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

When one SWiM isn't enough


  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#41 OFFLINE   SomeRandomIdiot

SomeRandomIdiot

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 637 posts
Joined: Jan 06, 2009

Posted 14 March 2013 - 09:01 PM

There's a good article about connecting more than one switch/SWiM here: http://forums.solids...ers-in-the-home

One of the more advanced is:

http://www.dbstalk.c...=1&d=1342586724

To aid in planning losses and layouts before committing to this, here is a calculator that you can load coax lengths to get an idea of the DECA loss.
This works best with the longest coax connected to the same splitter, since the signal only needs to go through one splitter between the nodes.
Long runs on one splitter do effect the maximum length of other splitter runs.

[ATTACH]29602[/ATTACH]


In the jpg shown in post #1 (and above), if one had a position open on the 4 way splitters, couldn't you just interconnect the SWiM clouds from that point instead of using the 4 additional 850-2150s, which in theory would result in less signal loss?

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

#42 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Topic Starter
  • Moderators
  • 41,637 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 14 March 2013 - 09:19 PM

In the jpg shown in post #1 (and above), if one had a position open on the 4 way splitters, couldn't you just interconnect the SWiM clouds from that point instead of using the 4 additional 850-2150s, which in theory would result in less signal loss?

Absolutely Not.

Combining two SWiMs without using diplexers causes the two SWiMs to interact, "in very bad ways". If you don't use the correct diplexers this has happened too.
A.K.A VOS

#43 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,907 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 14 March 2013 - 10:57 PM

Absolutely Not.

Combining two SWiMs without using diplexers causes the two SWiMs to interact, "in very bad ways". If you don't use the correct diplexers this has happened too.


This is my main concern as I'm considering reducing losses on my setup through both changing out my two 8-way splitters on each leg of the SWiM-16 from the original install for two 4-ways, as well as bypassing the internal DECA crossover on the -16 with two cross-connected diplexers.

However dielray once told me to be careful to use the right dipelxers, particularly in regard to their ability to suppress any leakage of the 2.3 MHz SWiM control signal to the OTA ports which the DECA signals are using wreaking havoc with the alternate SWiM-8 circuit.

Was considering this one by Sonora DA;

Posted Image

Sonora SWM/CATV Horizontal Case (SD SWMD2)

#44 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Topic Starter
  • Moderators
  • 41,637 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 15 March 2013 - 08:20 AM

This is my main concern as I'm considering reducing losses on my setup through both changing out my two 8-way splitters on each leg of the SWiM-16 from the original install for two 4-ways, as well as bypassing the internal DECA crossover on the -16 with two cross-connected diplexers.

However dielray once told me to be careful to use the right dipelxers, particularly in regard to their ability to suppress any leakage of the 2.3 MHz SWiM control signal to the OTA ports which the DECA signals are using wreaking havoc with the alternate SWiM-8 circuit.

Was considering this one by Sonora DA;

Posted Image

Sonora SWM/CATV Horizontal Case (SD SWMD2)

The NAS STD-9501M is $6 and is known to work, while the Sonora is $10 and "should work".
A.K.A VOS

#45 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,907 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 15 March 2013 - 09:44 AM

The NAS STD-9501M is $6 and is known to work, while the Sonora is $10 and "should work".


Well the one in the photo is Sonora's SD-SWMD2 for $5.40 each (at Satprotv anyway). Are you referring to their SD-SWMD3 from Solid Signal for $10.99?

Posted Image

Thought that one would be unnecessary overkill for double the price.

#46 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Topic Starter
  • Moderators
  • 41,637 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 15 March 2013 - 10:12 AM

Well the one in the photo is Sonora's SD-SWMD2 for $5.40 each (at Satprotv anyway). Are you referring to their SD-SWMD3 from Solid Signal for $10.99?

Posted Image

Thought that one would be unnecessary overkill for double the price.

SS lists the SD-SWMD2 at $10.
If the SD-SWMD1 was still available it would be a better choice, which leaves the SD-SWMD3 @ $11 as the only choice from Sonora.

The NAS diplexer is the only one that has been tested in this configuration.

Sonora "may" have a product that works, but without testing, I won't say they do.
A.K.A VOS

#47 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,907 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 15 March 2013 - 09:25 PM

SS lists the SD-SWMD2 at $10.
If the SD-SWMD1 was still available it would be a better choice, which leaves the SD-SWMD3 @ $11 as the only choice from Sonora.

The NAS diplexer is the only one that has been tested in this configuration.

Sonora "may" have a product that works, but without testing, I won't say they do.


Though I must say that after looking at this illustration from Sonora DA, I'm not sure I want to spend some $22.00 on these expensive diplexers if all I can expect is around a modest 3 db of gain (-7 to -4 db) through bypassing the internal DECA crossover bridge of the SWiM-16 with these diplexers.

http://www.dbstalk.c...89&d=1363403579

Is that about the same gain I can expect with the NAS diplexers?

Attached Thumbnails

  • Crossover diplexer Illustration.png


#48 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Topic Starter
  • Moderators
  • 41,637 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 15 March 2013 - 09:37 PM

Though I must say that after looking at this illustration from Sonora DA, I'm not sure I want to spend some $22.00 on these expensive diplexers if all I can expect is around a modest 3 db of gain (-7 to -4 db) through bypassing the internal DECA crossover bridge of the SWiM-16 with these diplexers.

Is that about the same gain I can expect with the NAS diplexers?

The crossover has about 6 dB loss, and the NAS when in bridging mode, has about 1 dB, so there's a 5 dB "gain" for DECA.
When you move to combining two SWiM-16s, with a 4-way, the "plus" 5 dB drops to -5 dB due to the 4-way loss.
A.K.A VOS

#49 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,907 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 15 March 2013 - 09:57 PM

The crossover has about 6 dB loss, and the NAS when in bridging mode, has about 1 dB, so there's a 5 dB "gain" for DECA.
When you move to combining two SWiM-16s, with a 4-way, the "plus" 5 dB drops to -5 dB due to the 4-way loss.


Ok;

I once experimentally measured the loss of the -16 internal crossover, and it was indeed about -6 db, but I was simply using Sonora's quoted figure of -7 db anyhow in case I made an error since they are the experts with the professional test equipment. :)

http://www.dbstalk.c...90&d=1363405801

Attached Thumbnails

  • SWM-16 Crossover Bridge Loss Illustration.png


#50 OFFLINE   ndole

ndole

    Problem Solver

  • Registered
  • 1,892 posts
Joined: Aug 26, 2009

Posted 16 March 2013 - 07:32 AM

Absolutely Not.

Combining two SWiMs without using diplexers causes the two SWiMs to interact, "in very bad ways". If you don't use the correct diplexers this has happened too.


I can attest to that :lol:
Spend the money on the correct diplexers.
"He that is good for making excuses is seldom good for anything else."

#51 OFFLINE   Scott Kocourek

Scott Kocourek

    On the edge

  • Super Moderators
  • 9,017 posts
  • LocationWisconsin
Joined: Jun 13, 2009

Posted 16 March 2013 - 12:36 PM

I can attest to that :lol:
Spend the money on the correct diplexers.


We never did get to see the back of that setup
:lol:

Opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily reflect
those of DBSTalk.com, DIRECTV, Dish Network, or any other company.
Become a DBSTalk.com member or join the CE program HERE


#52 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 19,714 posts
  • LocationBay Area
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 16 March 2013 - 01:33 PM

Ok;

I once experimentally measured the loss of the -16 internal crossover, and it was indeed about -6 db, but I was simply using Sonora's quoted figure of -7 db anyhow in case I made an error since they are the experts with the professional test equipment. :)

http://www.dbstalk.c...90&d=1363405801


Just curious: is SWiM signal going so high - 1.84 GHz ?

#53 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Topic Starter
  • Moderators
  • 41,637 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 March 2013 - 01:53 PM

Just curious: is SWiM signal going so high - 1.84 GHz ?

yes.
9 100 MHz "channels" starting just below 1 GHz.
A.K.A VOS

#54 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,907 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 16 March 2013 - 03:23 PM

yes.
9 100 MHz "channels" starting just below 1 GHz.


102 MHz to be exact. :)

But don't know why the seemingly trivial additional 2 MHz is for though.

#55 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Topic Starter
  • Moderators
  • 41,637 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 March 2013 - 03:35 PM

...

[side note/question] Do you ever read PMs?
A.K.A VOS

#56 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 19,714 posts
  • LocationBay Area
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 16 March 2013 - 03:52 PM

102 MHz to be exact. :)

But don't know why the seemingly trivial additional 2 MHz is for though.


perhaps 2 MHz is guard gap, and one "channel" taking up to 100 MHz ?

#57 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,907 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:01 PM

perhaps 2 MHz is guard gap, and one "channel" taking up to 100 MHz ?


That's what I once considered P. Smith

But with the satellite transponders 24, 36, and 62.5 MHz wide, there would seem to be a lot of remaining space from 100 MHz for guard bands without the need for an another 2 MHz.

#58 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 19,714 posts
  • LocationBay Area
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:05 PM

We need to know SWiM type of modulation (forget about tpns with 62.5 MHZ width - no one tuner H/HR and dish STBs support it !); is it QAM-1024 ?

#59 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Topic Starter
  • Moderators
  • 41,637 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:08 PM

We need to know SWiM type of modulation.

"It would seem" to be just what the tps use and this is merely a frequency shift.
A.K.A VOS

#60 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 19,714 posts
  • LocationBay Area
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 16 March 2013 - 04:12 PM

I could make sweeps with spectrum analyzer and post them here, if someone will throw away "old" SWiM LNBF or SWM-16 (to connect it to my AU-9 LNBF) ;) ...




spam firewall