In earlier posts, Bill, W2BLX responded to a post by Johnny Siu, VR2XMC. These
posts are below.
I would like to comment on Johnny's rebuttal, because the root of the problem
may be semantic. Johnny justifies his remarks about ergonomics by discussing
tin boxes and rusty screws. Neither have much to do with ergonomics, unless
you add the maintenance issue, and even there, ergonomics only deals with the
ease of, say, replacing the rusty screws. Whether or not they rust is an
engineering issue. Ergonomics deals with the design of the interface between a
machine (device) and a human who uses it. It would extend to the design of
software, and to the speed at which at device responds to inputs, but not to
the particular material used to build a device, or how much power it uses or
puts out. The aforementioned issues are not irrelevant to the device design,
but the final word on these belongs to electrical, software, and mechanical
engineers. With regard to a piece of electronic equipment, ergonomics deals
with the usability and maintainability of the equipment.
With that said, ergonomics are always a compromise. The K3 has a minimum of knobs and buttons and dials with a maximum of functions. It does this at the cost of using knobs that also have switches, and switches that respond differentially to a momentary push or to a press. The limited space on the panel precludes complete labeling of all these functions, and it is necessary to memorize a number of double- and triple-switch functions. I must agree that, a year on, I still do not have all the ones I use completely learned. For example, the knob just to the upper left of the main tuning knob: (1) press to toggle between separate high-low control and width control, but this will also change the function of the knob to its left, because both are needed in these functions, and the knob to the left, when pushed, does exactly the same thing as this knob; (2) press and hold this knob, and it toggles between two preset widths, both of which can be changed when they are selected by
this toggling (but push and hold the knob to its left, and different things happen); (3) turn the knob and it is a width control when shift/width control is selected, but it is a high-frequency limit control when hi-lo is selected.
I have to side with Johnny that this is not an ultimately clear ergonomic
design, but it certainly reduces the number of controls needed on the panel of
the K3. Perhaps Elecraft should come up with two or three additional
faceplates that you can plug into the K3 so as to give you independent control
of every function without using any multiple-function controls. They could
hang down like an apron from the bottom of the rig, which would require about
2-1/2 times the faceplate size it now has. Or, perhaps someone should design a
software-control program for the K3 that separates every function and allows
you to click a function and then control it with the keyboard up/down buttons
or the mouse. I have no idea whether or not this would be an improvement.
Jan Ditzian, KX2A, K3 owner, Certified Professional Ergonomics (Retired)
Original post:
In a post speaking to the Sherwood chart, it was said, "........too many
people jump on one number to rate (rank) equipment and totally disregard
things like ergonomics (If they didn't the K3 would be at the bottom of
the list)."
What is so bad about how the K3 is designed (ergonomics)? This is not
the first time I have seen this said. I do not find it particularly
challenging to use the panel controls or the menus - but, maybe that's
just me. Is it the lack of curves and swirls or plastic molding? I go
for functionality of design - not eye candy.
The only thing I did to improve the controls on my K3 was to add a
TenTec tire to the main VFO knob - it increases the diameter slightly
and has a nicer feel to it than hard plastic.
Bill K-Line
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 19:50:50 +0800 (SGT)
From: Johnny Siu<vr2...@yahoo.com.hk>
To: Bill W2BLC<w2...@nycap.rr.com>, "elecraft@mailman.qth.net"
<elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 - Ergonomics
Message-ID:
<1396525850.28937.yahoomail...@web193505.mail.sg3.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hello Bill,
As I mentioned in this forum in the past, Elecraft is excellent in?production
engineering.? They use real good?components for the critical parts but also use
the real cheapest components for the rest.? It is nothing wrong with?Elecraft
in terms of cost engineering and it is indeed a challenge to the design
engineer as well.
As a result, you are now getting a tin box (yes, the advantage is light
weight)?but with excellent specifications in numbers.? I never gave a high
score for the ergonomic of elecraft radios.? The screws in my K3 rust as well
and this never happens in any of my other radios.
From time to time, I have been asked by local hams about my comments about
elecraft radios.? I always say that?elecraft radios?are excellent but?users
have to face a deep learning curve.? I need to read the manuals from cover to
cover as well as KE7X's books.
To conclude, I would consider Elecraft radios are really good but I have to
accept less favourable ergonomics and relatively primitive enclosure and screws
(yes, I know I can pay merely USD20 for stainless steel screws for an over
$2.5k radio).
73
Johnny VR2XMC
K2, K3, KX3, KAT500, KPA500, P3
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
