1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Second Dish for 119?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by coreese, May 6, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DBordello

    DBordello Legend

    125
    0
    Dec 16, 2006
    This may be obvious, but did you switch which input each dish was plugged into and see if the result was still only 110? Perhaps only 1 leg of the splitter is allowing RF to pass.
     
  2. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    It took me a smoke to "get there" too.
    Swapping inputs would give more "insight".
     
  3. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,435
    929
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    I did not remove the foil on the 119 LNB of the AU9 during the test hookup. I did remove after I wired back to normal (and 119 is working properly).

    No, I did not swap the two dish connections. That would have been a good check, but after the previous checks I did, and having measured voltage and tone going to each dish, I didn't think to try doing that.

    My test setup is now all taken apart and put away. I don't think I'm going to set it back up to make these two suggested checks.

    Carl
     
  4. Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    246
    Nov 15, 2005
    So what you're saying is you'll try this later tonight. :)

    Thanks for all the great work, Carl.
    Tom
     
  5. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    Thanks Carl,
    "in your spare time" play with it and make sure your "honey dew" is done.
    This would be so easy with a signal generator & a spectrum analyzer, but given what you have, there should be no reason you can't prove that it will or won't work.
    If I had the splitters, I'd be doing it for "old times sake". :D
     
  6. litzdog911

    litzdog911 Well-Known Member

    12,202
    63
    Jun 23, 2004
    Mill Creek, WA
    Maybe it's the 22kHz switching tone that's getting messed up? That might explain why 110 gets through, but not 119.
     
  7. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    The "tone" is for the switch & not to power the LNB. The 110 signals were coming because the DC [[& tone\ was going to the AU9 & the 119 was covered with foil to block the signals. Since the external LNB didn't go through the multi-switch [of the dish] and was getting PC power, it looks to be a "dead" RF port on the splitter [now reversed & being used as a combiner].
    The "next step" when Carl as the free time would be to: set it back up, then see if signals come from the 110 & 119, then swap inputs to see if they come through the other port. If they do then the reversed splitter isn't the problem, as it will pass RF from both legs to the common port, in the needed direction.
     
  8. DBordello

    DBordello Legend

    125
    0
    Dec 16, 2006
    After a few too many beers I sit here wondering why this isn't working. I have two thoughts.

    1) Carl, if you could, put the splitter back in place as you had it and block 119, leave 1 leg empty. As before you should only get 110. Then try switching which leg the AU9 is connected to. If you still get 110 then both legs are passing RF and back to the drawing board.

    2) Aren't all of 110's transponders 'shifted' to even #s? If so, it possibly means that only 1 splitter combination may be working (18v I think) causing the multiswitch to only see even transponders. Perhaps it isn't that we aren't seeing 119, but rather that only half of the setup is working.

    #2 is easily disproven if he get A) Odd 110 transponders B) No Even 119 (are there any?)

    I feel like the setup he has should work, maybe there is something we are missing or the splitters are monkeying with things too much. It would be interesting to see if you could combine Ka-hi, Ka-lo with another dish with the 110/119 signal. Does anybody have a phase 3 and a 5-lnb they feel like playing with? I wish i did.
     
  9. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    I wish I had your beer...
    I think that's just what Carl will be trying when he can get some free time.
    "The plan" once we can find out if the splitter(s) will work is to do this with a AU9 Slimline for just the reasons you're thinking about.
    The goal is to use a AU9 that doesn't have a line of sight to the 119 because of trees & then add a single LNB dish [with dual outputs] at a slightly different location so it will get a good line of sight to the 119 SAT. If "we" can get this to work then there will be more members that can get all of the signals when they live in a restricted location.
    Many of "us" think it can work but for the moment the splitters aren't behaving as nicely as they could when we use them as combiners.
    Well that's the exercise going on here. :D
     
  10. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,435
    929
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    I really hate to dissapoint, but I have taken down the 18" dish that I was using for 119, and won't be putting it back up in the short term. Had it mounted to the back deck, and that is now getting cleaned up before the house guests arrive.

    DBordello, as to your second point above, first I measured the voltage output going to both dishes on both legs - it was good. Second, if that were the problem I should have still seen the 119 even transponders. So whatever the problem, it wasn't a bad splitter/combiner as far as passing voltage.

    The LNB/internal electronics in the AU9 creates an rf signal at the IF (intermediate frequency) for each transponder and sends that out, regardless of whether the intelligence that is modulated onto it (the actual data from the 119 transponder) is present or not. Simply covering the LNB assembly doesn't stop that basically unmodulated signal for the 119 transponders from being created.

    So what I ended up with was the mix of two rf signals (at the IF) one containing the intelligence (signal from 119) and one not containing it. What happens when you beat two transmissions of the same frequency against each other? You can't "understand" the mix. That is what I believe is happening here and until someone finds a way to modify the AU9 so that it does not produce the IF, this approach isn't going to work.

    Carl
     
  11. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    I've worked a lot with mixed signals, & I'm not sure this is the problem, but this can be proved without the complete setup.
    Carl, can you mock-up your splitters [again] and see if the RF will pass through both legs by just using your current receiver? All "we" really need to know is that both legs will pass RF through the reversed splitter(s). If they do then I see no need to to test further. If one leg doesn't pass RF, then at some future time it might be worth further testing.
    "Signal in >>Signal out", then the other port, with what you have now. :)
     
  12. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,435
    929
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    Set the splitters back up, back to back the way I had them before. Connected the common ("input") of one to the receiver and the other common ("input") to an output port of a 5x8 multiswitch. then connected one of the "outputs" on one of them to one of the "outputs" on the other one.

    With no power insertion, I got all zeros on all transponders on all satellites.

    Then I inserted 13V with 22KHz and got odd transponders on 119. Then I inserted 18V with 22KHz and got even transponders on 110 and 119. The insertion was done on the other "output" port of the splitter connected to the 5x8.

    The splitters, in the configuration I am using them, appear to be properly passing RF.

    Carl
     
  13. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    That supports your idea of "something" coming from the "masked" 119 LNB.
    Enjoy your house guests.
    I'll need to beat my brain up as the only thing coming from the LNB should be noise, which by nature is random & can be summed to another with nothing more than a 3 dB increase in noise so the signal to noise ration would be 3 dB less.

    Thanks Carl.
    Can [or would] you post your splitter combination?
     
  14. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,435
    929
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    The two splitters (brands) I used were:
    Applied Telecom AHFS-2DSe, 5-2300 MHz dual port power passing, and
    Steren 201-242, 40-2050 MHz dual port power passing.

    Attached is a pdf of a quick drawing to show how I hooked everything up both in the 2-dish test, and in the last quick test to verify rf passage. It didn't really matter which splitter brand was used in which position.

    View attachment 5302

    Carl
     
  15. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    Everything in the drawing looks fine. "If" I were to wonder what might be changed would be the splitter to the "non working" LNB. From the drawing, the power is going in the "other" port than the working LNB [110]. I'm sure I'm stretching...for a "flaw".
    So if this mock-up is ever tried again:
    1) leave external LNB out & check primary signals from 110 & 119
    2) remove coax from primary and check secondary 119 LNB
    3) remove 22 kHz tone from secondary LNB to see if signals are present.
    3) cover primary with foil & check signal. I used a cat food can on mine.
    4) connect secondary 119 LNB and see that this gives the same results as the first time.
    5) swear at me for wasting your time. :)


    Even IF this would work, it doesn't solve how to power all of the LNBs.
     
  16. DLM-10

    DLM-10 New Member

    7
    0
    May 8, 2007
    I have been reading this thread because I have the problem with trees and no sat signal on 119 now. With the directional problems with splitters ect. what would happen if you hard wired a Tee of sorts for testing, power and signal flows both ways. Sorry if this is a silly suggestion, sometimes when you eliminate all the logical possibilitys the illogical ones are all thats left. I would like to find an answer to this myself I just got hd programing and have lost half my channels since the trees got leaves.

    Rod
     
  17. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    :welcome_s To the forum(s).
    So far it doesn't look to have a directional RF problem with the splitters used in Carl's last test. The DC power does seem to be a problem & why he used a second set of splitters to input the power.
    The dish [or LNBs] have a local oscillator that is used to convert the Ku signals down to an intermediate frequency range of 950-1450 MHz, which is the signal range in this exercise. If this can be made to work, then the next setup is for the Ka Hi/Lo bands [Hi 1650-2150 MHz & future Lo 250-750 MHz] to be passed through the setup.
    As these are all RF, matching or impedance is very important.
    Your "T" or use of a tap could be used for the power insertion to power the LNB with DC [13 or 18 volts].
     
  18. Ext 721

    Ext 721 Icon

    555
    0
    Feb 26, 2007
    So long as the 119 LNB on the ka/ku has NO signal whatsoever, you should be okay. I'd reccommend covering it. The reason is, the 2 LNBs picking up 119 signal will have 1X signal, but 2X background noise.
     
  19. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    My first D* dish was a phase III
    Before this I had single & dual LNB E* dishes.
    I was told back then that the only thing different between the two [D* & E*] were the switches, & that the LNBs were the same.
    I've read up on the C SAT upgrade kit which has a different LNB [1.061-1.149 GHz], a splitter [used as a combiner], and two cables. This is all to combine it with the 119 LNB.
    The 22 kHz tone is for the switch & not the LNBs.
    So to "walk through" what is going on:
    SAT A 101 LNB uses 13V for powering the RHCP [odd tps] & 18v for the LHCP [even tps].
    SAT B 119 LNB is the same, but the 22 kHz tone is for the switch [and stops in the switch]
    SAT C 110 LNB in combined with the SAT B LNB before the switch [both are selected with the 22 kHz tone]

    A - - C - - - - B ---LNBs
    | - - - \ - - - /
    | - - - - \ - /
    | - - - - - | ---both of these lines have 13 or 18 volts to select even or odd tps.
    [- switch -] here is where the 22 kHz tone is used [and stops]
    - - | | | | outputs

    So the C or B LNB should be able to be relocated. The fact that the splitters don't pass DC and 22 kHz from one leg in the reverse direction is what is needed as one leg would need to pass it to the primary dish to "lock" the dish multi-switch into a pass through mode], while the other leg blocks the 22 kHz tone. On this leg the DC voltage needs to be inserted to power the secondary dish [LNB]. The secondary LNB needs to have a dual output so one can have 13 volts [odd tps] and the other 18 volts [even tps],
    As this is what D* did in their early dishes, I don't see why this wouldn't work using a AU9 and a WB68 multi-switch, adding in the Ka bands.
    This is just an evolution of what D* started with.
    Your need to have a line of sight to 99, 101, 103 SATs as the LNB is a "combo".
    110 or 119 should be able to be from a secondary dish with dual outputs combined into the multi-switch inputs [but will need to have DC inserted into each to power the LNB].

    While this hasn't been successfully mocked-up yet, I still think this will [or see no reason why it won't] work.
    I believe it is based on what D* is doing [or has done already]. IMO
     
  20. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    That is the only "downside" -- noise x 2, as I see it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page