT500 follows the VFO back to the original frequency > and recalls the settings for that band slice. > > However, When XIT is enabled, the KAT500 does not follow the > frequency set by the XIT offset. That is, I hear no relay clicking > after crossing the boundary using XIT and stopping on a new > transmit frequency in the adjacent band slice, for which different > settings are normally recalled. > > Shouldn't it be the other way around, to optimize the match for the > transmitter, not the receiver? > > It's late, maybe I'm missing something. > > Bob NW8L ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bob-4
Hello,
It's been a while since we've seen firmware updates for the K line -- is there any chance that the RIT bug described below will be fixed this year? Thanks, Bob NW8L On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Bob wrote: > Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:02:55 +0000 (UTC) > From: Bob <[hidden email]> > To: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> > Cc: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>, > "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Need volunteers to try an even better version of > KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes > > > I updated to KAT500 1.63 and latest KPA500 and K3 firmware. I like the way > the KAT500 follows the VFO on the K3 but I noticed something odd when the VFO > is set near a boundary between two KAT500 stored band slice memories. > > When RIT is enabled, the KAT500 follows the frequency set by the RIT offset. > That is, I hear the relays click after crossing the memory boundary using RIT > and stopping on a new listening frequency. If I press CLR to reset the RIT > offset, the relays click again as the KAT500 follows > the VFO back to the original frequency and recalls the settings for that band > slice. > > However, When XIT is enabled, the KAT500 does not follow the frequency set by > the XIT offset. That is, I hear no relay clicking after crossing the boundary > using XIT and stopping on a new transmit frequency in the adjacent band > slice, for which different settings are normally recalled. > > Shouldn't it be the other way around, to optimize the match for the > transmitter, not the receiver? > > It's late, maybe I'm missing something. > > Bob NW8L > > > On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Wayne Burdick wrote: > >> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:31:16 -0800 >> From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> >> To: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>, >> "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> >> Subject: [Elecraft] Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 >> firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes >> >> Hi all, >> >> We just posted a new beta-test release of KAT500 firmware (rev 1.63) that >> does a better job on initial tunes than the previous release (1.58). We'd >> really like to get this firmware into production quickly, but to do that >> we'll need some testing help. >> >> If you can spare a few minutes, please do the following: >> >> 1) Save your current configuration so that you can return to it if >> necessary >> >> 2) Install KAT500 rev. 1.63 (follow instructions for beta releases) >> >> 3) Erase memories on at least one band where the tuner has to work to find >> solutions (that?s 160 through 40 meters for most of us) >> >> 4) Do some full-search tunes. >> >> The KAT500 should find very good tuning solutions (within its specified >> impedance-matching limits, of course). Please send me your results. >> >> Thanks-- >> >> Wayne >> N6KR >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> >> > > [hidden email] > SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org > [hidden email] SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes
|
Administrator
|
This is definitely high on my list, Bob. Thanks--
Wayne N6KR On Oct 3, 2014, at 8:30 AM, Bob <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hello, > > It's been a while since we've seen firmware updates for the K line -- is there any chance that the RIT bug described below will be fixed this year? > > Thanks, > > Bob NW8L > > On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Bob wrote: > >> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:02:55 +0000 (UTC) >> From: Bob <[hidden email]> >> To: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> >> Cc: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>, >> "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> >> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Need volunteers to try an even better version of >> KAT500 firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes >> >> I updated to KAT500 1.63 and latest KPA500 and K3 firmware. I like the way the KAT500 follows the VFO on the K3 but I noticed something odd when the VFO is set near a boundary between two KAT500 stored band slice memories. >> >> When RIT is enabled, the KAT500 follows the frequency set by the RIT offset. That is, I hear the relays click after crossing the memory boundary using RIT and stopping on a new listening frequency. If I press CLR to reset the RIT offset, the relays click again as the KAT500 follows >> the VFO back to the original frequency and recalls the settings for that band slice. >> >> However, When XIT is enabled, the KAT500 does not follow the frequency set by the XIT offset. That is, I hear no relay clicking after crossing the boundary using XIT and stopping on a new transmit frequency in the adjacent band slice, for which different settings are normally recalled. >> >> Shouldn't it be the other way around, to optimize the match for the transmitter, not the receiver? >> >> It's late, maybe I'm missing something. >> >> Bob NW8L >> >> >> On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Wayne Burdick wrote: >> >>> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:31:16 -0800 >>> From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> >>> To: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>, >>> "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> >>> Subject: [Elecraft] Need volunteers to try an even better version of KAT500 >>> firmware (rev. 1.63) -- more accurate initial tunes >>> Hi all, >>> We just posted a new beta-test release of KAT500 firmware (rev 1.63) that does a better job on initial tunes than the previous release (1.58). We'd really like to get this firmware into production quickly, but to do that we'll need some testing help. >>> If you can spare a few minutes, please do the following: >>> 1) Save your current configuration so that you can return to it if necessary >>> 2) Install KAT500 rev. 1.63 (follow instructions for beta releases) >>> 3) Erase memories on at least one band where the tuner has to work to find solutions (that?s 160 through 40 meters for most of us) >>> 4) Do some full-search tunes. >>> The KAT500 should find very good tuning solutions (within its specified impedance-matching limits, of course). Please send me your results. >>> Thanks-- >>> Wayne >>> N6KR >>> ______________________________________________________________ >>> Elecraft mailing list >>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >>> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> >> [hidden email] >> SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org >> > > [hidden email] > SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |