[Hammarlund] HQ-100C Alignment

Wed Oct 21 17:19:51 EDT 2009

Hi Greg,
They say "the Q-multiplier serves a dual function, since it is also employed as a BFO". And you are right, the Q-mult is made to osc. for BFO action. Not the easiest setup to understand, at least to me. I had a HQ-100 as a novice and don't think I got the full function from it even then...when my mind was better able to understand things. The previous owner of this rcvr had installed the XC-455...a 455kc xtal controlled BFO. Its not working as it is so I'm trying to figure it out.
73 de Bill K4JYS
Up the road from ya at Smithfield 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Mijal" <bluebirdtele at embarqmail.com>
To: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr at embarqmail.com>, "Rodger Singley" <rbsingl at ilstu.edu>
Cc: hammarlund at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 5:04:32 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [Hammarlund] HQ-100C Alignment

What BFO? I thought the HQ 100 didn't have one.  You have to push the Q 
multiplier into oscillation to copy CW.
73's
Greg
WA7LYO
Kinston NC

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr at embarqmail.com>
To: "Rodger Singley" <rbsingl at ilstu.edu>
Cc: <hammarlund at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Hammarlund] HQ-100C Alignment

> Good afternoon,
> Here is the latest report on this project. Rodger, I did pretty much as 
> you suggested and now the 10-12mc dead zone is active with signals and the 
> dial calibration is much closer. So that problem seems to be fixed. I then 
> went through the RF and then the Antenna adjustments with some success. 
> However, the stuck slug is the bottom RF adjustment for the 10mc freq in 
> the 10-30 band...so, can't tweak it and sigs are pretty weak around 
> 10-12mc. I may just live with that...not much to listen to in that range 
> anyway. I also noticed an image of the very strong CW numbers station in 
> the 10-30 band. I think images are the norm, esp. in that 10-30mc band.
>
> Now to the BFO. I'll work on that a bit and see what I run into. More on 
> that later. I expect I'll have a few more questions as I progress.
>
> Many thanks to you Rodger and all the others who offered help and 
> suggestions. What a great group of ops.
>
> 73 for now, Bill K4JYS
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rodger Singley" <rbsingl at ilstu.edu>
> To: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr at embarqmail.com>
> Cc: hammarlund at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:45:35 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: RE: [Hammarlund] HQ-100C Alignment
>
>
>
> Bill,
>
> Tune your TS-440S to 12.455 and set the HQ-110 dial to 12 Mhz. Set the 
> bandspread to the set point (make sure the bandspread capacitor is at its 
> unmeshed position). Now adjust the oscillator coil so that you hear the 
> oscillator signal with the TS-440S. Set your signal generator to 12 
> megahertz (you may have to rock the generator dial a few Khz. either way 
> if the calibration is a bit off) and peak the antenna and mixer coils.
>
> Reset your HQ-110 dial to 28 Mhz. and tune your TS-440S to 28.455 and 
> adjust the oscillator trimmer cap so that the signal is heard in the 
> TS-440S. Set your signal generator to 28 megahertz and peak the mixer coil 
> trimmer cap.
>
> At this point, I still think it is just way out of alignment instead of 
> having an actual component failure. Alignment using these steps will avoid 
> accidentally aligning on an image or spurious frequency. I repaired a 
> friend's SX-24 last year and it performed similarly due to alignment being 
> way off on the highest range.
>
> Let me know how this procedure turns out.
>
> 73, Rodger WQ9E
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Stewart [mailto:cwopr at embarqmail.com]
> Sent: Tue 10/20/2009 11:29 AM
> To: Singley, Rodger
> Cc: hammarlund at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Hammarlund] HQ-100C Alignment
>
> Good Morning HQ-100C advisers,
> Here's what I've done this morning. I ran a wire from the HQ-100 over to a 
> TS-440S (test rcvr). I started on the BC band (.54-1.6). Put the sig. gen. 
> on 1kc, tuned the HQ-100 to the sig. gen. and listened on the 
> TS-440S...and got a sig. at 1.455kc...did the same on 1.6-4 band...gen. at 
> 3kc, HQ-100 tuned to that sig, and heard a sig at 3.455kc on the TS-440S. 
> Also same type results on the 4-10 band. Dial readings were pretty close 
> to actual freq. Now, on the screwed up band (10-30), I put the sig. gen. 
> on 15mc, and found that sig. on the HQ-100 at around 13.4mc dial. I found 
> a signal on the TS-440S at 15.455mc. These tests seem to indicate the IF 
> is tuned to the upper side of the received sig. I found some weak 'images' 
> (?) of the sig. gen. sig.(15mc) up around 26 and 27mc (dial), on the 
> HQ-100.
>
> On the HQ-100, the dial calib. is about 1.6mc below the acutal signal 
> freq. Could there be a component failure or change in the tuned circuits 
> for the 10-30mc band? That's where I am at this point.
>
> Many thanks for your suggestions.
> 73, Bill K4JYS
> ______________________________________________________________
> Hammarlund mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hammarlund
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Hammarlund at mailman.qth.net
>
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
> ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **
>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 