New V2.6 AutoTuner Bug

  • 2
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 days ago
  • (Edited)
  I am using V2.49 with no trouble except Windows 10 update which was easily fixed. I installed V2.6 and discovered that my internal Autotuner would not tune some bands on my Carolina Windom. On 3.6 Mhz the tuner would not tune at all, SWR 3:3, on 3.75 tuned ok. on 14 meter band and the 10 meter band it would not tunel. The funny thing is if a cleared the memories I would get a one time tune only and back to no tune.
            Reinstall V2.49 and all started to work as normal, I am almost at the point of selling my radio. Flex needs to be more diligent in there software versions, I installed 2.51 and found that smartlink would let me in so I when back to V2.49. 
          This is not a "this piece of junk rant", your product is one of the best out there but please look at how you vet the software. We should not have one after another faults with a new Install.

Michael, VA3MD
Photo of Mike Lukasik

Mike Lukasik

  • 15 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
  • frustrated

Posted 4 weeks ago

  • 2
Photo of James Skala

James Skala

  • 107 Posts
  • 25 Reply Likes
Try to clear the tuners memories
Photo of Robert Lonn

Robert Lonn

  • 401 Posts
  • 143 Reply Likes
James,, I did exactly that with my Carolina Windom Antenna, 40-6 meter antenna... I normally re-set everything after an upgrade, no big deal... Hopefully Michael will do the same.. Welcome to the world of SDR radio and ADVANCED software application.. Been on my laptop and 6600M with 2.6, Stackers, Slicemaster, everything is working as it should.. 

Robert
Photo of Bill -VA3WTB

Bill -VA3WTB

  • 3981 Posts
  • 969 Reply Likes
VA3MD, the tuning problems your having has not been widely reported from all the other customers. It looks like the problem is a condition to your install.
After installing a factory reset is needed, did you do that? Even after rolling back it is a good idea.
Photo of Joe N3HEE

Joe N3HEE

  • 464 Posts
  • 110 Reply Likes
I have similar ATU issues on 80 meters on version 2.5.1. Nothing is tuning correctly on 80 meters like it was in 2.4.9.
Photo of Mike Lukasik

Mike Lukasik

  • 15 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Hi Bill
            I think that a factory reset would be the case if if was on all installed versions but just to go back to a older install and worked I would say no. Why should I have to completely redo my system on a new upgrade, I am not being difficulty but I would like some answers.
Photo of Bill -VA3WTB

Bill -VA3WTB

  • 3981 Posts
  • 969 Reply Likes
Mike, it is just a good practice. Mostly when people have strange problems that are not consistant with all users. 
It is not needed to completly re build your system after an upgrade, just import your profiles, in 3 seconds all is back the way you left it.

After any new upgrade, always factory reset your radio.....
Photo of Steven Linley

Steven Linley

  • 401 Posts
  • 68 Reply Likes
I am using v.2 3.9 because any version higher had glitches with CW, QSK, Recording. Now I read the new DAX forgets that it already updated?
Photo of Mike Lukasik

Mike Lukasik

  • 15 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Steven a friend of mine with a 6500 only uses v.2.3.9 because of the issues with higher versions.

Photo of Bill W2PKY

Bill W2PKY

  • 540 Posts
  • 94 Reply Likes
Seeing flacky results on my 6700 running 3.1.7. Have to click ATU button numerous times to get something near 1.2:1. Often the search stops with a 1.7 or higher SWR but if keep trying eventually a lower match will result. 
Have done numerous resets, cleared memories etc.  
Photo of Bill W2PKY

Bill W2PKY

  • 540 Posts
  • 94 Reply Likes
After speaking to Ken @ Flex support here is their response:

"I think that generally the radio is set to stop at 1.7:1 on difficult matches in order to limit the time it sends a carrier out on the air.  Generally this match is "Close enough" and the finals in the radio will handle it with no problem, and may not even engage the SWR protection power reduction.

It may be that the second push of the ATU Tune button starts it where it left off and lets it find a better match within the time window."

My radio seems to be performing as designed. 


Photo of Larry - W9FLA

Larry - W9FLA

  • 23 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I have seen the same thing with my 6700.  There was no change that I noticed between earlier versions until I went from v2.4.9 to v2.6.0.  Suddenly it took many attempt to to match my antenna on 80m.

A sweep of the antenna's SWR showed no apparent change.

A help ticket was opened with the resolution that perhaps the SWR (less than 3:1) put the program in an awkward place where it was hard to converge to 1.75:1.

I also pointed out that the MEM function now operated as a "Write Only Memory".  The 1.75:1 match can be used, but if the MEM is cycled Off, with the desired match stored, this solution is no longer available when the MEM is again turned On.  This then requires multiple attempts to restore the correct match.  Indeed, sometimes the tuning process would show "Success Mem" but the SWR value displayed with the Tune function would be the same as when the ATU was bypassed!

This AM, I decided to upgrade to 3.1.7.  After installing it, it could not obtain a license.  This PM, I saw the license server problem and, after several more hours, downgraded to 2.4.9.  Now my ATU quickly finds a match, as it did before, and I can cycle the MEM function On and OFF without losing the data.  Sigh!!!

Photo of HCampbell  WB4IVF

HCampbell WB4IVF

  • 296 Posts
  • 95 Reply Likes

Hope everyone who has encountered this problem with the new versions has submitted a trouble ticket like you did, with as many specifics as possible.  That way it’s sure to get Flex’s attention.

In the meantime, it might help to add a section of coax to see if it helps, since impedance seen by the ATU changes with feedline length (for non - 1:1 SWRs).  It doesn’t address the root cause, but easy to try and might in some cases get the impedance out of an “awkward place” as Flex put it.

BTW, I have a 80-10M OCF dipole.  It was a little tricky getting a match on all bands at first, and there a still a few ranges on that antenna which require an external tuner. 

Still on v2.4.9, and will probably hold off upgrading a bit longer for now until this is resolved.

Howard

Photo of VE7ATJ

VE7ATJ

  • 136 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
I have seen this same behaviour as well since upgrading from 2.4.9 to 2.6. I find tho, that pressing the ATU button multiple times will eventually get it to actually look for and find an appropriate match.
Photo of Jim G3YLA

Jim G3YLA

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Another me too here... very difficult getting a match on the new 2.6.1 after upgrade from 2.4.9  Antennas not changed and checked out ok, so its definitely the rig tuning which seems to have changed. Usually takes several goes, like 6 or more to get a match, whereas before it was one pass and job done.

I will submit a ticket...

73 de Jim
g3yla
Photo of Larry - W9FLA

Larry - W9FLA

  • 23 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
The bug persists in v3.1.8.  Also, as with v2.6.0, the MEM becomes a "Write Only Memory" and loses access to the stored band segment match when cycled from On to Off and back On.  It then can take, in my case, many (six or even more) presses of the ATU button to get the ATU relays to energize and indicate a result other than Byp.  To further frustrate me, when the "Success   Mem" is finally displayed, a check with the Tune button can sometimes show that the match result is not valid.

Note that with v2.4.9, on the same frequency (3.82 MHz) and antenna (ANT1), the match is found the first time the ATU button is pressed and the match value is retained when the MEM button is cycled from On to Off and back On.

Again, Sigh!!!
Photo of Bill -VA3WTB

Bill -VA3WTB

  • 3981 Posts
  • 969 Reply Likes
I just had a problem with mine, then realized the MON button was lit.
Photo of VE7ATJ

VE7ATJ

  • 136 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
As I noted before, I have the problem where I need to press the ATU button multiple times to get a 'reasonable ' match and I'm sure the MON button is off.
Photo of VE7ATJ

VE7ATJ

  • 136 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
Hi Guys... I submitted a Help Support Ticket on this and it has been identified as a possible software defect #7727.  For now, I've reverted back to 2.4.9.

Don
Photo of John, G3WKL

John, G3WKL

  • 42 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Same, here, detailed help ticket and feedback that it's a suspected software bug. Also referenced as #7727