Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

HR34 Error 47 (was CCK Weak Connectivity)


  • Please log in to reply
128 replies to this topic

#61 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:30 PM

"Resistors" not transistors are used in the terminations.
In the matrix of PHY Mesh, it looks like the nodes have changed from your earlier picture, but the values are about the same.

Changing the splitters will drop some of the loss, and these "should improve", but there may need to be some more work, as even low fifties just aren't that good, "but" should improve your Mesh.
A.K.A VOS

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#62 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:32 PM

"Resistors" not transistors are used in the terminations.
In the matrix of PHY Mesh, it looks like the nodes have changed from your earlier picture, but the values are about the same.

Changing the splitters will drop some of the loss, and these "should improve", but there may need to be some more work, as even low fifties just aren't that good, "but" should improve your Mesh.


Yes, you are correct, my error.

If the splitters don't do anything, what is the next step.

Jim

#63 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:37 PM

Yes, you are correct, my error.

If the splitters don't do anything, what is the next step.

Jim

The splitter "will do" something, but your next step will be "if they don't do enough", which then shifts to finding where the loss is coming from and trying to make changes for less of it.

While I know doing a "fancy layout" isn't very easy, if/when we get to this point, you'll need to guesstimate from each splitter, how long each coax is.

"Oh yeah" what about that mysterious "sixth coax"????

Have you removed it terminated the port and not had tuner errors???
A.K.A VOS

#64 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:50 PM

The splitter "will do" something, but your next step will be "if they don't do enough", which then shifts to finding where the loss is coming from and trying to make changes for less of it.

While I know doing a "fancy layout" isn't very easy, if/when we get to this point, you'll need to guesstimate from each splitter, how long each coax is.

"Oh yeah" what about that mysterious "sixth coax"????

Have you removed it terminated the port and not had tuner errors???


Going to work on the sixth coax when the kids go to bed. Should have an update in a couple hours.

Jim

#65 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:53 PM

Going to work on the sixth coax when the kids go to bed. Should have an update in a couple hours.

Jim

I'm kind of expecting the terminations to "cure" that problem, while I didn't have much hope for the loss/mesh problems.


Also the DECA networking pdf here has been changed/updated in hopes of helping to understand: http://www.dbstalk.c...ad.php?t=200024
A.K.A VOS

#66 OFFLINE   Shades228

Shades228

    Hall Of Fame

  • Banned User
  • 5,914 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2008

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:57 PM

I have only read this page and VoS is much smarter than I am when it comes to the RF stuff but the only question I have is why does it look like you have a jumper cable with a ton of spool?

#67 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 05 January 2012 - 06:35 PM

I'm kind of expecting the terminations to "cure" that problem, while I didn't have much hope for the loss/mesh problems.


Also the DECA networking pdf here has been changed/updated in hopes of helping to understand: http://www.dbstalk.c...ad.php?t=200024


Interesting development. I took the sixth unknown coax off but did not have a terminator for it. Still, I reset a couple boxes and ran system test with the only problems being the 48-190 home network interference error on the two upstairs boxes. The HR34 which has had this before and a hr20 that didnt before.

What is interesting is that the numbers are higher with 60's when I took the 6th coax out. Maybe you can better decipher the numbers. I will go out and by a resistor tomorrow and see if it makes a difference.

Jim

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20120105-202718-IMG_0067.jpg
  • 20120105-202732-IMG_0068.jpg


#68 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 05 January 2012 - 07:03 PM

Interesting development. I took the sixth unknown coax off but did not have a terminator for it. Still, I reset a couple boxes and ran system test with the only problems being the 48-190 home network interference error on the two upstairs boxes. The HR34 which has had this before and a hr20 that didnt before.

What is interesting is that the numbers are higher with 60's when I took the 6th coax out. Maybe you can better decipher the numbers. I will go out and by a resistor tomorrow and see if it makes a difference.

Jim

I think what you're seeing is that "the numbers" do vary between tests.
This weekend I did some further testing for the pdf updating, and noticed the loss between two nodes increased by 3 dB, but the cabling hadn't changed "one bit" :lol:
Mid to high fifties, can read high fifties to low sixties just as easy.
Now if these readings were being taken by calibrated test equipment, I'd be "bitching like hell", but instead I'm happy DirecTV engineering has given us what they have to get "some idea" of the status of our systems. ;)

With all the open ports, the SWiM signals were reflecting back and forth, which seems "reasonable" for the odd reaction to the "sixth coax". By terminating what you have, even with not all terminated [it seems] the signals have stabilized enough so the SWiM/receivers are no longer giving you the "very strange" error about tuners not being available.
A.K.A VOS

#69 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 05 January 2012 - 07:22 PM

I think what you're seeing is that "the numbers" do vary between tests.
This weekend I did some further testing for the pdf updating, and noticed the loss between two nodes increased by 3 dB, but the cabling hadn't changed "one bit" :lol:
Mid to high fifties, can read high fifties to low sixties just as easy.
Now if these readings were being taken by calibrated test equipment, I'd be "bitching like hell", but instead I'm happy DirecTV engineering has given us what they have to get "some idea" of the status of our systems. ;)

With all the open ports, the SWiM signals were reflecting back and forth, which seems "reasonable" for the odd reaction to the "sixth coax". By terminating what you have, even with not all terminated [it seems] the signals have stabilized enough so the SWiM/receivers are no longer giving you the "very strange" error about tuners not being available.


Tomorrow I will have the 2 way and 4 way splitters and will install them and all will be terminated. I will update you then.

I would still like to get the network issue taken care of.

Jim

#70 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 05 January 2012 - 07:31 PM

Tomorrow I will have the 2 way and 4 way splitters and will install them and all will be terminated. I will update you then.

I would still like to get the network issue taken care of.

Jim

"And here I thought" that was the point of this endeavor. :lol:
Your installer hasn't done you any favors, so there has been some cleanup needed along the way.
A.K.A VOS

#71 OFFLINE   krazyrs

krazyrs

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 28 posts
Joined: Sep 21, 2011

Posted 06 January 2012 - 05:37 AM

with the wireless CCK we've had issues where just the small coax run that comes in the kit just needs to be replaced with RG-6

dunno if that's the problem for your network though.
SWiM
HR24-500/HR24-500 - HDMI - Samsung 46" LCD TV
HR24-500 - HDMI - Dynex 32" LCD TV
HR24-500 - HDMI - Vizio 19" LED LCD TV
CCK - Charter - 30mbps down/ 4mbps up

#72 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 06 January 2012 - 01:04 PM

"And here I thought" that was the point of this endeavor. :lol:
Your installer hasn't done you any favors, so there has been some cleanup needed along the way.


Ok, I'm back and I think you are going to be shocked by the results. I installed the 2 way and 4 way with the 5 coax. No 771 issues.

Attached are the screen shots for the coax stats. The levels are significantly reduced.

Note that when I ran the test on the hr34, I continue to get the Network interference error on both of the upstairs tv's

I think the phy levels are back where they should be? Now, back to the original post, what is the next step on the wcck?

Thanks

Jim

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20120106-145844-IMG_0069.jpg
  • 20120106-145858-IMG_0070.jpg


#73 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 06 January 2012 - 02:09 PM

Ok, I'm back and I think you are going to be shocked by the results. I installed the 2 way and 4 way with the 5 coax. No 771 issues.

Attached are the screen shots for the coax stats. The levels are significantly reduced.

Note that when I ran the test on the hr34, I continue to get the Network interference error on both of the upstairs tv's

I think the phy levels are back where they should be? Now, back to the original post, what is the next step on the wcck?

Thanks

Jim

Node 2 still has a problem. Which receiver/location is Node 2?
A.K.A VOS

#74 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 06 January 2012 - 02:48 PM

Node 2 still has a problem. Which receiver/location is Node 2?


How do I know which receiver/location is node 2?

#75 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 06 January 2012 - 02:56 PM

How do I know which receiver/location is node 2?

The first screen calls out:
node 2 Master bedroom HMC N/A
^
It may now be a good idea to run this test from other locations.
A.K.A VOS

#76 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 06 January 2012 - 03:00 PM

The first screen calls out:
node 2 Master bedroom HMC N/A
^
It may now be a good idea to run this test from other locations.


Yes, that is my hr34 and where I am having the network interference problem. If I remember correctly it will not measure the device you are doing the test from?

How can I run the test from other boxes? It is my understanding that my hr20 and hr20 will not do this, only the hr34.

#77 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 06 January 2012 - 03:09 PM

Yes, that is my hr34 and where I am having the network interference problem. If I remember correctly it will not measure the device you are doing the test from?

How can I run the test from other boxes? It is my understanding that my hr20 and hr20 will not do this, only the hr34.

"Right", and I forgot all your others have white DECAs.
Check "their" LEDs and make sure the cLink is solid green.
Next it to move the HR34 to another port off the 2-way and repeat the tests.
The last step would be to move it to the other SWiM output [which may mean moving/disconnecting others] and run the test from there.

What I'm trying to get you to do is:
check the coax that the HR34 is using now, then check the HR34 "itself" by testing on the other side, where you already have good readings.
It is so much easier when this test can be run on more than one receiver.
A.K.A VOS

#78 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 06 January 2012 - 03:47 PM

"Right", and I forgot all your others have white DECAs.
Check "their" LEDs and make sure the cLink is solid green.
Next it to move the HR34 to another port off the 2-way and repeat the tests.
The last step would be to move it to the other SWiM output [which may mean moving/disconnecting others] and run the test from there.

What I'm trying to get you to do is:
check the coax that the HR34 is using now, then check the HR34 "itself" by testing on the other side, where you already have good readings.
It is so much easier when this test can be run on more than one receiver.


Okay, I checked the 3 boxes with white decas and the link is green.

I switched the hr34 and hr20 on the 2 way and here is the results.

If you need me to move the hr34 and hr20 to the other side and switch the other 3 boxes to this side, I can do that next. If needed. Of course wouldn't it be easier to switch the one coax that is connected to the swim on each instead of each of the connectors?

Jim

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20120106-174442-IMG_0073.jpg
  • 20120106-174454-IMG_0074.jpg


#79 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,642 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 06 January 2012 - 03:59 PM

Okay, I checked the 3 boxes with white decas and the link is green.

I switched the hr34 and hr20 on the 2 way and here is the results.

If you need me to move the hr34 and hr20 to the other side and switch the other 3 boxes to this side, I can do that next. If needed. Of course wouldn't it be easier to switch the one coax that is connected to the swim on each instead of each of the connectors?

Jim

So Node 2 is still the problem with Phy Mesh below 220.
"Hopefully" this test was done by moving the receiver and not the coax. If so then this isn't a bad coax drop.
Next is to move it [not the coax at the splitter] to the other side [yeah PITA] so you can connect it to a "known good" splitter/coax group.
If only the node 2 has these low numbers, then since the HR34 is reporting good numbers between all the other nodes, it looks like the HR34 is what is having the problem.
A.K.A VOS

#80 OFFLINE   jimlenz

jimlenz

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 120 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2007

Posted 06 January 2012 - 04:48 PM

So Node 2 is still the problem with Phy Mesh below 220.
"Hopefully" this test was done by moving the receiver and not the coax. If so then this isn't a bad coax drop.
Next is to move it [not the coax at the splitter] to the other side [yeah PITA] so you can connect it to a "known good" splitter/coax group.
If only the node 2 has these low numbers, then since the HR34 is reporting good numbers between all the other nodes, it looks like the HR34 is what is having the problem.


I misunderstood you, I only moved the coax. If you want me to move the receiver, I will do that now. I assume, I will switch it with the one that is on the same splitter? Do you want me to do this first before I move to the other side.

Jim




spam firewall