Kenwood TS-940S Fixes Reviews
Kenwood TS-940S Fixes Reviews
Kenwood TS-940S Fixes Reviews
Page 1 of 151
From a passionate Kenwood TS-940 owner. The 940 has to be one of the greatest transceivers ever
produced.
This page is provided because:
Some information here is not available anywhere else and should be useful to any TS-940 owner,
Information does not exist in a single web site which is easy to follow,
If the information remains available more TS-940s will be repaired and functional, (and probably
improved),
The intention is to acknowledge the person who discover the information so questions can be sent to that
person.
When information is already well documented and reliably maintained on another site then a hyperlink
is made to that site to avoid yet another slightly different version.
I will publish all email feedback at the end of the page, so that whatever is discovered by others can be
shared by all. Please email to [email protected]
Yours sincerely
Jeff King ZL4AI / DU7
Disclaimer: No liability or responsibility whatsoever is taken for any of the information on this site. You
assume total liability for any modification you undertake.
Copyright: Everything on this page
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 2 of 151
PLL BOARD
AND
RF BOARD
AND
PLL
OUT OF LOCK
INDEX
PROMOTIONAL BROCHURE
RECEIVER PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTS.
R1. KENWOOD PRODUCED 3 SERVICES BULLETINS WHICH DO CONSIDERABLY IMPROVE THE RECEIVER.
RECEIVER 2. FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTORS AROUND THE WRONG WAY.
RECEIVER 3. THERE IS NO AGC TIMING CORRECTION
SUMMARY OF R149 AND R150 MIS-LABELLING
Mike KC8ZNW on 25/4/05 describes this same behaviour to the Kenwood.net.
Executive Summary of AGC Mod
Independent Feedback on how Receiver Improves
THE PRODUCTION MISTAKE DESCRIBED:
TO CHANGE THE RESISTORS
THE INITIAL PROBLEM SYMPTOMS:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TO PERSONS WHO HELPED SOLVE THIS
A CAUTION:
COMMUNICATIONS WITH KENWOOD JAPAN BELOW:
RECEIVER 4. PIN DIODE IMPROVEMENTS
4.1: Background on how Pin Diodes were discovered to improve radios.
4.2 RadCom Technical Topics explains what Pin Diodes were supposed to achieve.
Intermodulation properties of switching diodes, by Dr. Ing. Jochen Jirmann, DB1NV
4.3: Summary of Key points on Purpose of Pin Diodes: [by ZL4AI]
4.4 Experience from Persons who modified the TS-940
4.5 : Pin Diode Modification for TS-440
4.6: So summary of Pin Diode Modification
PLL BOARD PROBLEMS
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
PLL
PLL
PLL
PLL
PLL
BOARD 0:
BOARD 1:
BOARD 2:
BOARD 3:
BOARD 4:
Page 3 of 151
RESEAT CONNECTORS
REMOVE THE BLACK FOAM FROM BEHIND THE BOARD
REMOVE THE WAX FROM THE VCOS
IDENTIFY WHICH PLL IS NOT LOCKED
PLL BOARD AND RF BOARD AND PLL OUT OF LOCK
CONTROL BOARD
VOLTAGE REGULATOR HEATS UP AND CAUSES A SHIFT IN BFO ON IF BOARD
AVR BOARD & POWER SUPPLY
FAN AND TEMPERATURES
COOL AVR COMPONENTS BY REMOUNTING ON HEAT SINK
POWER SUPPLY HEAT SINK RUNS TOO HOT
VERIFY THERMISTOR 101 IS ATTACHED AND FUNCTIONING
REPLACE Q101 AND Q 102
MOTOR BEARINGS GUMMED UP: TEMPORARY FIX
RF BOARD 1: BOARD RUNS VERY HOT
HOW IT WORKS
AM MODE: HOW TO VERIFY ITS SWITCHED IN
FM MODE: SETTING FM CARRIER
CW FILTERS
SERVICE MANUAL & SERIAL NUMBERS
IDENTIFYING WHEN RADIO MANUFACTURED
BULBS
CONNECTOR PROBLEMS
BATTERIES: [INTERNAL]
BATTERY REPLACEMENT
INFORMATION NOT ANNOUNCED BY KENWOOD:
KENWOOD RELEASED INFORMATION:
S METER ALIGNMENT LEVELS
PARTS
LINKS TO USEFUL SITES
HELP WANTED
PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS
MODIFICATIONS
POWER SUPPLY IMPROVEMENTS
ALC DELAY TIME:
TS-940 AVERAGE OUTPUT POWER SSB
USE OF TS940S FSK RECEIVE FOR HF PACKET
INQUIRY REGARDING USE OF ADDITIONAL RECVR.
GEIL CHIP
FEEDBACK FROM READERS
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 4 of 151
PROMOTIONAL BROCHURE
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 5 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 6 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 7 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 8 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 9 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 10 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 11 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 12 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 13 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 14 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 15 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 16 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 17 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 18 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 19 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 20 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 21 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 22 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 23 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 24 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 25 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 26 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 27 of 151
5/14/2006
Page 28 of 151
http://www.kenwood.net/indexKenwood.cfm?
do=DownloadFile&Document=09b9d746891ed0281dcc8482861e53da08bf66aab282a3fe0ec52cce1a1412bab3177362513310
http://www.kenwood.net/indexKenwood.cfm?
do=DownloadFile&Document=57aa76a9447b3b37e1e9f60965f865a395e42da53ae01ebf6db6adb98b2ed832baa0aa033a297d
http://www.kenwood.net/indexKenwood.cfm?
do=DownloadFile&Document=2e0ca5ad0e0e9060f7f850fe27f80b1a95e42da53ae01ebf6db6adb98b2ed832baa0aa033a297d15
http://www.kenwood.net/indexKenwood.cfm?
do=DownloadFile&Document=55221dd570b7e465e5087cf67f5e71fa95e42da53ae01ebf6db6adb98b2ed832baa0aa033a297d1
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 29 of 151
was described in a Service Bulletin dated March 2, l987. I requested a copy of the bulletin and have
attached a copy of it to this letter for your information. (See Issue No. 76, Pg. 30 and 31 for Kenwood
Service Bulletin No. 917 and schematics pertaining to this subject.)
Since receiving the bulletin from Kenwood, I have installed it on my TS-940S and found it to make a
very significant improvement in weak signal handling in the presence of nearby strong signals. I would
recommend highly that anyone experiencing reciprocal mixing problems install the new fix. It should be
noted that some of the newer TS-940S have the fix installed. I was preparing to install the fix on a
friends's TS-940 which had a serial number 100 lower than my own and found that the fix had been
factory installed. Apparently, more than one manufacturing site is used and serial numbers are given to
each in blocks. Consequently, it is possible for higher serial numbers to be produced at one location
without the fix, while another site any have cut in the fix but is using numbers from a lower block.
The quickest way to verify whether the fix has been installed is to check R120 and R129 on the PLL
Unit (X50-2020-00). If these two resistors are 3.3 ohms in value [Editor correction Service Bulleting
917 says 3.3 Kilo-Ohms], the fix is already installed. Do not depend on the on the absence of C176,
C180 or C181 as an indication, as earlier attempts (factory or field) to correct the mixing noise problem
may have removed these same capacitors. The instructions in the bulletin state that when making the
modifications to the RF Unit (X44- 1660-00), it is easiest to move C132/C133 to the foil side of the
board. As the component side of the section of the RF Unit containing these two capacitors has been
filled with wax, it is definitely not easier. The factory installation of the fix left C132/C133 on the
component side and installed the R154/C193 and R155/C194 series RC networks on the foil side. This
is definitely easier. As a side note, the installation of the fix took me about 2 hours. Both the PLL Unit
and RF Unit modifications must be completed before the transceiver is usable. If you install just the
PLL Unit modifications and then try the receiver, CW signals will should like raw AC. Also, to make
life simple, do not remove each of the boards above the PLL Unit individually. The easy way to gain
access to the PLL Unit is to remove the top two screws (one on each side) holding the front panel and
loosen the bottom tow screws. This allows the front panel to be tilted forward. The speaker assembly
and all the boards above the PLL unit may then be removed as a unit by removing only 4 screws and
tilting this unit towards the front of the TS-940S. No cables need be removed from the boards above the
PLL Unit.
I hope the above information is helpful to you in dealing
with the reciprocal mixing noise problem. (Thanks, Rich
Maher, WZ4Z, 1117 NW 7th St., Boynton Beach, FL 33435)
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 30 of 151
http://www.eham.net/articles/9261
Initially ZL4AI found it hard to understand this website and actually what PY1NR had discovered.
Starting with the circuit board layouts I tried to draw out the circuit: What I found was that apparently
the FETS were mounted with the drain where the source was supposed to be and vice-versa.
As FETs normally allow current flow until the gate has a potential, I wonder if this really makes that
much difference.
PY1NR suggest that reversing these transistors will provide 10 dB of gain. But this claim does not
appear be based on before and after measurement. It would be useful to have some feedback on whether
others have had much improvement by reversing the FETS.
Garey Barrell provides Kenwoods advice
=========================================================
=============================
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Garey Barrell
Sent: Wednesday, 9 March 20055:53 a.m.
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Kenwood] RE:TS-940 What is the correct FET direction?
Jeff OK..... Just in from Kenwood...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear Kenwood Customer:
This information pertains to the TS-940S component location.
The circuit designer said the installation of Q10 in the actual TS-940S transceiver
is correct.
The PCB view in the Service Manual is correct too. The schematic is the only
section that is in error. The schematic indicates the drain of one FET connected to
the source of the second FET. The correct installation is to have the source of one
FET connected to the source of the second FET.
In addition, testing at Kenwood Communications in Long Beach, CA showed poor
results. Sensitivity can become unstable. The most important point about the Q10
pair is that both FET's must be replaced at the same time (like a matched pair).
Replacing only one FET at a time can affect sensitivity.
If you need further assistance, please e-mail us again.
Sincerely,
Kenwood Amateur Radio Customer Support
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
73, Garey - K4OAH
Atlanta
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 31 of 151
The Q4 situation is not quite as clear. The schematic appears to be correct, (sources tied together or
push-pull,) and the board layout
drawing appears to be incorrect. According to a tech in Japan, the FET's in the actual unit are correct.
They have not found any instance where they were reversed in the actual radio or any 'in-house' docs
that could have resulted in such an error. I guess someone is going to have to open one up and look at
the traces! Looking at the board traces in the component layout, it certainly appears that one FET has
the Source and Drain connections reversed if the FETs are installed in the orientation shown. Perhaps
the board traces were changed? [ZL4AI editor comment: Boards made exactly as shown in the Service
Manual]
The guys at Kenwood, both in LA and Japan, are pretty frustrated with the whole mess! They tried to
duplicate the Q10 situation, and found that performance was degraded considerably when the PY1
"correction" was made. They also mentioned that replacing one of the pair was not recommended.
The original circuit used a matched pair and they recommended replacing them only with a matched
pair. They were unable to describe the "matching" process, but we surmised they selected for Idss, and
possibly transconductance.
The big question is, these transceivers have been working and meeting specs for 15+ years, so who
cares!? :-)
73, Garey - K4OAH
Atlanta
===========================================================================
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 32 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 33 of 151
5/14/2006
Page 34 of 151
===========================================================================
After reading Kenwoods Gareys and Traians advice, I turned around only Q4 on the IF board.
The result was a quieter receiver. I do not believe that there was any significant gain increase in the
receiver.
I would appreciate (and will post on this page) emails describing others experience regarding this
change.
From Kenwood.net on 25/4/05
Hi Dale
I also became interested in the RX mod you mention. Before opening my 940, I
decided to first check whether drain and source of the 2SK125 are symmetrical or
not. This was easy for me because I own a "dead" 940 RF board as a source of parts
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 35 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 36 of 151
PY1NR provides feedback and re-endorses previous statements on turning the FETs around
PY1NRFeedback
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 37 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 38 of 151
Editors Note:
John has undertaken some very useful measurements and it is very useful to have some measurements.
Measurement outcomes could be more factual if a change in signal to noise ratio was measured by
laboratory methods described by the ARRL. For example MDS.
http://p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/aria/ARIA_MANUAL_TESTING.pdf
http://www.arrl.org/~ehare/testproc/testproc.pdf
If someone could do an MDS noise floor test before and after the FET swap, it would be more complete
evidence of the assumed improvement.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 39 of 151
Even a good test, i.e., s+n / n measurements before and after, or _accurate_ noise
figure measurements really wouldn't impress me that much, since a receiver meeting
the Kenwood specs would be limited by external noise regardless!
I suspect Garey is correct about the noise floor: This is a less than 0.2 microvolt receiver: Maybe turning
the FETS around produces more noise, [which of course lifts the S meter] but does it produce any more
signal or better signal to noise ratio?
If first before an FET swap the S meter was calibrated against a signal generator, then signal strength
against independent signal source measured, then an MDS measured, then after the FET swap the s
meter was again re-calibrated, then a reading of the independent signal sourceand separately MDS again
would show that it was just not an increase in noise.
I wish Kenwood would behave like a responsible manufacturer and explain the technical reasons they do
not recommend turning the FETs around.
Have a look at the following links which show how measuring receiver improvement is a difficult
undertaking. Even definition of what you are measuring requires some considerable reading and
comprehension.
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html
http://www.rac.ca/opsinfo/smeters.htm
http://www.seed-solutions.com/gregordy/Amateur%20Radio/Experimentation/SMeterBlues.htm
http://www.w8ji.com/receivers.htm
RECEIVER 3.
STOP: This modification was suggested following Kenwood Japans advice, that
The I.F circuit diagram was correct and the I.F. board was labelled incorrectly.
Communications_1_2_with_Kenwood_Japan
Kenwood Japan have now changed their mind and confirmed
The I.F circuit diagram is incorrect.
Communication 3 with Kenwood Japan
Swapping R149 and R150 probably increases sensitivity to similar degree as achieved by just turning the AGC off
Please review KI4NRs email below advising the (Kenwood intended) correct construction was electrical
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 40 of 151
2. Then incorrectly labelled the PC board [to correct the mistakes on the schematic] so correct resister values put
in circuit.
(For example the position of R150 was labelled as R149 on the PC Board, which resulted in a 150K resistor being
put at the R150 position.)
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 41 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 42 of 151
that it
barely moves on some signals which are perfectly readable, other sigs give me 8 or
9 and I
have even heard an occasional 10DB+ movement. My TS830S will give me a 2 or 3 sunit
increase when I switch the antenna to it for the same signal.
Is this an effect of the sensitivity of the receive section? Or do I have a
malfunction? In
addition my VFO exhibits the occasional hiccup on the last 2 digits on small
movements of
the knob. I understand this may be caused by solder joints.
TIA, Mike KC8ZNW
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 43 of 151
2.
[Editors Note: ZL4AI questions the validity of these observations but has included them to keep
feedback information unbiased. Varying the resistors from Kenwoods values was never recommended
or intended. With resistors changed around on the Editors 940 AGC slow is still very much slower than
AGC fast.]
3.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 44 of 151
4.
5.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Makes a good 940 a great 940........I can now hear much better not.
FET reversal change useless...........not worth the bother.
Page 45 of 151
I found the
KB9IV .......Minnesota
6.
http://www.eham.net/articles/11090
7.
On the TS-930 signal board the equivalent AGC resistors to R150 and R149 are:
R730 2.2M
and
R710 68K
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 46 of 151
Jeff
I forget to add something. When you swap the resistors around. you are putting the
2.2 Meg ohm in series with C-126. this effectively removes the Base line time
constant to all AGC positions on the switch including AM even thou the switch does
not function there. That why people say the meter is more jumpy. plus the 150 K or
68 K bias the gate of Q23 more heavy and allows the receiver to stay more sensitive
to low level signals. if you look at the TS-930 schematic this is the correct
circuit in every way and the way Kenwood intended it to work and how the 940 is
One other thing .....on all the older 940
4, 5 and early 6 mil serial
number ...the IF board is different. The gain distribution in not the same. All the
940 ... late 6 and newer had better IF boards. They have more gain TX & RX the
radio are hotter sensitivity wise, better AGC compression. I use a 5 mil TS 940
with a later model 8 Mil IF board in it .......much , much better !!
Also Kenwood put an S meter slam mod in those boards. all the older 940 when you
shut the radio off, pin the S meter over. The newer boards are fix for that.
8.
From: Jeff King [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, 1 August 2005 8:01 a.m.
To: '[email protected]'
Cc: '[email protected]'
Subject: RE RE: Is your advice Correct about TS-940 R149 and R 150: being in wrong places???
Dear Mr T.Soranaka
Thank you so much for your 2 emails sent in March 2005 [attached as below].
COMMUNICATIONS_WITH_KENWOOD_JAPAN About R149 & R150
From your advice I understood:
The I.F circuit diagram is correct about positions of R150 and R 149 and the I.F. board is labelled incorrectly.
Because your advice was valuable I recorded this to a small web page:
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
This has been seen by some TS-940 enthusiasts. It enables one to adjust a TS-940 to operate as (you advised)
Kenwood designers really intended.
A very experienced Kenwood repair expert from the USA very strongly suggests your advice may not be correct.
The reasons he states sound correct and are very convincing: Those reasons are summarised below.
With the greatest of respect to Kenwood Corporation and yourself I ask please:
Could you please review your advice and advise again if R150 and R149 on the IF Board should be swapped
around to make the TS-940 to operate as Kenwood designers really intended?
============================================================================
30 July 2005:
Abbreviated summary of key points in Emails from KI4NR Kenwood Repair Expert in USA
When R149 and R150 are swapped around the AGC does not function as Kenwood intended.
- The service manual is wrong on the schematic.
- The silk screening of numbers on the circuit board are reversed to the schematic and wrong in relation to the
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 47 of 151
schematic (only).
- But the resulting resistor placement on the board is correct.
I believe the silk screening on the 940 IF board is correct and the IF schematic is wrong.
The 2.2 Meg ohm resistor is in parallel with C-127 .....the 68K or 150K resistor is in series with C-126 which gives
the base line time constant when AGC switch is in the fast position. This is the CORRECT arrangement.
The 2.2 meg ohm resistors in both the TS-930 and TS-940 sets up the bias to the FET from the 3.2 volt AGC
reference voltage. The 68k or 150k in series with the Cap set up the base time constant. The other FET switch in
for slow AGC on SSB and Fixed AGC on AM.
Also if you look at the TS-930 (both schematic and signal board) that has the almost identical AGC circuit.
(R730 2.2M and R710 68K, are the equivalent resistors on the TS-930.) The TS-930 is the correct circuit in every
way and the way Kenwood intended "the AGC of the TS-940" to work.
When you swap R149 and R150 around. you are putting the 2.2 Meg ohm in series with C-126.
This effectively removes the Base line time constant to all AGC positions on the switch including AM even thou
the switch does not function there. That is why people say the meter is more jumpy. Plus the 150K or 68K bias
the gate of Q23 more heavy and allows the receiver to stay more sensitive to low level signals.
73 John KI4NR
LPC Wireless
[email protected]
Phone: 386-774-9921
=========================================================================
Mr T.Soranaka I look forward to receiving your advice.
Yours sincerely
Jeff King
9.
-----Original Message----From: Customer Service Section [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, 2 August 2005 6:01 p.m.
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: RE RE: Is your advice Correct about TS-940 R149 and R 150: being in
wrong places???
Dear Mr.King,
Please accept my apologies for having supplied incorrect information.
A very experienced Kenwood repair expert from the USA is right.
The service manual is wrong on the schematic.
Yours sincerely,
T.Soranaka
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Customer Support Center
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 48 of 151
Kenwood Corporation
(Japan)
URL: http://www.kenwood.com/
Email: [email protected]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
10.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 49 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 50 of 151
Does putting the 2.2M ohm resistor where the 150 ohm Resistor should be make a
difference. Yes! You bet. Change the 150 ohm back to the direct circuit and
the AGC responds very quickly. [similar to the AGC in a TS-930]. AGC could not
respond quickly before because it had to wait until C126 charged up.
This is in the heart of the AGC timing section.
Probably all TS-940s have R149 and R150 in the wrong place.
================================================================
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 51 of 151
I suggest you put in new resistors, because with longer leads they will slightly
easy to hold in place while soldering.
After R149 and R150 changed back to positions Kenwood intended in the circuit
diagram, the result was:
-The fault of the rising S meter when cold disappeared.
- S meter dropped back to S1 on both AGC OFF and AGC SLOW, with no antenna signal.
Needed to adjust VR3 to bring the S Meter to S0.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 52 of 151
Traian Belinas
[email protected]
who diagnosed the problem and really understands these circuits. Traian appears to
have amazing skill and after reading the symptoms pointed me to look at R149. From
there it became obvious the circuit was not assembled according to the circuit
diagram.
Garey Barrell
'[email protected]'
Who provide some very useful advice on functions of components and explanations how
to read the circuit diagrams.
==============================================================
A CAUTION:
Not all IF boards are identical.
I installed another IF board installed as per factory spec with R149 and R 150 in their other components position
in my TS-940. It did not have the rising S meter problem. But it was not sensitive to weak signals
==============================================================
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 53 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 54 of 151
R149 68K
R150 2.2M
Specified in Revised Service Manual:
R149 150K
R150K 2.2M
Resistors as actually installed on my board if you follow the logic of the circuit
diagram.
R149 2.2M
R150 150K
I have two IF boards here and they both have the resistors installed as required by
the screen printing and hence on both boards both resistors are reversed. Possibly
this is the case for every TS-940 ever made.
I cannot understand how the circuits would function as the designer intended, as
the installed resistors are very different to those shown on the schematic
diagrams. Could you please advise if my observation is correct, and after later
when Kenwood has investigated if it would be advisable to swap R149 with R 150 and
vice versa?
At this time could you please just confirm that the question will be investigated?
I look forward to your reply.
Yours sincerely
Jeff King ZL4AI
RECEIVER 4.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 55 of 151
can switch is basically determined by the width of this Intrensic area, the narrower the I junction, the faster it will s
frequency that you can pass throught it. Unfortunately, to build a PIN diode that will switch at HF freqs (below 30
or the diode will switch too fast to allow one cycle of an HF signal to pass through it.
What all of this means is that PIN diodes are relatively expensive. A regular PN junction diode (typically a 1N4148
however a 'cheap' true PIN diode will cost between one and three dollars apiece; and thats why you do not see them
ECONOMICS. (I'm not sure why it took that much verbage to explain, but it did.)
Corsair II's used a regular silicon switching diode, 1N4148 to switch the filters. The Omni 6 does use PIN diodes, b
mentioned economics, TenTec uses diodes that 'will do the job' verses expensive PIN diodes.
I read Rhode's article on PIN diodes and decided I could improve the IM performance of my Omni 6 (it didn't need
Packard PIN diodes that Rhode stated were the best, and installed them in my Omni 6. Over the past five years usin
in some serious DX contest, I have yet failed to see where these expensive HP PIN diodes made any substantial im
TenTec runs about 10ma of current through their production PIN diodes, in order to gain the full IM advantage of t
through the HP PIN diodes!
So the bottom line is if you replace the PIN or silicon diodes in a rig, you will see (hear) practically no improvemen
utilize the diodes operating at their optimum design specifications. Probably if you find the filter switching diodes
probably means that someone has taken the time to change the current running through the switching diodes to real
At 01:32 PM 9/17/97 -0400, you wrote:
>H. M. 'Puck' Motley W4PM wrote:
>> I have the feeling that the pin diodes in question are a modification
>> suggested in an article by Ulrich Rhode (not sure of the spelling of his
>> name) a few years back concerning 2nd order IMD in modern rigs. One of
>> the rigs mentioned was the Paragon. The article stated that by replacing
>> the common switching diodes used to switch the receiver front end band
>> pass filters with a certain type of pin diode, 2nd order IMD could be
>> improved. Maybe some of our more technically oriented folks remember this
>> article and can comment in greater detail. This is all I remember so if
>> you have additional questions don't ask me!
>Thanks, Puck. I was certain it was something Rohde said, just wasn't
>quite sure when or what the exact reason was. I just spoke to Ten Tec
>about this, and they actually said they had tested different types of
>diodes to switch the Paragon's receiver filters, and settled on regular
>switching diodes because there wasn't much difference with other types.
>So, I guess replacing the receiver filter switching diodes with PIN or
>other (hot carrier, etc.) types is probably a mod that some users have
>done themselves. At least I know for sure it's not a factory
>modification.
>Is there anyone out there who knows this for sure? Has anyone done the
>aforementioned mod? I know one fellow recently mentioned in a message
>that a rig he had for sale had the mod. Now I'll go search for the Rohde
>article. 8^)
>73, KE3KR
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 56 of 151
4.2 RadCom Technical Topics explains what Pin Diodes were supposed to
achieve.
TECHNICAL TOPICS April 1995
RF SWITCHING I TUNING DIODES
TT FEBRUARY 1993 REPORTED briefly an important article by Dr Ulrich Noble, KA2WEU/DJ2LR,
which was published simultaneously in English and German QST and CQ-DL November 1992) on
"Recent advances in shortwave receiver design". He subsequently published a series of three articles
(QST May, June and July 1994)on Key components of modem receiver design, and a recent follow-up
Key components of modern receiver design: a second look" (QST, December 1994). In these articles
he stressed that for receivers intended to have a very wide dynamic range, the intermodulation
distortion that arises from the use of unsuitable RF switching and tuning diodes imposes an important
limitation. He has recommended the use (or substitution) of such special-purpose RF diodes as the
Hewlett-Packard HP5082-3081 PIN diodes.
Dr Rohde's articles encouraged Tom Thomson, WOIVJ, to investigate how bad in practice are the more
distortion-prone switching diodes and how good are those designed for low distortion ('Exploring
intermodulation distortion in RF switching and tuning diodes', QST, December 1994). He carried out
laboratory tests on four types of diodes: The IN4153 generic PN switching diode: the Motorola MPN
3700 PIN diode intended for RF switching; the BAT-17 Siemens PIN switching diode; and the low-cost
1N4007 which is a generic 1 kV-PIV rectifier diode with a PIN structure but not intended for RF
switching
He has tabulated results in terms of diode switch insertion loss (dB) at 1O MHz with 0, 5, 10 and 20mA
bias currents; and similarly the second- and third-order intercept points (IP2, 1P3 and dBm). He draws
the following conclusions: "RF-specified PIN diodes are the devices of choice for low-distortion
switching at HF and above, for band pass filter selection and C switching in a narrow-band pre-selector.
Although the presence of a PIN structure in the 1 N4007 makes it seem attractive as a low-cost
alternative to RF-specified PIN diodes, its insertion-loss performance When unbiased and
reverse-biased - and its IMD performance when unbiased - is demonstratively interior to RF-specified
PIN diodes.
He adds: 'The manually switched and tuned front-end filters of the 1960s and 1970s had much to offer
in terms of second-order IMD, but we need not retrogress to those techniques to achieve improved 1P2
and 1P3 performance today. More attention paid to front-end filtering in general can produce the
improvement we need."
Dr Rohde in commenting on W0IVJ's finding, notes that many amateurs had reported difficulty in
obtaining HP5062-3081 diodes. He recognises that even with the Motorola MPN3700 with a US price
Of less than 11 replacing all 20-plus filter-switching diodes can be expensive. Nevertheless he
recommends changing all the diodes between the antenna and the first mixer, which includes the
diodes on both sides of the band pass filters of a transceiver but not the transmit/ receive switching
diodes which typically are already high-quality PIN types. He also adds some notes on Japanese
switching diodes which might be used to replace the 'bad' diodes seen in the past".
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 57 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 58 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 59 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 60 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 61 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 62 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 63 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 64 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 65 of 151
5/14/2006
Page 66 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 67 of 151
"Finally, there is no question that relays provide the best of all worlds as far as IMD characteristics are
concerned, but not necessarily the best solution in terms of space and costs. 1 have just tested a
soon-to-be-re leased transceiver which uses PIN-type di odes and exhibits superb IMD characteristic
while maintaining a good noise figure.
"As to multi-tone functionality, once 2n and 3rd order IMD tests have been done, on can predict the
higher-order IMD effects, especially since they are based on diode characteristics and this type of test
is a legitimate test to evaluate receivers.
"Hopefully, your readers will not deduct from this experiment that QST or other reputable magazines
publish articles which are technically incorrect."
In a subsequent letter, dated September 19, 1995, Dr Rohde confirms that he has run into a lot of
people who have modified their RF switching diodes and have been extremely happy with the results.
Further, after refining his test set-up he finds the improvement is now slightly more dramatic than
outlined in his QST article.
In regard to Dr Rohde's endorsement of the technical accuracy of articles, I would enter a caveat. While
most writers strive lo complete accuracy. the mechanics an Murphy's Law of publication make it difficult
to avoid some errors, particularly in column produced to a tight deadline. Many years ago I stressed
that I regard Technical Topics as forum for new ideas, not all of which are likely to prove repeatable or
even strictly accurate No guarantees can be given on experimental ideas still under development! I
welcome comments from sceptical readers or those spotting printing errors etc. Fortunately, there is
good evidence that the vast majority of 7T items do work as intended, and often provide useful
additions to amateur lore!
==================================================================================
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 68 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 69 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 70 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 71 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 72 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 73 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 74 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 75 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 76 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 77 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 78 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 79 of 151
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 80 of 151
5/14/2006
Page 81 of 151
Carl
KM1H
All tests were run on 28MHz during the past few days on a customers unit.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 82 of 151
===========================================================================
-----Original Message-----
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 83 of 151
===========================================================================
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 84 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 85 of 151
(1) I exchanged the PLL amplifier IC (IC18, PLL board) into a pair of extremely low
noise OPamps,
which lowered phase noise. However, this required to tackle some problems with PLL
instability.
(2) I have the optional 250 Hz CW filter for the 455 kHz IF. When working PSK in
SSB mode, I missed the
possibility to activate this filter. I found out how to modify the 940 to allow
for activation of the
CW filter in SSB, including the control LED at the narrow CW filter switch.
(3) When I bought my first 940, it came without the AT unit. So I built one with an
automatic antenna tuning
board (kit) and built an interface which nicely communicated with the antenna
tuning control circuit of
the 940. Later, I got the original AT-940.
(4) Follow hyperlink
VOLTAGE_REGULATOR_HEAT_UP_AND_BFO_SHIFT
(5) I equipped my 940s with the piexx boards which allows to control the 940 via
the serial interface of
a PC.
Best 73s for today, Jeff
Thomas, DF5KF
==========================================================================
The following 2 emails have had some irrelevant content edited out.
>From: "Jeff King" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: <[email protected]>
>To: "'thomas hohlfeld'" <[email protected]>
>Subject: RE: ts-940
>Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 19:35:16 +1200
>
>Hi Thomas,
>
>Thanks for your email which I am still thinking about, a lot.
>
>Anyway I have been trying to get BA479G diodes from
>a supplier.
>
>The supplier advises they have the BA479 but cannot tell if it is a G or S.
>I have asked them to put a resistance meter on it and await those
>results. [They replied they could not help.]
>
>Attached you will find the datasheet. As you can see on the second
>and third lines on the first page
>Reverse impedances are:
>G: 5 k Ohms
>S: 9 K Ohms
>
>It appears to me that the S might be better, or no worse than the G.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 86 of 151
>
>Do you think S would be suitable to use without further testing.
>My worry is installing an S and finding it does not work well.
>
>I have an interesting article from Radcoms Pat Hawker on Pin Diode
>replacements in July 1995. If you would like this I will send that when
>I have it scanned. This article explains that the BA482 replaced in the
>Omni VI with the HP 5032-3081 resulted in impaired performance because
>the HP put through 0.5 dB less signal.
>
>
>Your sincerely
>Jeff King
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 87 of 151
original Kenwood diode (1-2 dB worse). Below 10MHz the BA479 showed less (!)
insertion loss and were clearly superior with respect to intermodulation.
To summarize, the BA479G is better than the original TS-940 diode only at
frequencies lower than 10 MHz. As you will imagine, I am thinking about
returning to the original diodes at 10 MHz and above. It may take a couple
of weeks until I will have time.
I can also take some digital photographs of the intermodulation spectra and
mail them to you, if you are interested (may take 2-3 weeks). Let me know if
your e-mail server has limitations in file size.
Best regards for today and vy 73,
Thomas,
DF5KF
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 88 of 151
5/14/2006
Page 89 of 151
Part #2 of my measurements will follow, where I studied the diodes behind the input
filters (D4,6,8...20 and D21)
which are run at a lower forward current. The measurements are already finished but
the figures need to be arranged.
Good luck for today!
Thomas
DF5KF
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 90 of 151
QRG. But I compared the generation of harmonics by the Kenwood diode and the
BA479 at lower frequencies and found the BA479 still to be better than the
Kenwood diode even at frequencies down to 100KHz.
The above measurements also show that the BA479 has a slightly higher
insertion loss than the Kenwood diode. This is a well known disadvantage of
pin diodes (also adressed in the excellent articles on your web page). In
the case of the BA479, however, the effect is less than 1dB and therefore
probably negligable in the 50 Ohm system of the TS-940. To confirm this, I
also used a dB meter to determine the insertion loss of two Kenwood diodes
in series compared with two BA479 in series. At 17 mA diode current, two
Kenwood diodes produce a loss of -0.2dB at 1.75 and -0.1 dB at 3.5 though 28
MHz. Two BA479 in series cause a loss of 0.8 dB at 1.75 and 3.5MHz and
-0.7dB at 7 through 28MHz. So there is a clear difference, but probably
without much importance.
What are the consequences? As long as a broadband antenna feeds the TS-940,
the front-end before the bandpass (diodes D3, D5... D19) will probably be
improved by changing into suitable pin diodes, such as the BA479. Those who
use the TS-940 only with a beam antenna (e.g. 20-10m), which is unlikely to
deliver large signals at 80 and 160m, will probably not have much benefit.
The two switching diodes between the bandpass filters and the preamplifier
may also be replaced by pin diodes at the lower bands (D6, D8 ... D14 and
D21). I would not recommend to exchange D16, D18 and D20, because the
original diodes are already excellent at the higher bands and the pin diodes
would add nothing else than a (minimal) increase of insertion loss.
In addition to the front-end diodes, there are also numerous switching diodes
in the IF unit. Particularly those before the 8MHz crystal filters may be
considered for replacement by pin diodes. I can imagine that this will
improve narrow-band intermodulation. Id be curious if anybody else has
experience with this. If not, I may check out this point in future.
--------------Your last mail says you ordered 40 BA479 diodes, so it seems you found a
source. I for myself also ordered 50 BA479 from Schuricht, here in Germany.
Its good to have some on stock for future projects and people say these
parts are likely to be replaced by SMD types in future. If you still need
BA479, let me know and I will try to help. By the way, there are probably
excellent alternatives. The TS-940 uses in its front-end an attenuation pad
which is part of the AGC (D23 and 26, MI204). I tested these and found they
are even a little better than the BA479. The problem with these is that they
are hard to obtain.
--------------Thank you for mailing the discussion on the reversed Q10/Q4 problem.
Although I was unable to find a difference in my test setup (as I reported
earlier), it is certainly possible that there is an asymmetry of the
internal capacitances that did not become apparent in my measurements. I
think I should try out this mod and do some measurements, but it may take a
little until Ill have time. It would also be interesting to see how the
increase in sensitivity, if it really occurs, will change the receivers
dynamic range.
--------------Finally, my congratulations for your exciting web page! You did a very good
job in digging out all the fascinating information about and around the
TS-940. Its a pleasure to contribute.
Best regards,
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 91 of 151
Thomas
(DF5KF)
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Page 92 of 151
5/14/2006
Page 93 of 151
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 94 of 151
D4
Original
Kenwood
Diode
1s2588 [(L30)
DIODE TW4000A, $3.15]
1s2588
D5
1s2588
0.5-1.5
D6
1s2588
0.5-1.5
D3
Original
Spec
Operating
Frequency
MHz
~0.5
~0.5
D8
1s2588
D10
1s2588
3-4
D12
1s2588
4-7
D14
1s2588
7 - 8.5
D7
1s2588
D9
1s2588
3-4
Replacement
Replacement Spec
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 95 of 151
D11
1s2588
4-7
D13
1s2588
7 - 8.5
D16, 15
1s2588
8.5 - 14
D18, 17
1s2588
14 - 20
D20, D19
1s2588
2 -- 30
D21
1s2588
2 -- 30
D26
MI204
Pin
Diode
2 -- 30
Whether you install many pin diodes depends on how crowded the bands are at your location.
More information below explains this:
-----Original Message----From: thomas hohlfeld [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, 21 June 2005 9:16 a.m.
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE:
Hi Jeff,
yes, I think that 0.3-0.4 dB is almost nothing. Remember that one S unit makes 6 dB
(20-fold more!). The additional loss caused by the pin diodes therefore is a very
small fraction of an S unit. A few meters of RG58 antenna cable with conventional
plugs cause more attenuation than these pin diodes.
By the way, I also measured the attenuation between the TS-940 antenna plug and the
preamplifier input. All frontend switching diodes plus the relay contacts plus the
bandpass filters (14 MHz) have an attenuation of 2 dB. The same measurement with my
Icom IC751 was 5 to 6 dB. This shows that the TS940 is indeed an excellent
construction.
Based on the results of my pin diode measurements I have now replaced most of the
switching diodes with BA479G. The only exception are D20, D18, D16 and D14 which I
did not change. With this change (plus turning around Q10), the RX sensitivity
(MDS) is -135 dBm, an excellent result fully competitive with the top Rigs marketed
today.
Best regards,
Thomas
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 96 of 151
Hello Jeff,
0,35 dB is an INSIGNIFICANT amount of loss, it is even dificult to detect a such low difference....
The positive aspect of the reduced IMD (especially the second order IMD reduction) is by far more
important than the little loss.
My only doubt in such case is the parts and labour cost, and if the mod is really needed for you there.
If you consider it as being needed (if you have unwanted strong signals at your QTH, and please
consider the broadcast bands also), then go for this mod with confidence.
Thomas is right, the lower bands are really crowded here, especially during the evening. You are a lucky
OM being there in ZL...
After 22.00 local time, the 80m band is full here, I can hear even the italian and DL stations making
local QSO's with other I and DL stations there respectively and having some big signals, as not to
mention the russians which are everywhere and really strong, like locals, and S9 + 30 to 40 dB signals
are usual. The thousands of GU43, GU74 and GS35 power tubes are really put to work out there, hi.
In my case, the added city QRN is also high, the normal noise is to +20 dB, so I use the attenuator for to
get the noise lower, at a reasonable level as it have no sense seeing the S meter to S9 + 20 only because
of the noise and so to loose a big part of available Rx dynamic range. The PIN mods are usefull here in
Eu.
73,
Traian, YO9FZS
All the Best,
Traian
From: Traian Belinas [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, 22 June 2005 10:26 p.m.
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: pin diode, reversed FET
Traian,
Hi thanks for this. It did really help my understanding.
In New Zealand we have max of 4,500 hams.
The bands are not crowded
http://kb9amg.slyip.com/markd/KB9AMG/top_dx_spots/by_callsign/zl.html
This is the strongest ZL stations.
So on 80 meters at night I can tune whole band and only hear about 2 or more other stations.
My 80 antenna, you have seen diagram is only about 13.5 off ground so it does not work well.
Usually I hear Australian stations and occasionally some USA.
Yes when propagation is there I hear those strong Russians here too.
Now back to Pin diodes.
My simple understanding of how the pin diode works is that the clean pin diode prevents other unwanted multiple
frequencies up and down the band. This would seem to be an advantage during transmitting because it prevents
unwanted additional off frequency splatter signals on the band.
Until I read your email yesterday, I did not comprehend to the fact that of course this works in reverse for
receive!!! It the existing diodes generate those off frequency signals then of course the a nearby signal will be
picked up off frequency in reverse the same way and that off frequency signal will be heard as interference on top
the signal you want to hear. Hence Pin Diodes significantly improve the selectivity of the receiver. Traian please
confirm this understanding is correct.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 97 of 151
The problem with the normal junction diodes is that when they conduct (when the filter is switched in
line), the far out of band signals may cause 2nd order IMD and the close or in band signals may cause
3rd order IMD. Note that the in band mean inside the BPF which may have many MHz bandwidth...
Actually the diode act like a mixer (such simple one diode mixers are used, especially at SHF)! You
may see how it hapen if consider the unwanted signals which will be mixed by the diode...
For example, when receiving the 14 MHz band here in EU, if big signals exist in the 41m broadcast
band, they may cause second order IMD (a 7110 and 7150 kHz BC stations may produce a ghost signal
at 14250 kHz as second order IMD; the same will hapen for different bands/frequencies...). Also, when
receiving the 40 m ham band, two signals on the 41m BC band may cause 3rd order IMD apearing as
ghost unreadable or carrier signals on the 40m amateur band. These are only particular examples, as
when the propagation is good, many hundreds of signals arrive simultaneously at the RX diode bandpass
filters input which may cause a lot of trouble, especially the stronger ones, the band may seem noisy or
ghost or unreadable signals may appear.
The advantage of the PINs is that they act (theoretically) as controlled resistor, they can rectify and mix
only for the signals at frequency lower than the one corresponding to its carrier lifetime and their
switching characteristics regarding the produced IMD are much better than for the normal diodes.
You may understand now why PINs having large carrier lifetime specification as the BA479 are better
for HF than the ones having very small carrier lifetime: they may maintain the same good IMD
behaviour at lower frequencies; and the bigest problem is at the lower bands, as Thomas measurements
confirm, it is just a practical confirmation of the theory...
Regarding the TX, the signals switched during Tx are few, they are the mixing products from the Tx
mixer and IMD is not a problem, as all are originating from the same signal, so a PIN will not make
large improvement for Tx. Actually, the Tx IMD are generated by the final amplifier...
Jeff, please note that the proffesional Rx, if not using relays for the BPF switching then they are using
good PIN diodes.
So, using PINs instead of the existing diodes is a good thing, especially if the above mentioned problems
seemed to occur (so include the presence of the strong signals of the broadcast bands!).
But if big signals are not present, if have a good quiet location like yours, and when considering the cost
and the effort involved, it may not worth doing it. It is only a decision of each of us, depending also on
the local Rx conditions...
This is what I intended to let you know before.
The mod shall be more usefull for me here, but I am not decided because I will have to sell all the radios
some day, so no reason for spending $ and effort for such mod, and I consider also that some buyers
don't like buying the modified radios...
Now I must admit I am not sure if I Need these pin diodes. Now propagation is not good I am only really listening
on 20 at about 3 UTC. According to Thomas [if one want to avoid losses] I probably should only be interested in
changing the diodes below 10 MHz, so this is really only going to improve 40m and 80m
Yes, this is done on some Rx, as the Icom R9000, where the Rx BPF are splitted in two banks (LF+MH
and HF) switched by good PINs.
the other diodes are normal.
[The TS950 SDX Rx BPFs are also separated in two banks by a HPF filter which attenuate the LF/MF
signals when using the higher bands, for avoiding the 2nd order IMD caused by the LF/MF broadcast
signals. This is the only difference between the TS950SD and TS950SDX regarding the RF board/front
end , and some amateurs that are not aware of this are still speaking of the "big difference" between the
two radios !!!]
Now Im convinced not to do the PIN diode mod. I think you are right I do not need it here, where there is little
interference.
==================================================================
I look forward to your reply.
Yours sincerely
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 98 of 151
Jeff King
PLL BOARD 1: Remove the Black Foam from Behind the Board
From: "kt4xw" <kt4xw@...>
Date: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:41 am
Subject: Re: TS-940 Very low output. update kt4xw
Hello,
This morning I had a chance to look at the rig again, and found out some things that were interesting.
The power adjust control on the
front panel, along with the carrier control in cw all seem to work. The output power goes up and down
with adjustment. With the power out
adjustment VR2 all the way up, the SSB power jumped to 100w, but I still only had 3w or so CW. The
IC meter showed 4 amps with no output
on SSB, so I check the current with a ohm meter and verified it was around 1.2a. A adjustment of the
IC0 control fixed that. With 100w
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Page 99 of 151
out on SSB, the IC meter read over 16a. The ohm meter read 8.5a to 9a Adjument of the IC meter adjust
pot fixed that. Then, on a fishing
expedition, I look at the micro processor board, and fixed several fish eyed solder joints, no help, but
made me feel better. Then,
under the Het. Osc. on the PLL unit there was a piece of black conductive foam that had deteriorated.
Also, it had a green/white
residue covering it. I cleaned all of it, and removed the rest of the foam. It helped alot. I had to readjust
VR2 back down to 110w or so,
and the CW output jumped up to 15-18w. But still, that is it on CW.
Thanks for all of your help!
Keith Spainhour, KT4XW
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Well, I finally got it working. There is a line on the PLL board that goes to the control unit that's labeled
"UL". This line goes low if one of the individual PLL IC's is in unlock from both the PLL board and the
carrier board. If you have dots on the display, first disconnect connector #2 on the PLL board and check
the voltage at connector #5 pin 5. If the voltage is "high" (~4.6V) then the unlock is on the carrier board.
If the voltage is still low (~0V) then replace the #2 connector and then check the voltage on the
individual IC's.
Check the voltage on IC8 pin 2, IC9 pin 2, IC19 pin 2 and IC17 pin 7. The one(s) that has(have) a low
voltage on them are the PLL's
out-of-lock. Troubleshoot that PLL circuit.
Curt, K8AI
PLL Board 4:
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Next, do the PLL/VCO service note [Editors Comment this is Service Bulletin 900],
which should be in the files section of the group. Requires an RF probe for your
DVM.
73, Bill K0ZL
CONTROL BOARD
VOLTAGE REGULATOR HEATS UP AND CAUSES A SHIFT IN BFO ON IF
BOARD
-----Original Message----From: thomas hohlfeld [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2005 9:23 a.m.
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: ts-940
(4) One of the voltage regulators on the control board warms up the bottom of the
940, which causes a small but detectable shift of the BFO on the IF board. I
removed this regulator from the control board and mounted it on the big aluminium
heat sink at the rear side of the TRX.
Best 73s for today, Jeff
Thomas, DF5KF
-----Original Message-----
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
in
BFO on
In my TS940 there is the shift in BFO due the warm up. The shift is about 150 Hz
per first 30 min of operation.
Thomas advice to be careful with the IC7 voltage regulator on the Control Unit.
From my assumption it is god to reduce the voltage drop on IC-s on the Control Unit
via AVR Unit thru reduction the signal 21T from 23.2V (see service manual page 103)
to 21 V.
May be the name of the signal has a sense? To drop the voltage we shall use D14
with 22 V or a bit less.
U (i/o) IC7 = 23.2-15=8.2 V
21-15= 6V
6:8.2 *100 =73%
So we would have a 27% reduction the dissipated power from all the 3 voltage
regulators in Control Unit.
Additional advantage of my suggestion is: the Q6 will not blow when AC 220 Volt
is low. It is happened in winter time in Russian country side due electrical
heating of houses.
When AC =190V, the voltage drop on Q103 too low, it current amplification is low
(beta is function from emitter-collector voltage), due that Q6 is trying to give
more drive to Q103 till Q6 had burn with D14. I have changed two times Q6 with D14
by the conditions.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
76 is far too hot to put your finger on. Something could be seriously wrong in the
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
It is hard to tell with above AVR circuit diagram, so lest redraw the circuit
below:
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
AC 4
D12
D13
C12
+
This diagram is
still under
construction.
Intention when
finished is to show
bridge rectifier can
be put in here
D10
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
D11
AC 3
5/14/2006
22D
22.8v
21.6v
21.6v
21.4v
DF5KF
measured
(original)
(above)
on circuit
diagram
22.7v
24.3v
21.2v
23.2v
ZL4AI replaced
D14 with
1N4748-209
1W
1N4748-209
22.8v
20.7v
20.5v
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
On page 8 of the promotional brochure above, its shows that the heat sink should run at or below 40
degrees Celsius.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
drop across the resistor is more than 18V, the Zener conducts, supplying enough voltage to start the
motor. Once the motor starts, the voltage across the resistor drops below 18V and the Zener is out of the
circuit. BUT this is only a temporary fix! If the motor freezes up, the 940 WILL overheat significantly.
73, Garey K4OAH
Chicago
-----Original Message----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Garey Barrell
Sent: Monday, 31 October 2005 4:10 a.m.
To: Bill Stewart
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Kenwood] TS-940S Cooling Fan Problem
Walt I have been through this several times. The problem is gummy or worn bearings in the fan motor. The
"locked rotor" current is too high, dropping the supply voltage (supplied through an 18k, 1W resistor)
too low to start the motor. The fan will start sometimes if you spin the blade to get it started. The fan
will start and run fine if the supply is stiff enough. All Bill has to do is measure the voltage across the
18k resistor and he will see about 22V. The transistor will be saturated, and about a volt across the
motor winding. An 18V Zener across the resistor will allow the motor to start, and once it starts the
voltage across the resistor will drop to about 12V, and about 9-10V across the motor. But once the
motor stops altogether, which it will, the transceiver WILL overheat, damaging AVR board parts first,
and if you're unlucky, the PS pass transistor will short putting 40V across the final and driver
transistors. The fan motor will sound cheap then...
73, Garey - K4OAH
Chicago
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
HOW IT WORKS
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
CW FILTERS
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
73 es gd dx
John, WA2OOB
SERVICE MANUALS:
These can be found from time to time on the internet. If you need a service manual, we offer it on a
comprehensive CD-ROM, which contains in PDF format, a complete set of TS-940 documents.
- 13 Service Bulletins (above)
-TS-940S Revised Service Manual, 62 pages,
-SO1 service adjustment instructions,
-SP-940 Service Manual,
-VS1 (Voice Synthesiser Unit) Service Manual,
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Phil W9IXX
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
BULBS
Ham To Ham #13 - October 1996
73's Ham To Ham column
c/o Dave Miller, NZ9E
7462 Lawler Avenue
Niles, IL 60714-3108
Lighten up
From George Vaughn WA4VWR comes this tip:
"I've found a local source for the bulbs that illuminate the Kenwood TS-940's sub-display. When one of
them went bad in my TS-940S, I removed both and measured the voltage applied to and the current
drawn by the single working bulb...12 volts at 75 milliamperes . A trip to the local Radio Shack (reg.
trade mark) store resulted in my discovering standard RS replacement bulbs of the exact size and shape
(RS Cat. #272-1092), but the RS bulbs draw 15mA less, or 60mA - and they lack the little green
"bootie" that the original Kenwood bulbs have. The green "bootie" can be carefully removed from the
old bulb, provided it hasn't been "cooked" into place too badly, and with the aid of a touch of clear
silicone grease, can be installed on the RS replacement bulb quite easily.
The 15 milliamp difference in current (and light output) is about the same as if one were to put a 47
ohm, 1/2 watt "bulb-life-extender-resistor" in series with the Kenwood bulb, so to me it's perfectly
acceptable. The biggest difference is in the price...$1.49 for two of the RS bulbs vs. $4.19 each ($8.38
total) plus $6.00 shipping, for the Kenwood relacements. That's $7.19 per bulb from Kenwood...75 cents
per bulb from Radio Shack. Guess which ones I'm using in the future.
What about the TS-940S's 'S-meter' bulbs...does Radio Shack carry a replacement for them? Yes, but
this time the difference is more pronounced. The bulbs in the S-meter are 12V at 75mA; the Radio
Shack replacement with wire leads (Cat. #272-1141) is rated at 12V but this time at only 25mA. It's
noticably dimmer than the stock Kenwood bulb, but it may be acceptable to many; you'd have to try it
and see. Personally, I chose to use Radio Shack's Cat. # 272-1143, a 12V, 75mA bulb, but with a screwin type of base. If you use the same bulb as I did, it's advisable that you not solder the 12 volt feed wire
directly to the screw-type base, but rather wrap a couple of turns of non-stranded, fairly stiff wire around
the screw-threads instead. Also be sure to connect the "ground" 12 volt feed wire to the screw-base, not
the "hot" wire. If the screw-base on this bulb were to ever cut through the insulating grommet, you
might damage your set if the hot 12 volt lead were connected to it and then shorted the supply bus to
ground. You can easily determine which feed wire is "hot" and which is ground by measuring each with
a voltmeter when the set is turned on. The "hot" wire will have 12 volts on it, and of course the ground
wire won't. Again, make sure that the ground wire connects to the screw-base shell of the replacement
bulb. The tip of the replacement bulb should be reasonably safe to solder the "hot" 12 volt lead to, using
the existing "solder-blob" as a connection point...do it quickly.
One other small caveat, the #272-1143 bulb is just a tad too large to fit into the existing holes in the back
of the TS-940S's meter, but a few seconds with a tapered reamer resulted in the right hole size for a nice
fit...take your time and don't get carried away! If done properly, the original Kenwood bulbs can still be
used later on if desired. By the way, it is necessary to remove the metal meter mounting bracket to
perform this particular step, but again, the cost savings are well worth the small extra effort."
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Moderator's note: We've all noticed how difficult it's become to change the pilot lamps inside of most of
today's radios? In the old days - when radios and lamps both were a lot bigger - changing a pilot lamp
was a pretty straight-foreword, easily accomplished job . The lamps were always mounted in sockets,
and usually just a twist of the wrist popped it right out, ready to receive a new one. Not so today...most
are now on small wires, soldered in-place and buried deep within the wiring of it's front panel. It usually
requires some internal "surgery", so many hams either don't bother changing them at all when they burn
out, or they leave the job for when the set has to be disassembled for some other troubleshooting reason.
George has offered some well-thought-out advise in his tips from above; here's some more for you to
consider.
What follows won't make the task of bulb changing any easier, but it just might double or triple the time
between pilot lamp failures. When a lamp does burn out, many probably think first of going back to the
manufacturer for a replacement. There's nothing wrong with that idea, especially if it's a very specialized
type of bulb. But as George pointed out, it's probably the most expensive and time consuming route to
take, especially when there may be a much more cost effective approach. Since Radio Shack stores stock
a number of small low voltage lamps, many of which will either fit directly or can be adapted to fit, a bit
of "ham innovation" is sometimes needed, as displayed in George's piece.
Take a look into what Radio Shack calls their 12V micro-lamp, Cat. #272-1092. It may well work as a
replacement bulb for LCD displays and other situations where a very small size lamp is in order. Hobby
stores also carry what they call "grain-of-wheat" lamps, which are very similar, but be sure to ask about
their voltage and current ratings. By the way, using a lamp rated at a higher voltage is fine, as long as it
will provide enough brightness once it's installed; in fact, it will last a lot longer than one rated at the
nominal voltage. Additionally, if you lower the voltage to a 12V lamp, even by just a couple of volts,
you'll increase it's life dramatically. I've seen test curves that prove that the life expectancy of a lamp
zooms upward as the voltage across it goes down, and vice versa of course. Putting a resistor in series
with each lamp that you replace, will often give you two to three times the life expectency from a given
bulb, everything else being equal.
There are three things to consider before doing this: 1) what value resistor will be needed, 2) what its
wattage rating should be and 3) how much loss of light is acceptable? Lowering the voltage to the lamp
will decrease its brightness - and shift its color toward the red region - so you'll have to visually judge
whether you can accept both of these consequences.
You can install the lamp, clip-leading a resistor in series with it, then looking at the meter or display
under normal room lighting, to see if it's okay for you own particular situation. To arrive at the right
resistor values, simply use Ohm's Law, plugging in the correct numbers for your own transceiver's lamp
supply:
Voltage drop desired divided by the lamp's rated current equals the resistance needed.
and
Voltage drop desired times the lamp's rated current equals the resistor's wattage.
By way of an example, let's take the Radio Shack #272-1092 lamp that I mentioned before, which has a
current rating of 60 mA or .06 Amp. Let's say we'd like to drop the 12 volts feeding the lamp down to 10
volts, or a 2 volt total drop. We plug in the numbers:
2 (volts) divided by .06 (amp) equals 33 ohms
and
2 (volts) times .06 (amp) equals .12 watt
Now we know that we'll need a 33 ohm, 1/4 to 1/2 watt resistor in series with each lamp in order to drop
the 12 volt lamp supply down to 10 volts. A 1/2 watt resistor will provide a 4 times safety margin for
heat dissipation (dissipation ratings for resistors generally assume their full lead length, in free air, so it's
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
safest to over-rate them by 2 to 4 times for shorter lead lengths and operation within confined
enclosures).
By the way, try to avoid using bulbs intended for flashlight service...they're often high brightness, low
life expectancy...since flashlights are usually on intermittently. There are charts available showing life
expectancy at rated voltages for various lamp type numbers. The lamp's manufacturer can provide this
information and it's also sometimes included in the more complete electronic supply house catalogs. It's
surprising how much different lamps do vary in their average life expectations.
Dave, NZ9E
CONNECTOR PROBLEMS
The following is the most sensible write up I have ever read about connector problems It is from the site
below which contains other information and is well worth reading.
http://www.qsl.net/n5iw/ts940.html
Next I detached and then re-attached each of the connectors mounted to the transceiver printed circuit
boards. Systematically I went over each of the boards carefully; unplugging the connector, inspecting
and then reconnecting each one. This process went routinely until I got to the main control board. On
this board the fourth connector checked pulled completely out of the board ( the male portion of the
connector completely separated from the board) leaving two very clean holes in the board. I make a note
of the faulty connector and continued checking plug connections. The very next plug checked also
pulled out of the board. My inspection of the rest of the connectors did not yield any more problems
quite so obvious.
I removed the board, inspecting the faulty connection points, and re-soldered the plug bodies back into
the board. .
Before removing the connectors I sketched a simple schematic and labeled it and the plug connectors.
This enabled the return of the connectors into the original configuration without doing a lot of schematic
wire tracing. I removed all remaining old solder from the original plug bodies and solder connections,
then re-inserted the male plug bodies into the pcb board. I re-soldered these parts back into the boards
and while the board was accessible to the solder iron; I used a jeweler's loupe and carefully inspected the
solder points all over the board. I pay special attention to the plug body pins for the numerous
connectors on the board. This process pays off big results! I find at least 8 other connectors on this same
board that are obvious cold solder connections ( the pins were obviously "floating" in the old solder, and
moved visibly when touched). This discovery was very encouraging; an obvious root cause of some of
the intermittent issues this rig has had in the past. I suspect that the loose plugs and many of the cold
solder joints were actually caused by the WIGGLE and Plug/Unplug technique so heavily endorsed in
earlier internet comments and reports. The first time it probably had good results; over time this
technique actually increased the amount of transceiver issues.
I reheated the solder on the connector pads that are bad, discovering that the old solder would not stick
to the plug body pins. I used a solder vacuum and solder wick to carefully remove the old solder from
each of the old pins that I know and even suspect are bad. This process is repeated for any solder point
that is suspect on the rest of the components on the board. As you can imagine; this process takes some
time. When I completed the control board, it was re-installed into the rig, and the transistor heat sinks
and disconnected plug bodies were re-installed.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
After completing the process noted above; I repeated the process for each of the other remaining boards
on the rig. There are 5 other main pcb boards on the rig, not counting the little specialized boards located
on the back of the main panel. I went through each pcb with the same process; finding and correcting
more bad or suspect solder connections. In summary total; I corrected 2 completely disconnected plug
bodies, 12-14 visually obvious cold-solder connections and another 30 or so suspected bad connections
on various plugs and components.
BATTERIES: [INTERNAL]
There are two
1. Behind switch Unit L (X412-1600-00)
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
BATTERY REPLACEMENT
From: Jeff King [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, 22 March 2006 5:16 a.m.
To: 'Jim Bazsika'
Subject: RE: [TS930S] 940 clock display stopped working
Jim,
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Definitely the battery behind the LCD has lost voltage. Almost exactly same happened to my 940.
What I found was voltage on this battery had dropped to 1.7V, Should be 3V. found if I left the 940, 24 hours the
battery recovered up to 1.8V and the sub display worked, for about 20 minutes, and then became scrambled
letters again.
Anyway what to do to fix.
The TS-940 has internal batteries which are similar to a CR430. 3V lithium at 285 mAh.
Have a look at this page which explains battery replacement in an 850.
http://n6tr.jzap.com/850BAT.html
Genuine Kenwood batteries have metal tabs and leg pin wires on them and are soldered to the boards.
You don't need to use genuine batteries.
The table below shows many of the 3 volt dc coin type batteries you can use!!
Model Capacity Dimensions (mm)
Weight
Number (mAh)
(g)
A B
C D
E
CR 2016
RH
CR 2025
RH
CR 2032
RH
CR 2032
RH1
CR 2325
RH
CR 2430
RH
CR 2430
RH1
CR 2450
NRH
CR 2450
NRH1
CR 2477
NRH
75
148
200
200
190
285
285
540
540
950
You can buy a CR2430 at Dick Smith or Radcliff. If you want battery with legs which is easily soldered then go to
Radcliff behind the Railway Station. It will take you a week to get. Maybe longer because they are unhelpful with
finding small parts. But they definitely can obtain special batteries.
Any way I brought a CR2430 and soldered wires onto it. Wasn't easy to solder.
Then at Dick smith I brought two push on plugs, with legs that can be soldered directly into a board similar to
those used in later model Kenwoods.
http://dse.resultspage.com/search.php?sessionid=44202d9e016908da273fc0a87f9906b7&site=&w=p2731
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Cut one leg off the plug and solder it into the hole that was left when you unsoldered the old battery.
To get at the battery remove the top side screws on the front, loosen bottom screws and tip the front face forward.
Then un plug, take out screws and remove Switch Unit L.
Unsolder the battery wires, and soldered in the new plugs.
Reassemble.
Find a small enclose to hold the battery, so if it leaks the enclose contains the leaking fluid.
Attach this container by Velcro to a convenient point inside the radio.
This way next time I replace a battery it will be just a plug in without having to take the 940 apart so much.
Next time I will look at using AAA size 3V lithium in a battery holder. With the potenetail long life from newer AAA
lithium battery may never have to replace the again.
Yours sincerely
Jeff King
ZL4AI / DU7
Exists
Removed
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
Removed
5/14/2006
BOARD
R118 as
4.7K
between
Q13 and
L17 to
C96
IF
BOARD
C8
Exists
Exists
Removed
Exists
Removed
IF
BOARD
C9
Exists
Exists
Removed
Exists
Removed
Removed
IF
BOARD
C10
Exists
Exists
Removed
Exists
Removed
Removed
IF
BOARD
R220
Replaced Replaced
with
with wire
wire 105 105
Replaced
with wire
105
unknown. Any
information would
be appreciated.
Reason removed
unknown. Any
information would
be appreciated.
Reason removed
unknown. Any
information would
be appreciated.
Reason removed
unknown. Any
information would
be appreciated.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
ASB0921B.JPG TS-940S SSB Talk Power Improvements S/N 601XXX - 708XXX 51.11 KB
ASB0951A.JPG TS-940S Erratic Display (Remove The ROM Socket) 84.33 KB
ASB0951B.JPG TS-940S Erratic Display (Remove The ROM Socket) 49.49 KB
ASB0988A.JPG TS-940S MFR-485 Driver Transistor Changes (Blue Dot) 79.27 KB
ASB0988B.JPG TS-940S MFR-485 Driver Transistor Changes (Blue Dot) 29.54 KB
ZL4AI found that some of the diagrams Kenwood put on the web cannot be read. Legible versions can
be obtained by emailing Kenwood. It helps to point out there is considerable Health and Safety issue /
liability fro Kenwood if an Amateur using information makes a mistake because the information
Kenwood provided could not be correctly interpreted.
ZL4AI adds:
from page 78 / 79 of the TS-930 service manual, confirms the above:
Japanese SG 0dB = American 0.5uV
from page 51 of TS-940 Operating Manual
If a standard signal generator ( SSG) is available, adjust VR-4 so the S meter indicatesS-9, at
14.175MHz for a 40 dB (50uV) signal
from page 69 of the TS-930 service manual
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
The TS-940 Service manual on pages 72-73 is not very easy to understand: ZL4AI have prepared the
extended service instructions:
Measurement
Item
Condition
6.1
S meter
BAND:
14.175MHz
SSG output :
14.175 MHz 0dB/u
6.2
S meter
6.3
6.4
Test
equipment
Unit
SSG
AF V.M
SP
SCOPE
SSG output:
8dB /u
AGC: FAST
SSG output:
40dB /u
SSG output:
100dB /u
6.5
Adjustment
Terminal
Unit
Part
Method
IF
VR3
RF
VR1
IF
VR1
IF
VR4
ADJ to S9
Verify full scale
Repeat ADJ S1 a
S9
dBm values quite interesting to compare with other expert observations, tahts S Meters are not linear:
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [AMPS] s meter calibration
From: [email protected] (Larry Molitor)
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:57:40 +0100
At 07:45 AM 6/13/00 +0100, Ian White, G3SEK wrote:
>According to the lab reviews in the magazines, most modern receivers seem to be calibrated so that the
difference between S9 and S9+20 is pretty close to 20dB. Below S9, the scale looks linear but the dB
per S- point is not1 It typically takes many more dB to get from S2 to S3 than it does to get from S8 to
S0 - often less than 3dB per S-point at the top end.
>It doesn't have to be that way - there are engineering solutions that could easily deliver the full IARU
specification - but when everybody on HF is "five nine" anyway, who cares any more?
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
>
>73 from Ian G3SEK
Ian and all,
As has been said before, the manufacturers correctly assume that the majority of buyers are technical
idiots. Have a S-meter that has 1 dB per S-unit and about 5 uV for S 9 is a good marketing thing.
Besides it's a lot cheaper to build. I would hope that anyone who actually cares about such things would
take the time to "calibrate" the meter on their store-bought radio. Since I do this with all my radios, I
would not care to pay extra for a manufacture to make a feeble attempt at a real meter.
Using a HP8648C generator (at 14.1 MHz) this last time, I produced the following chart for my
FT1000D:
S1 = -103.5 dBm
S2 = -101.5 dBm
S3 = -98 dBm
S4 = -94 dBm
S5 = -90 dBm
S6 = -85 dBm
S7 = -80 dBm
S8 = -75 dBm
S9 = -70 dBm
+10 = -60 dBm
+20 = -51 dBm
+30 = -42 dBm
+40 = -33 dBm
+50 = -24 dBm
As you can see, it's kinda poor at the bottom end, but quickly stabilizes at about 5 dB per S-unit. With
S-9 being within 3 dB of 50 microvolts and 5 dB per S-unit, this particular FT1000D has the best Smeter out of the 10 or so radios I've checked.
With a chart like this handy, it gives you a real good idea just how good the other guys antenna
is or how much gain his amp really has. While the guy on the other end is usually an idiot and won't
believe what you tell him, at least you will know for sure.
Since it's so easy to do this, I'm surprised there aren't more folks with handy little charts for
their radios. I know, not everyone has a room full of good test equipment. But I bet most people on this
list know someone who does or has access to it one way or another. Give it a whirl, you might be
amazed!
73,
Larry - W7IUV
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
PARTS
(800) 637-0388 www.kenwoodparts.com
East Coast Transistor has an online data base with part numbers: Very helpful in identifying the correct
part. They also supply some parts not listed on the database.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Kenwood Corporation
Kenwood Electronics Australia Pty Ltd
Kenwood Electronics Europe UK
K0BX Kenwood Interface HomePage
850 Repair Page
K0BX Kenwood Interface HomePage
Piexx Company - Home
International Radio Service Division
http://home.fuse.net/jg/Chips/TS940Chip.html
QSL.Net Index
Yahoo! Groups : TS-940
Yahoo! Groups : Kenwood TS-950SDX
AAvid
The Defpom Kenwood Radio Modifications Page
KENWOOD MODIFICATIONS - LINKS - XE1BEF PAGE
K0CKD's Topband/Kenwood Resources & More!
The Kenwood Archives
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/239
http://efjdevices.net/Problems.html
HELP WANTED
More information on the Pin Diode Improvements would be appreciated
PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS
A lot of reviews found at
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/239
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Very little SSB testing, but the heterodyne filter works as good (or better) than the one on the 59+ DSP.
Did not have multiple heterodynes to
see how it works, but would guess OK.
Forgot to check for transverter input!!! Dope! Suppose that auxiliary receive antenna is possible
somehow.
COMPARISON OF TS940 TO YAESU 1000MP:
I borrowed K9IG's 1000MP for similar testing. I felt like I should sign away rights to my firstborn
grandchild if I damaged it, so better believe I
was REAL careful with it and read the manual first!! But Greg seemed unconcerned that I was driving
away with HIS 2500 dollar radio in my truck.
I set up similar to the TS570 test, and as luck would have it the power company chose to temporarily fix
the line noise (after five months!!!) that
day. With all the mechanical and DSP features kicked in (including a DSP59+ on the 940), the TS940
and the FT1000MP performed about the same on 160 through the other bands (CW only tests). Some of
the controls WERE tricky, and the preset filters on the 1000MP took some getting used to. There must
be about two million bells and whistles on the 1000MP, and my fat fingers found a few by accident. It is
an impressive rig... but without line noise, not enough to make me dump the old 940. Without the noise
reduction, the 940 is OK.
One thing I noted... small point... S meter readings were comparable for both rigs at low signals and
noise levels... but S meter readings were higher
on the 940 for stronger signals... of course, that does not mean much, as an S meter ain't that accurate...
just needed more attenuation with 940.
I packed up the 1000MP and got it ready to take back to Greg (about 8 miles from me)... then
Indianapolis Power and Light came through just in time!!!
Line noise returned, but only at S9 levels. I quickly patched the 1000MP back into the setup and
compared reception. In this case (with strong line
noise), the 1000MP was better at pulling weaker signals up out of the crud. Even with noise blanker on,
the 940 lost some of its ears. Noise blankers on
both rigs eliminated the noise HEARD, but the 1000MP was better at finding signals and bringing them
up than the 940 with DSP59+ was.
4/15: Bill Tippett reports that his 1000MP is extremely clean (no intermod products observed) compared
to the TS930 he retired.
COMPARISON WITH OMNI VI+
I wanted to test an Omni VI+, but none to be borrowed locally, so I asked NE3H for his opinion (see
above). In the meantime, power company has repaired a number of defective lightning arresters, a bad
transformer, and God knows what else to the point where my line noise is now S3 or less most of the
time..so the 940 gets a reprieve. I fact, even though it's almost too late in the season, am working DX on
160 most evenings now when I could not hear it in winter!!! With a little luck I might hit 50 countries
for the 96-97 season.
I wish I could find the mail messages I sent to George because there was more specific info in them...
but this report is the bottom line. From my own observation, the 1000MP and the TS570 outperform the
TS940 receiver with high line noise levels. Mechanical filters are needed on both rigs. But with little
line noise the 940 is still pretty dang good.
Thanks to K9IG (formerly KO9Y) and N9QCT for the loan of their rigs.
Mel KJ9C
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
-FAQ on WWW:
http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
MODIFICATIONS
POWER SUPPLY IMPROVEMENTS
-----Original Message----From: John [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, 10 April 2005 3:06 a.m.
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Advice on what to do upgrade TS-940 PowerSupply
First thing
Replace all the Zener diodes on the AVR board with 1 watt Units. Same voltage values. you will have to
open the hole up slightly to allow for larger leads on new parts
D-3
D-4
D-8
D-9
D-14
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
D-1, 2 ,10-13 are all ok ... just leave them. They are 2.5amp at 100Vpiv
Q-1 and Q-2 , Q-6 are fine. Just replace them with same.
replace C-3 ,C-4,C-6 with 2200UF 50volts , replace C-13 too.
Put a 47 ohm 1/2 watt resistor in series with the collector of Q-6 to limit inrush current on turn on.
Replace the pass transistor Q101, Q102 with 2N5886 ......if these short it puts 42 volts on final unit
and burns out the expensive driver transistor in about 30 seconds
Resolder the complete board & deflux it too.
========================================================================
Observations by ZL4AI
Original Diode Specifications:
ZL4AI thinks the file below gives MTZ diode operating values.
MTZ specs MTZJ_LESHAN.pdf
Possible Replacement Diode Specifications:
1n_Formosa.pdf
1n_General.pdf
1N_JDG.pdf
1N_Leshan.pdf
1N_Rectron.pdf
1n47__Vishy.pdf
1n4728A to 1n4753A Hitachi.pdf
bzx85C__Fairchild.pdf
Original Original 1
D1,
D2,
D10
to
D
13
D4 500
mW
D8
Original 1
500
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
1N4742
1W
12V
BZX85C12
1.3W
1N4746
BZX85C18
5/14/2006
mW
D14 500
mW
1W
18V
1.3W
18V
Hitachi
1N4748
1W
22v +- 5%
21v 23v
Fairchild
BZX85C22
1.3W,
22V
Leshan
1N4747
20v +- 5%
19v 21v
ZL4AI put in
1N4748-209
and measured
at
pin 5-21T on AVR
see
AVR_D14_replac
From Eham
RE: Kenwood ts 940s avr board Reply
by N0XWR on February 28, 2006
you won't find an AVR board for sale new. you should endeavor to fix the one you have. first, check
regulator Q103. it is in the rear left corner of the rig as the rig faces you. it is on the heatsink for the
power supply. there are three regulators side by side. it is the one on the far left. no matter whether you
replace it or it is good, it is imperative that you cut the connector off of the three wire harness that plugs
on to regulator Q103 and solder directly to it. this harness comes from plug-in #2 on the AVR. over time
the connector overheats and fails and cannot carry the 20-30 volts to and from that regulator. i have seen
the problem many, many times. when the connection to that regulator fails, it takes out Q6 on the AVR
board, so check it next. clif at AAvid, now retired helped me get through the problem. also check D3,
D9 and D14 which are zener diodes on the AVR board. they can be checked right on the board with a
multimeter. the board can be removed easily. as you unplug the wiring harness use a sharpie and number
each connector so that you can reinstall it easily. make a diagram, too. use small long nose forceps to
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
unplug the connectors to the AVR board. Incidentally, Q103 is part #NTE377 available at mouser. Q6 is
part #NTE382 also available at mouser. i have the part numbers for the zeners if you need them. 73s
Jerry N0XWR
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
GEIL CHIP
a chip available from Giehl electronics in Cincinnati that will slow the tuning rate to 2 khz per
revolution on the main dial of a kenwood ts-940
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
FETs
5/14/2006
73,
Ed Alves KD6EU
USA
Hi all,
Jeff, thank you for keeping me informed about the TS940 work and about your website, and
please continue doing it...
Please also pass any usefull info to me also, I am interrested about.
Using switches for comparison of the normal/reverse FET state may be not feasible, even in the
case of using shielded cables.
The added hardware (switches and cables) will unbalance the mixer in the case of Q4 or may
cause other Rx problems in the case of Q10, so the comparison may not be made this way or can
be irrelevant.
A better aproach shall be using hole contact pins for the FETs and reversing them one or another
position for comparison.
Don't let the contact pins there, don't forget removing them as the Q10 runs at high drain current,
and so it runs normally very hot and its cooling is made mostly by the terminals conduction and
by the PCB traces path....
Tnx & GL,
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
73,
Traian Belinas, YO9FZS
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006
Hello Jeff,
PY1NR asked me to also say that he modified 2 (two) TS-940S, from 2 different
originations. The same improvements of gain and AGC were found. He cannot
precisely measure the gain improvement due to poor instrumentation.
He also wants to emphasize that is very important to fix all contact fails (very
common in many TS-940S). The contact fails could "mask" the improvements
that the modification may occur.
There's another Brazilian ham that did the mod and found no difference the first
time. But later on he found a defect on the VR2 trimpot. After this correction he
got 6 dB more at 1,8 Mhz and 12 dB at 28 Mhz. It's also very important to fix all
eventual defects before the make the mods described by PY1NR.
Thanks and regards
EG - PY1BR
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~jaking/TS-940_02.htm
5/14/2006