Increasing Cable TV signal strength

[amdx]

Hi All,
I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
signal to work 100% of the time.
I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
strength.
Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
Any ideas to get a better signal?
Mikek


PS.

When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
digital channels.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET>, amdx
<am...@knology.net> writes

Despite your long 170ft drop cable, were you getting good analogue
signals before the change to digital? If so, it could be that something
is not right. Normally, even if you have had only fairly mediocre
analogues, the digitals are good.

Otherwise....
It sounds like your signals are just too weak. As things are, and if you
can, the obvious fix would be to overcome the substantial loss of the
170ft drop cable by fitting an amplifier at or near the utility post
(not at your end), and power it with low voltage via the coax from your
end (ie similar to a line-powered masthead antenna amplifier). However,
you would need to consult with the cable company to see if they were OK
with letting you do this. It could be that they might be able advise you
on the most suitable amplifier to use. It's not rocket science, but you
have to be a little careful not to break any of their rules and
generally do anything they don't approve of.
--
Ian

[Fred Bloggs]

On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.

That's about 10dB loss at midband for RG6.

> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.

That was just a 3dB boost.

>   That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.
>    I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?

Really? There are such things a power inserters and compatible drop
amps that allow you to power the amplifier over the cable from the
user end. For RG6 18ga stranded that is about 0.6V loss at 250mA and
therefore doable,

> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.

Forget it.

>   Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
>    Any ideas to get a better signal?
>                 Mikek
>

Use a 15dB gain drop amp with power inserter, but that's just a guess.
Would help if you actually knew signal levels like what the receiver
requires for optimum reception and what the cable co sources. Putting
the amplifier at source gives you a typical system noise figure of
3dB, but putting it at your end limits your NF to 10dB minimum from
the start.

[Dave Platt]

In article <b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET>,

amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:
>I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
>signal to work 100% of the time.
> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
>out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
>I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
>strength.
> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> Any ideas to get a better signal?

Adding an amp at the cable box isn't all that likely to work... you
can try it, but don't get your hopes up. Unless the amp has a
significantly lower "noise figure" than the RF front end in the cable
box, all you'll be doing is adding noise... the desired signal will be
stronger, but the noise will be stronger yet.

Something you could do, is add a single-port RF amplifier right at the
utility post splitter, where your tap comes off of the feed. You can
buy amplifiers of this sort which are designed to receive "phantom
power" through the coax cable... you'd install a "power injector" at
your boat, which feeds a DC voltage up the coax to the amplifier.
This is probably your best bet:

- It would amplify the signal before it's attenuated by the 170-foot
cable run.

- It won't require a power supply at the post... just at your
boat, where you already have power.

- It shouldn't interfere with the other taps on the
splitter, even when the amplifier is not receiving power from your boat.

You'd be looking for an "antenna mast" type of preamplifier. The
Channel Master 0068DSB or 7777, Winegard AP-8700 or AP-8275 or
HDP-269, AntennaCraft 10G212, or one of the Blonder Tongue Galaxy III
models might do the job for you. You'll probably want a "75 ohm in,
75 ohm out" model, which would connect directly to the 75-ohm coax.

--
Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

[Robert Macy]

see URL:
<http://www.dbsinstall.com/broadcast/vhf_uhf_freq_list.asp>
41 is 324 - 330MHz and 42 is 330-336 MHz
cables attenuate more at higher frequency.

By ALL means, if you're going to add an amplifier, add it at the
source location, not at the receiver location
Cheap, but good, ones are available from microcircuits. Can you buy a
line driver from your CATV company?

I suspect the 'better' cable is only marginally better. What is the
EXACT cable you're using? what is its attenuation per foot per MHz?
You can buy extremely low loss coax, but you may have to send in your
first born. Go to a local NRTL [EMC Test Lab] and see if they can
(are willing to) order a length for you.

Find the highest channel you wish to receive and the frequency
associated with that. Now you can balance the amplifier gain with the
cable loss to determine if it will work. Note you already know that
170 ft of ?? cable gets you up to channel 41, so from that number you
can estimate just how much drop your receiver can take before it stops
receiving.

[mike]

Are you sure it's a signal strength problem?
The cable guy should have been able to measure the signal at your cable box.
Are the people using the other taps having problems?
If you're on a boat, you might be at the end of the cable run.
In that case, you might be able to get them to crank up the gain in their
distribution amp.
Power at the pole is not a problem. You can get amps that are powered
through the signal cable to your cable box. Getting them to let you
install it
is another matter.
You can get MUCH better wire, for a price.

Signal strength is not the only problem with digital TV.
Reflections in the system can confuse the decoder. Are there
any unterminated cables on the other taps?

I have OTA antenna digital TV. Plenty of signal, but reflections
cause significant drop outs on some channels. More signal won't fix
that. In fact, I have a variable attenuator to REDUCE signal strength.
I tweak the signal level for fewest dropouts.


Might be electrical noise coupled in thru the ground system.

Bottom line is that you pay the cable company for TV reception.
It's their responsibility to provide you with a watchable signal.
You shouldn't have to tell them what to do. They should just FIX it!!

[amdx]

But, analog can be snowy but very watchable, digital an be pixalated
and stuttering without no sound or often no picture at all.

> Otherwise....
> It sounds like your signals are just too weak. As things are, and if you
> can, the obvious fix would be to overcome the substantial loss of the
> 170ft drop cable by fitting an amplifier at or near the utility post
> (not at your end), and power it with low voltage via the coax from your
> end (ie similar to a line-powered masthead antenna amplifier). However,
> you would need to consult with the cable company to see if they were OK
> with letting you do this. It could be that they might be able advise you
> on the most suitable amplifier to use. It's not rocket science, but you
> have to be a little careful not to break any of their rules and
> generally do anything they don't approve of.

I had not thought about a coax powered amp, Thanks.
Mikek

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 2:36 PM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx<a...@knology.net> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>
> That's about 10dB loss at midband for RG6.
>
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
>
> That was just a 3dB boost.

But that 3bd did get me a more consistent picture.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <9a54a$4f32e7bc$4b4c116f$32...@KNOLOGY.NET>, amdx
<am...@knology.net> writes

You are quite correct. However, digital is generally capable of working
to lower signal levels than analogue. It's amazing how rubbishy digital
signals can be, yet still give perfect pictures - but don't expect
miracles!

>> Otherwise....
>> It sounds like your signals are just too weak. As things are, and if you
>> can, the obvious fix would be to overcome the substantial loss of the
>> 170ft drop cable by fitting an amplifier at or near the utility post
>> (not at your end), and power it with low voltage via the coax from your
>> end (ie similar to a line-powered masthead antenna amplifier). However,
>> you would need to consult with the cable company to see if they were OK
>> with letting you do this. It could be that they might be able advise you
>> on the most suitable amplifier to use. It's not rocket science, but you
>> have to be a little careful not to break any of their rules and
>> generally do anything they don't approve of.
>
> I had not thought about a coax powered amp, Thanks.
> Mikek
>

I see that several others have also suggested a coax-powered amplifier.
[If the cable company can't give you more signal level, it's the only
solution.] As suggested, they should be able to provide a suitable
amplifier and power unit - or at least advise you what to use.
--
Ian

[amdx]

Hey thanks for the part numbers, I'll look into these.
Mikek

[ne...@jecarter.us]

The cable company probably has amplifiers that can be powered over the
cable run. If not, those amps can be found on ebay. Be sure to get a
bidirectional amplifier because some systems send the control signals
back up the cable to the cable company (Comcast in the southeastern
US, for example.)

John

[amdx]

That's helpful. however, I do receive channels up to 484!
Dang, just noticed "Lesbo Euro Trash: Big Boobs" is on 502, but, it's
pay per view. :-)

> 41 is 324 - 330MHz and 42 is 330-336 MHz
> cables attenuate more at higher frequency.

I thought there might be a bigger jump between 41 and 42
because when 42 was pixelating 41 was always perfect.

> By ALL means, if you're going to add an amplifier, add it at the
> source location, not at the receiver location
> Cheap, but good, ones are available from microcircuits. Can you buy a
> line driver from your CATV company?
>

> I suspect the 'better' cable is only marginally better. What is the
> EXACT cable you're using? what is its attenuation per foot per MHz?
> You can buy extremely low loss coax, but you may have to send in your
> first born. Go to a local NRTL [EMC Test Lab] and see if they can
> (are willing to) order a length for you.
>

I think I'll try the amp, before spending for better cable.

I think I just found a work around, The station I wanted, 42
is repeated on 428 in HD and it doesn't pixelate when 42 does.
The pixelating problem is rare, only a spall percentage of the time,
but very annoying. Ah, the wonderful world if Digital TV.
Mikek

[amdx]

Yes, it is the loss in the cable.

> The cable guy should have been able to measure the signal at your cable
> box.
> Are the people using the other taps having problems?

No other problems, I'm just way down the dock from them.

> If you're on a boat, you might be at the end of the cable run.
> In that case, you might be able to get them to crank up the gain in their
> distribution amp.

Next time they are around I'll ask.

> Power at the pole is not a problem. You can get amps that are powered
> through the signal cable to your cable box. Getting them to let you
> install it
> is another matter.
> You can get MUCH better wire, for a price.
>
> Signal strength is not the only problem with digital TV.
> Reflections in the system can confuse the decoder. Are there
> any unterminated cables on the other taps?
>

Yes that is possible, There are transients in and out so sometimes the
taps are used and sometimes not. I suppose I could make a bunch of 75
ohm terminations, and put on a new one every time it's needed.
However I never noticed a correlation between boats in and boats out.

> I have OTA antenna digital TV. Plenty of signal, but reflections
> cause significant drop outs on some channels. More signal won't fix
> that. In fact, I have a variable attenuator to REDUCE signal strength.
> I tweak the signal level for fewest dropouts.
>
>
> Might be electrical noise coupled in thru the ground system.
>
> Bottom line is that you pay the cable company for TV reception.
> It's their responsibility to provide you with a watchable signal.
> You shouldn't have to tell them what to do. They should just FIX it!!

Ya, but no. It's in a marina and the marina has a deal with the cable
company.
At this point there is talk about putting up an antenna.
The marina has ten cable boxes for transients that need to be plugged in
and connected (I guess keep them updated). So it has become a hassle for
the marina handle the boxes. I just want to lay low and not rock the boat.

[Ralph Mowery]

"amdx" <am...@knology.net> wrote in message
news:b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET...

> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At this
> point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the utility
> post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the cable guy
> put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.
> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is out.
> Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.
> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> Any ideas to get a better signal?
> Mikek
>

At only 170 feet, that should not be a problem. My cable runs down a
utility post, then over 200 feet to my house. It goes to a 2 way spitter
and then about 30 feet to a cable modem. The other end goes to anotehr two
way splitter, one side to a regular TV and the other to a digital box.

No problem with the TV signal at my house, and the internet is around 7 MB
or however they measuer it. That is by my test on the internet and what
they say I am paying for in the speed./


Sounds like they need to send more signal from the main cable to the taps to
your line.

[nesesu]

>                  Mikek- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

FWIW, our local cable system just converterd to digital and after
installing the cable boxes I noticed that there were usually about 4-6
drop-outs between 6PM and 11PM. I suspected that the problem was at
their end but they sent out a tech who re-terminated the cables at the
demarcation box outside then changed that splitter from 3 output to 2
output. Inside he trimmed about 2m of excess cable from the wall jack
[inside the wall space] and re-terminated that and installed a new
jumper from there to a splitter [replaced] feeding the two cable
boxes, one feeding the TV the other the VCR. He then measured the
levels and the incoming signal was -10dB [just on nominal] and the
back feed level [at the cable office] was -15dB, again just on
nominal. He said that performance was good down to at least -20dB
incoming. My run is about the same length as yours from the
distribution pedistal and is of lower performance that RG-6.
The number of drop-outs is perhaps slightly less, but a new PVR seems
to handle the drop-outs much better than the cable boxes did so they
are less noticable than before. I have also noted that one particular
commercial has a drop-out in it and it is the same everytime it is
run, again pointing to the problem being at their end.

Neil S

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:12 -0600, amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:

>I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.

Ok, 200ft of coax. Presumably RG6a/u.

>Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>Digital TV.

You have been assimilated. Resistance is futile.

>I got the new digital converter and had no picture.

Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up
to about 10dBm. Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end. Your set
top box is suppose to operate with a 10dB margin. If you would kindly
disclose the maker and model, it might be possible to find the specs.
Typically, you'll have at least 10dB margin. Even with 200ft of coax,
you should have 4 to 6dB margin.

Drag your cable box and TV over to the splitter and try it on the
incoming drop. If that works, move to the ports on the splitter. Make
sure that the unused ports are terminated properly. If that doesn't
work, call your unfriendly cable company and ask them why they don't
have sufficient level to operate your set top box without the 200ft
cable. If it does work, find a 200ft RG6a/u cable that isn't
saturated with water. Try to get some compressing fittings instead of
the crappy crimp type.

Your unspecified cable set top box may also have some user accessible
diagnostics which include per channel signal levels. You may want to
check those.

I'm not familiar with Knology, but I suspect they do the same thing as
Comcast. With Comcast, the lower 72 channels are still analog in my
area. If so, you can probably plug your TV directly into the cable,
set the TV for cable frequencies, not broadcast, and see if that still
plays.

Hint: Troubleshoot by substitution.

Drivel: I spent about an hour troubleshooting my TV distribution
system, only to find a brand new Type F "barrel" connector, with no
center connections. That which is most obviously correct, beyond any
need of checking, is usually the problem.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

[Sal]

"amdx" <am...@knology.net> wrote in message
news:b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET...

> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV.

< snip >

> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.

I take respectful exception to that last sentence. My digital cable box is
about 130 cable-feet from the pole. My signal is tapped enroute for digital
telephone, tapped enroute for Internet and then split (by me) so I can feed
analog signals via a disttribution amp serving bedrooms, kitchen and shack.
I get enough from the pole tap to do the job.

Somebody is treating you badly -- maybe the cable company, maybe the marina.
Yes, the approach for you to buy and install an inline, remote-power amp at
the pole is entirely valid, technically. However, that's not in keeping
with reasonable expectations. You needn't roll over so easily. It's
supposed to work.

What -- Are you worried you might offend somebody? That "somebody" seems
quite okay with kicking you in the ankle. Or elsewhere.

"Sal"

[Jeff Urban]

All the technical advice is fine. However none of this is necessary.
Just call the cable company and tell them that the situation is
unacceptable so you are cancelling.

Voila ! Next day dBs !

J

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:41:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
>between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end.

Some better numbers for RG6a/u:
Freq Atten
MHz -dB
10 0.8
50 1.4
100 2.9
200 4.3
400 6.4
1000 11.0

The CATV band is approximately 50 to 800MHz. With 200ft of cable, you
should see 2.8 to 16dB of loss. While there may be problem at the
high channels, all the lower channels should work.

The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.

Picking a random set top box:
<http://www.zoran.com/IMG/pdf/Simplify_NextGen_STBs_Solutions.pdf>
See Page 3. Sensitivity is -18dBm for 256QAM and -24dBm 64QAM.

At the low end, you have 0dBm in, 7dB loss in the splitter, 2.8dB loss
in the coax, resulting in -9.8dBm to the box. That's much more than
the -18dBm/-24dBm needed.

However, at the high end, things are not so wonderful. 0dbm in, 7dB
loss in the splitter, and 16dB loss in the coax, which delivers
-23dBm. That's 1dB of margin, which is not very good. Still, it
should work on the lower channels.

[Joerg]

amdx wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.

Looks like the cable guys screwed up.

a. They should be putting enough signal on that cable to overcome the loss.

b. They should be able to measure the amplitude of pilot signals at your
end of the cable and tell you how much above minimums they are.

> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.
> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> Any ideas to get a better signal?
> Mikek
>
>
> PS.
>
> When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
> Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
> digital channels.
>

If all else fails you may need an amp. What Fred means with drop amp is
usually called a "mast preamplifier", like this:

http://www.amazon.com/Uhf-Vhf-Antenna-Pre-Amp/dp/B0018CDGEQ/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&qid=1328748729&sr=8-20

I don't know this particular one but essentially it should be
weather-proof. It gets its DC voltage via the coax, from a wall wart
that would plug in at your boat. So no need to run a power supply cable
up there.

Don't go for too much gain. This dreaded DTV falls apart rather easily
on the slightest distortion or cross-modulation. Not sure if the above
amp can handle that. You might need a more expensive one. Michael
Terrell might know which ones are good. What matters is dynamic range.

Also, make sure you have a perfect 75ohms match at your end. The cable
box from the cable company should provide that. if you have Internet
and/or phone through them as well check that connection so it doesn't
cause reflections. On a boat at sea stuff can corrode quickly.

Oh, and don't dare to watch that boobs channel while your wife's on the
boat :-)

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 5:41 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:12 -0600, amdx<am...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>
> Ok, 200ft of coax. Presumably RG6a/u.
>
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV.
>
> You have been assimilated. Resistance is futile.
>
>> I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>
> Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
> to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up
> to about 10dBm. Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end. Your set
> top box is suppose to operate with a 10dB margin. If you would kindly
> disclose the maker and model, it might be possible to find the specs.
> Typically, you'll have at least 10dB margin. Even with 200ft of coax,
> you should have 4 to 6dB margin.
>

Now remember the problem is quite intermittent, but seems to be
happening almost daily for short periods.

> Drag your cable box and TV over to the splitter and try it on the
> incoming drop. If that works, move to the ports on the splitter. Make
> sure that the unused ports are terminated properly. If that doesn't
> work, call your unfriendly cable company and ask them why they don't
> have sufficient level to operate your set top box without the 200ft
> cable. If it does work, find a 200ft RG6a/u cable that isn't
> saturated with water. Try to get some compressing fittings instead of
> the crappy crimp type.
>

There should be no water in the cable, it's only a couple of months
old and both ends have crimp on connectors and are located in a box or boat.

> Your unspecified cable set top box may also have some user accessible
> diagnostics which include per channel signal levels. You may want to
> check those.

It does have diagnostics, I'm not sure if it is each channel though.
But I can get some info out of the box. I'll be there Friday and I'll
get that info and the model of the cable set top box.

> I'm not familiar with Knology, but I suspect they do the same thing as
> Comcast. With Comcast, the lower 72 channels are still analog in my
> area. If so, you can probably plug your TV directly into the cable,
> set the TV for cable frequencies, not broadcast, and see if that still
> plays.
>

I'm using Comcast at the boat. We are lucky here (I think) in that
we have a choice of two cable companies.

> Hint: Troubleshoot by substitution.
>
> Drivel: I spent about an hour troubleshooting my TV distribution
> system, only to find a brand new Type F "barrel" connector, with no
> center connections. That which is most obviously correct, beyond any
> need of checking, is usually the problem.

Drivel is good.

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 6:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:41:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann<je...@cruzio.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
>> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end.
>
> Some better numbers for RG6a/u:
> Freq Atten
> MHz -dB
> 10 0.8
> 50 1.4
> 100 2.9
> 200 4.3
> 400 6.4
> 1000 11.0
>
> The CATV band is approximately 50 to 800MHz. With 200ft of cable, you
> should see 2.8 to 16dB of loss. While there may be problem at the
> high channels, all the lower channels should work.

Any idea where channel 428 would be in that frequency range?
That's a duplicate of 4,2 but in HD, and it works when 42 doesn't.

>
> The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.

Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
(or 4) and it did make a difference.

[amdx]

Been trying to think of something funny to say about that...
Best I got is, she would say, "mine look better than those!

[Joerg]

amdx wrote:
> On 2/8/2012 6:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:41:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann<je...@cruzio.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
>>> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end.
>>
>> Some better numbers for RG6a/u:
>> Freq Atten
>> MHz -dB
>> 10 0.8
>> 50 1.4
>> 100 2.9
>> 200 4.3
>> 400 6.4
>> 1000 11.0
>>
>> The CATV band is approximately 50 to 800MHz. With 200ft of cable, you
>> should see 2.8 to 16dB of loss. While there may be problem at the
>> high channels, all the lower channels should work.
>
> Any idea where channel 428 would be in that frequency range?
> That's a duplicate of 4,2 but in HD, and it works when 42 doesn't.

I believe that's entirely up to the cable company, you'd have to ask an
engineer there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cable

Quote "For example, a cable company might call channel 5-1 "channel 732"
and channel 5-2 "channel 733"".

>>
>> The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.
>
> Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
> 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
> (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>

Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
properly terminated?

[...]

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:24:06 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>Now remember the problem is quite intermittent, but seems to be
>happening almost daily for short periods.

Monitor the signal levels at the set top box and see if it coincides
with something nearby changing, such as the dock lights or operation
of heavy machinery. Maybe shove a DVM (digital voltmeter) into the AC
power and see if it moves around.

> There should be no water in the cable, it's only a couple of months
>old and both ends have crimp on connectors and are located in a box or boat.

I don't like crimp type connectors. Push on connectors are MUCH
better. Also, if the coax came from Radio Shack, all bets are off as
to the quality.

>It does have diagnostics, I'm not sure if it is each channel though.
>But I can get some info out of the box. I'll be there Friday and I'll
>get that info and the model of the cable set top box.

Digital set top box diagnostics are different from analog. Instead of
per-channel levels, it might have levels for specific channels.

> I'm using Comcast at the boat. We are lucky here (I think) in that
>we have a choice of two cable companies.

If it's Comcast, you will probably still have the lower 72 channels
doing analog. Remove the set top box and plug in your TV directly.

> Drivel is good.

The story of my life.

[Mark]

>
> > Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
> > 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
> > (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>
> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
> properly terminated?
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Regards, Joerg
>
> http://www.analogconsultants.com/

right good question...OP, when you had the analog signal, was there
significant ghosting?

digital boxes might tolerate a WEAK signal but they are intolerant of
reflections.

Mark

[Phil Hobbs]

And you know what you'd better reply!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

[Michael Coslo]

On 2/8/12 7:27 PM, Sal wrote:
> "amdx"<am...@knology.net> wrote in message
> news:b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET...
>> Hi All,
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV.
>
> < snip>
>
>> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
>
> I take respectful exception to that last sentence. My digital cable box is
> about 130 cable-feet from the pole. My signal is tapped enroute for digital
> telephone, tapped enroute for Internet and then split (by me) so I can feed
> analog signals via a disttribution amp serving bedrooms, kitchen and shack.
> I get enough from the pole tap to do the job.

I respectfully agree! 8^)

I don't know exactly how it's done now, but when I worked in the Cable
industry many moons ago, we had a lot of adjustment we could make. Even
more, we had variable by frequency attenuators so we could ensure that a
flat signal showed up. There was a lot of signal at the amplifiers, and
if we really needed more oomph, we could put in a distribution amp.
Another amp was really rare.

> Somebody is treating you badly -- maybe the cable company, maybe the marina.
> Yes, the approach for you to buy and install an inline, remote-power amp at
> the pole is entirely valid, technically. However, that's not in keeping
> with reasonable expectations. You needn't roll over so easily. It's
> supposed to work.
>
> What -- Are you worried you might offend somebody? That "somebody" seems
> quite okay with kicking you in the ankle. Or elsewhere.

Yeah, there is something wrong there. For as much as people hate
Comcast, when I had cable internet put in, they replaced all the cable
from the pole to the house, and a lot inside the house. I did talk them
out of replacing the new cable I had put in, but insisted on putting new
connectors on them. The measured all the levels and set them high enough
that I'd be able to add more televisions if I liked.


Time to call the cable company and tell them you want your MTV.


- 73 de Mike N3LI -

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:30:07 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>Any idea where channel 428 would be in that frequency range?
>That's a duplicate of 4,2 but in HD, and it works when 42 doesn't.

Ummm... it's ugly. There are up to 10 standard definition or 2 HD
channels crammed into a 6 MHz wide RF slot. In order to untangle
this, you would need to run a PSIP decoder and extract the CVCT
record:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSIP>
to figure out where digital CH 428 fits. It could literally be
anywhere. However, if you happen to have an tuneable notch filter
(which I happen to have), you can stuff it in series with the cable,
and spin the dial until the signal disappears. Then, just read the
dial. (Comcast seems to be putting well paying and popular channels
on the lower frequencies, and obscure junk on the higher frequencies.
I'm not sure if this is intentional, accidental, or my imagination).

>> The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.
>
>Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>(or 4) and it did make a difference.

Yeah, I saw that. I guess I wasn't too clear. The input signal can
vary over a 10-16dB range, and it still should work. The 3dB
difference between a two port and a 4 port splitter isn't going to
make much difference, exept at the higher channels.

[Sal]

"Michael Coslo" <mj...@psu.edu> wrote in message
news:jgvb3o$jg4c$1...@tr22n12.aset.psu.edu...

< snip >

> Time to call the cable company and tell them you want your MTV.

No way to know from here, but they may not be able to add another amp.

While I was looking for something else, I lurched into this page:

<http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/cable/ps2217/products_white_paper0900aecd800fc94c.shtml>

While its intended audience is Internet modem designers, the noise
discussions are informative with regard to other signals, too.

My point: When you try stringing too many amps in line, the signal-to-noise
ratio (SNR) eventually becomes unacceptable. (Remember the acceptable SNRs
cited for 256 QAM and 64 QAM.)

"Sal"

[Sal]

"Sal" <sob...@aol.com> wrote in message news:jgvoub$fet$1...@dont-email.me...

> My point: When you try stringing too many amps in line, the
> signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) eventually becomes unacceptable. (Remember
> the acceptable SNRs cited for 256 QAM and 64 QAM.)
>
> "Sal"
>

Sorry. I should have said carrier to noise ratio (CNR), not SNR. SNR
applies to post-detection signals. i joined the digital world late in life.

"Sal"

[Robert Baer]

amdx wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of

> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.

> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.

> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.

> Any ideas to get a better signal?
> Mikek
>
>
> PS.
>
> When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
> Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
> digital channels.
>

Well, you could add an amplifier at the splitter where (nominally)
there is no power.
Use the coax center conductor for power; inline capacitors allow
signal to pass and feeding center via small choke allows DC but no signal.
Once upon a time there were little adapters that did this AC/DC thing...

[Ian Jackson]

In message <l916j7hrlnslf403b...@4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann
<je...@cruzio.com> writes

>

>
>Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
>to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up
>to about 10dBm.

Careful! Don't get your dBm mixed up with your dBmV. There's around 48dB
difference! 0dBm is a massive 48dBmV. That would certainly make most
set-top boxes wake up and pay attention!

>

--
Ian

[amdx]

They go to two other outlets, that are used for transient boaters.
sometimes they are used and sometimes they sit unterminated.
I have not seen my problem better or worse when boats are in or out.
But I have several 75 ohm F connector terminations. It's worth a try.
Mikek

[amdx]

Never noticed any ghosting with the analog.
Mikek

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 8:18 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:24:06 -0600, amdx<am...@knologynotthis.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Now remember the problem is quite intermittent, but seems to be
>> happening almost daily for short periods.
>
> Monitor the signal levels at the set top box and see if it coincides
> with something nearby changing, such as the dock lights or operation
> of heavy machinery. Maybe shove a DVM (digital voltmeter) into the AC
> power and see if it moves around.
>
>> There should be no water in the cable, it's only a couple of months
>> old and both ends have crimp on connectors and are located in a box or boat.
>
> I don't like crimp type connectors. Push on connectors are MUCH
> better. Also, if the coax came from Radio Shack, all bets are off as
> to the quality.
>

I'm sorry I got that wrong, they are F compression connectors.
Coax was from the cable company.

My drivel:

At my home, knology recently upgraded there system for faster internet.
A cableman said he heard me radiating a block away. he came in and
changed 7 crimp type connectors in my attic a couple of cable runs.
Speedtest.com went from 6 Mbps to over 11 Mbps with just those changes.

>> It does have diagnostics, I'm not sure if it is each channel though.
>> But I can get some info out of the box. I'll be there Friday and I'll
>> get that info and the model of the cable set top box.
>
> Digital set top box diagnostics are different from analog. Instead of
> per-channel levels, it might have levels for specific channels.
>
>> I'm using Comcast at the boat. We are lucky here (I think) in that
>> we have a choice of two cable companies.
>
> If it's Comcast, you will probably still have the lower 72 channels
> doing analog. Remove the set top box and plug in your TV directly.
>

Oh, if that is the fact, I may get me some browny points, If I can
get the signal up to snuff, then put the vcr back in the line, my wife
could record her soaps again.
That would get me 15 seconds of hero status!
Mikek

[amdx]

Just an addition to the termination debate, the marina has about 150
taps, I'd be surprised if 30 of them are connected to a tv and the rest
are unterminated. The line generally goes to the utility pedestal into
a 2 way splitter and then about 1 ft of cable connects it to the 2 taps
for the boat owners.
Mikek

[Joerg]

Yup, try it. Transient boaters will most likely not carry the required
set top box around but use the lower analog channels or nowadays maybe
UHF digital. Sort of "basic cable". Then the TV is connected directly
and those rarely have a true 75ohms input.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:54:19 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>> My drivel:
>>
>> At my home, knology recently upgraded there system for faster internet.
>> A cableman said he heard me radiating a block away. he came in and
>> changed 7 crimp type connectors in my attic a couple of cable runs.
>> Speedtest.com went from 6 Mbps to over 11 Mbps with just those changes.

Yep, that's the way it works. Compression type F connectors work
well. Crimp type are junk. The catch is that there are probably 100
different types of connectors, each with their own compression tools,
intended to fit about 8 different types of 75 ohm coax (RG6a/u,
RG59/u, single shielded, double shielded, quad shielded, direct
burial, etc). Mixing connector types and cables doesn't work. I got
fed up and "obtained" a 1000ft roll of double shielded RG6a/u, a big
of matching F, BNC, and phono connectors, a compression tool, a
stripping tool, and replaced all the junk cables in the house.

>>> If it's Comcast, you will probably still have the lower 72 channels
>>> doing analog. Remove the set top box and plug in your TV directly.
>>>
>> Oh, if that is the fact, I may get me some browny points, If I can get
>> the signal up to snuff, then put the vcr back in the line, my wife could
>> record her soaps again.
>> That would get me 15 seconds of hero status!
>> Mikek

I'm sure it's true for Comcast in Santa Cruz, CA. No clue on other
areas. The grand plan is to move all the analog channels to digital
area by area:
<http://www2.insidenova.com/news/2011/jun/22/comcast-removes-scores-channels-analog-cable-ar-1126652/>
<http://www2.newsadvance.com/business/2011/nov/09/comcast-switching-analog-digital-ar-1448489/>
Unfortunately, your area may be one of those that have moved to all
digital. Hard to tell from here.

>Just an addition to the termination debate, the marina has about 150
>taps, I'd be surprised if 30 of them are connected to a tv and the rest
>are unterminated. The line generally goes to the utility pedestal into
>a 2 way splitter and then about 1 ft of cable connects it to the 2 taps
>for the boat owners.
> Mikek

Can you determine if the marina is using a distribution amplifier
driving a big splitter, or is using a single cable trunk snaked
through the marina, with taps (directional couplers) at various
points? If taps, it's easy to install too many taps, or miscalculate
the tap type, resulting in level variations along the trunk.
<http://www.doityourself.com/forum/entertainment-center-tvs-stereos-vcrs-dvds-8-track-tape-players/334706-difference-between-tap-splitter.html>



--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:01:21 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

How to Check Comcast Signal Levels
<http://www.ehow.com/how_7777024_check-comcast-signal-levels.html>
I'm not sure if this works on the newer set top boxes, but give it a
try.

[Jeff Liebermann]

Oops. All my mentions of dBm should be dBmV. Thanks.

Range of acceptable signal levels. They're similar for DTV.
<http://www.dslreports.com/faq/16085>

How to check signal levels with a Motorola set top box:
<http://www.ehow.com/how_12186368_check-signal-strength-comcast-digital-cable-motorola.html>

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
>   That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.
>    I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.
>   Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
>    Any ideas to get a better signal?
>                 Mikek
>
> PS.
>
>   When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
> Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
> digital channels.

Google your cable box model. You should able to find ifo on how to
pull up a menu that shows signal strengh. -60dbm is about where my
sigal starts droping out

Jimmie

[Michael A. Terrell]

There are no dBs, since 'dB' without a reference level is
meaningless.


You'll have a whole lot less than 0 dBm. We would terminate service
to people like that, because they were never satisfied. Out drops were
at +10 dBm at the street.

I had to sign a waiver to get cable service restored here, after a
hurricane ripped down the original drop. they refused to replace it
over a driveway, and the new route added +100 feet of RG-6 it runs
along a fence line, to my garage. This was already 45 feet longer than
the original drop. Then it ran 10' up the wall, 40' across the garage,
10' down the opposite wall and 40 feet of underground conduit back to
where the original drop entered their weatherproof wiring box.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

[Michael A. Terrell]

amdx wrote:
>
> On 2/8/2012 7:50 PM, Joerg wrote:
> >
> > Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
> > properly terminated?
> >

> They go to two other outlets, that are used for transient boaters.
> sometimes they are used and sometimes they sit unterminated.
> I have not seen my problem better or worse when boats are in or out.
> But I have several 75 ohm F connector terminations. It's worth a try.

Not really. If there are long unterminated 75 ohm cables after the
splitter, they are a crude termination. The splitter's backmatch
eliminates ghosting from reflections from the unterminated end.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Michael Coslo wrote:
>
> I don't know exactly how it's done now, but when I worked in the Cable
> industry many moons ago, we had a lot of adjustment we could make. Even
> more, we had variable by frequency attenuators so we could ensure that a
> flat signal showed up.

Those are 'Equalizers' and used to cancel the cable losses. There is
some adjustment in the trunk amplifiers, but some brands just used a
plug in equalizer marked with the rolloff in dB while others had both.
The coarse plugin, and a variable equalizer to level the trunkline for
'Proof of Performance' tests.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Joerg wrote:

>
> amdx wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> > Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> > Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> > I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> > suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> > company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> > this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> > utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> > cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> > That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> > signal to work 100% of the time.
>

> Looks like the cable guys screwed up.

In your opinion. If they are delivering the level called for in
their franchise, they didn't screw up. It has always been up to the
customer to pay for or provide extra equipment for non standard
installs.

[Michael A. Terrell]

A power inserter is used to put 9-28 volts DC on the coax, depending
on the amplifer you use.

[Sal]

"JIMMIE" <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
news:490a9f32-61ad-49bf...@m7g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...

=====================================================

Yes, but be mindful of the difference between dBm and dBmV. The cable
industry often deals in levels on the dBmV scale.

There are places like this ...

http://www.maxim-ic.com/app-notes/index.mvp/id/808

where you can see some conversion equations. Jimmie's -60dBm equals -11.25
dBmV. Same power level -- different scale.

I have long known level requirements for the TV tuner's cousin, the cable
modem. The common DOCSIS 2 cable modems are usually spec'ed for -15dBmV to
+15dBmV and the smart operators try to keep inside +/- 12. Thus, you can
see that Jimmie's -11.25dBmV is near the low limit and that dropouts become
more likely in that neighborhood.

I little bit of google snooping revealed that DTV cable boxes would like
0dBmV and will usually be okay with -10dBmV to +10dBmV. Almost the same.

i hope this helps.

"Sal"

"Sal"

[Joerg]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>> amdx wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>>> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>>> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>>> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>>> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>>> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>>> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>>> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
>>> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
>>> signal to work 100% of the time.
>> Looks like the cable guys screwed up.
>
>
> In your opinion.

If their company cable box doesn't deliver a useful and reliable signal
I call that screwed up. One pays for a service and expects to either get
it delivered as promised or money back.


> ... If they are delivering the level called for in

> their franchise, they didn't screw up. It has always been up to the
> customer to pay for or provide extra equipment for non standard
> installs.
>

Mike's install does not sound non-standard. 170ft cable drop towards
premises which is fairly normal, plus the cable company's set-top box.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Grow up. That is an excessive length drop. A standard drop is under
100 feet. You think you know everything, and that the world has to live
by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. I'll bet you've never even
seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to
by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company
isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are
limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to
build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a
physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to
start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The
system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the
equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can
design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has
over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20
miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then
you can tell me I'm wrong.

One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test
port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If
you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions

[tom]

On 2/9/2012 9:35 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
>
> Grow up. That is an excessive length drop. A standard drop is under
> 100 feet. You think you know everything, and that the world has to live
> by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. I'll bet you've never even
> seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to
> by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company
> isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are
> limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to
> build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a
> physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to
> start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The
> system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the
> equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can
> design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has
> over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20
> miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then
> you can tell me I'm wrong.
>
> One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test
> port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If
> you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions
>
>

Cool! You seem to know what you are up to.

Can you put rough numbers around what you mentioned? Like what are
providers legally required to deliver at the far end of the drop?

Thanks.

tom
K0TAR

[Michael A. Terrell]

We were required to deliver 0 dBmv at the end of 100 feet of RG-59 or
RG-6 for two sets per the franchise. The system was designed at +10
dBmv at the tap to allow for three or four TVs at the 100 foot range.
That was on a 36 channel system with RCA modulators & HST. It was done
for two reasons. To have a little extra signal available when the
system was built, and for conversion for a 300 MHz plant to a 450 MHz
plant without respacing the trunk amplifiers.


I build a headend & interface to tie two incompatible community loops
together. Ours was a sub split loop, and the other CATV company used
mid split. We used 2 & 12 for pilots, so we fed them Channel 2 into
their return, and down converted their feed to T-9 for our return. That
headend had two RCA HSP and a combiner. The interface was another HSP
in a large stainless steel NEMA box mounted to a power pole at the
boundary of the two systems. A pair of two way splitters were used to
route the signals between the systems, as well as into and out of the
HSP. The other company wanted us to install a modulator and a
demodulator at the boundary to give us audio & video, and another pair
from our side so the interface would be baseband. Their design was over
$15,000 in hardware alone. My design was under $3000 for all the
hardware & labor to install. I had system designers from both sides
telling me it wouldn't work, but it did the job with no problems. :)

[tom]

On 2/9/2012 10:34 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> tom wrote:
>>
>> On 2/9/2012 9:35 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote: >>
>> Cool! You seem to know what you are up to.
>>
>> Can you put rough numbers around what you mentioned? Like what are
>> providers legally required to deliver at the far end of the drop?
>
>
> We were required to deliver 0 dBmv at the end of 100 feet of RG-59 or
> RG-6 for two sets per the franchise. The system was designed at +10
> dBmv at the tap to allow for three or four TVs at the 100 foot range.

> That was on a 36 channel system with RCA modulators& HST. It was done

> for two reasons. To have a little extra signal available when the
> system was built, and for conversion for a 300 MHz plant to a 450 MHz
> plant without respacing the trunk amplifiers.
>
>

> I build a headend& interface to tie two incompatible community loops

> together. Ours was a sub split loop, and the other CATV company used

> mid split. We used 2& 12 for pilots, so we fed them Channel 2 into

> their return, and down converted their feed to T-9 for our return. That
> headend had two RCA HSP and a combiner. The interface was another HSP
> in a large stainless steel NEMA box mounted to a power pole at the
> boundary of the two systems. A pair of two way splitters were used to
> route the signals between the systems, as well as into and out of the
> HSP. The other company wanted us to install a modulator and a

> demodulator at the boundary to give us audio& video, and another pair

> from our side so the interface would be baseband. Their design was over
> $15,000 in hardware alone. My design was under $3000 for all the

> hardware& labor to install. I had system designers from both sides

> telling me it wouldn't work, but it did the job with no problems. :)
>
>

Very nice. We were much more constrained on the install I mentioned up
the thread a ways. The fiber was fed at E1 speed, which probably didn't
work it very hard.

We had an issue at one point.

This was a distributed proc/data system, one of the first. Each cabinet
was a standalone PBX. And you could make 126 of them look like one.
And each could survive on its own.

First fiber campus we'd done. Staggered cut to the new infrastructure.
Fun stuff.

At one point we had to do the cutover to the other large pice of the
system. Each end connected the fiber. 0 signal.

TDR from A end showed 700 meters from A end, 800 meters from end B.
Length from A to B is 1500 meters.

The work that occurred because of that was not fun. Had to go get the
guy doing fusion splicing.

Joy. Midnight trip to Pittsburgh with the salesman.

Actually it was fun. Not much traffic at night.

Landing pattern at 160mph in between DC9s into Pittsburgh at about
midnight. And they didn't like 160 at all. This was scary.

Quickest turnoff onto a taxiway I've ever experienced. Of course the
taxiway may not have been one. We didn't care.

tom
K0TAR

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 9, 6:35 pm, "Sal" <sob...@aol.com> wrote:
> "JIMMIE" <JIMMIEDEE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message

> "Sal"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sal, A relative number by any other name would smell as sweet. The
reccomendations for my box is about the same but it works well below
that at least according to what I measure withe the cable box. BTW it
just says 'db'. dBm was an assumption on my part..


Jimmie

Jimmie

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 9, 12:01 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:54:19 -0600, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net>

> <http://www2.insidenova.com/news/2011/jun/22/comcast-removes-scores-ch...>
> <http://www2.newsadvance.com/business/2011/nov/09/comcast-switching-an...>

> Unfortunately, your area may be one of those that have moved to all
> digital.  Hard to tell from here.
>
> >Just an addition to the termination debate, the marina has about 150
> >taps, I'd be surprised if 30 of them are connected to a tv and the rest
> >are unterminated. The line generally goes to the utility pedestal into
> >a 2 way splitter and then about 1 ft of cable connects it to the 2 taps
> >for the boat owners.
> >              Mikek
>
> Can you determine if the marina is using a distribution amplifier
> driving a big splitter, or is using a single cable trunk snaked
> through the marina, with taps (directional couplers) at various
> points?  If taps, it's easy to install too many taps, or miscalculate
> the tap type, resulting in level variations along the trunk.

> <http://www.doityourself.com/forum/entertainment-center-tvs-stereos-vc...>

>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann     je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com

> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Jeff, I installed TVRO systems for several years and used a lot of F
connectors. Suprisingly the ones I found that worked best were the
ultra cheap ones that only took a pair of pliers to fasten These were
the ones with the separate crimp rings. Used with some good quality
heat shrink tubing this eliminated most of the problems you mention. I
dont know why these connectors went away, my only guess is that
someone wasn't making enough money on them.

Jimmie

Jimmie

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:17:03 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
<JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:

>Jeff, I installed TVRO systems for several years and used a lot of F
>connectors. Suprisingly the ones I found that worked best were the
>ultra cheap ones that only took a pair of pliers to fasten These were
>the ones with the separate crimp rings. Used with some good quality
>heat shrink tubing this eliminated most of the problems you mention. I
>dont know why these connectors went away, my only guess is that
>someone wasn't making enough money on them.
>
>Jimmie

Yech...

Please try this test. Insert such a crimp type F connector and cable
into some useless piece of equipment with a type F jack. Pull on the
cable hard. In my experience, it doesn't take much to make the cable
and connector part ways. Repeat with a screw on connector. Now,
repeat the experiment using a properly assembled compression type F
connector and cable. It takes considerably more brute force to break
the connection. I think the official minimum pull test is 55 lbs, but
I'm too lazy to Google for it now.

Hiding the workmanship under shrink tube is not very functional. It
will have little effect on the pull test.

Most of the cable leakage problems I've seen (and found) were due to
crimp type F connectors coming apart or badly crimped. That includes
both the hex shaped crimp, and ones held together with a crimped ring.

Bad:
<http://www.fconnector.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/F-Connector2.jpg>

Worse:
<http://www.showmecables.com/images/catalog/product/F-connector-RG59.jpg.ashx?format=jpg>

Good:
<http://images.lowes.com/product/converted/783250/783250926510lg.jpg>

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com

Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Joerg]

> by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. ...


http://www.starvision.tv/lineup_res.htm

Quote "Maximum Drop Length 300 Feet"

Now that's what I call good service.


> ... I'll bet you've never even

> seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to
> by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company
> isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are
> limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to
> build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a
> physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to
> start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The
> system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the
> equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can
> design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has
> over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20
> miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then
> you can tell me I'm wrong.
>
> One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test
> port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If
> you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions
>

See above. Obviously others can. And yes, I have designed RF broadband
power amps. Lots of them. Not just lashing up boxes but the actual
transistor level circuitry including layout guidance for the nasty stuff.

Fact is, if a cable company isn't competent to do a 170ft drop they
should decline the job. Otherwise it is a screw-up, plain and simple. In
our area they'd lose their shirts to the satellite guys because there
are many houses like ours where there is no reasonable way to get from
the street to the house with a 100ft limit. We have around 200ft that's
still there from the early 90's and the previous owner said cable TV
worked just fine for them. We are not subscribed because TV ain't that
important to us.

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 5:41 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:12 -0600, amdx<am...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>

> Ok, 200ft of coax. Presumably RG6a/u.

>
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV.
>

> You have been assimilated. Resistance is futile.

>
>> I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>

> Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
> to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up

> to about 10dBm. Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end. Your set
> top box is suppose to operate with a 10dB margin. If you would kindly
> disclose the maker and model, it might be possible to find the specs.
> Typically, you'll have at least 10dB margin. Even with 200ft of coax,
> you should have 4 to 6dB margin.
>


The Box is a CISCO RNG100
Only data I know how to get is;
Tuner 537.00 Mhz 2dbmv
TDC 75.25 Mhz 5dbmv
RDC 20.00 Mhz 30.0dbmv Yes 30.0

On the road, will check in this evening.
Mikek

[Michael A. Terrell]

Still easier than having to use blasting caps to find the ends of a
broken conduit under the finished concrete floor in a new RADAR site.
An old fish tape & blasting cap pushed as far as it would go and
BOOM!!!. Then repeat for the other end. Then they used a jackhammer to
break out the concrete between the huge floor divots to install new
conduit. The electrical contractor had failed to tie the conduit to the
rebar & wire mesh before the pour. :)

Or driving ground rods through permafrost in Alaska. We drove 60' of
rod and used three tanks of Acetylene to heat the rod to get it through
the ice layer outside a military radio & TV station at Ft. Greely.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Yawn. You constantly harp about having to meet specs in medical, but
whine like a drunken jackass when other businesses have to meet their
specs. yes, they could design the sytems to 300 feet or more, but the
cost to every customer on the system would go up. Would you like to pay
an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better
service? Oh, that's right. You're too cheap to even have cable TV.

[tom]

On 2/10/2012 7:47 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> Still easier than having to use blasting caps to find the ends of a
> broken conduit under the finished concrete floor in a new RADAR site.

> An old fish tape& blasting cap pushed as far as it would go and

> BOOM!!!. Then repeat for the other end. Then they used a jackhammer to
> break out the concrete between the huge floor divots to install new
> conduit. The electrical contractor had failed to tie the conduit to the

> rebar& wire mesh before the pour. :)

>
> Or driving ground rods through permafrost in Alaska. We drove 60' of
> rod and used three tanks of Acetylene to heat the rod to get it through

> the ice layer outside a military radio& TV station at Ft. Greely.
>

You've got me beat.

I am glad I didn't have to use blasting caps as TDR. But it does sound
kind of fun if you didn't have delivery pressure on top of it.

Sounds like good work. But not up the Giant Rat's standards, I'm sure.

Interesting that he portrays himself as young and uses that reference.
Very curious. Maybe he's old and a failure and not young and a failure
as he claims.

tom
K0TAR

[Michael A. Terrell]

JIMMIE wrote:
>
> Jeff, I installed TVRO systems for several years and used a lot of F
> connectors. Suprisingly the ones I found that worked best were the
> ultra cheap ones that only took a pair of pliers to fasten These were
> the ones with the separate crimp rings. Used with some good quality
> heat shrink tubing this eliminated most of the problems you mention. I
> dont know why these connectors went away, my only guess is that
> someone wasn't making enough money on them.

Those were the lowest grade, next to screw on fittings. They had the
highest leakage, and shortest service life of all the connectors I ever
tested. Did I mention that we bought 50,000 feet of RG-59 & RG-6 per
month for cable installs? We were using the Raychem for new work &
repairs in the mid '80s. They were the best we could find, both for
drop, trunk & feeders. They didn't need a boot, and you would break the
cable before a connector would pull off, if installed properly. We had
to keep a close eye on radiation to prevent one of the midband channels
from interfering with airplanes. 95% of the problems were those half
assed separate ring, three cent connectors.

[Michael A. Terrell]

He was a cable grunt when Time Warner built Cube in Cincinnati, so I'd
say that he's at least 50 and still a very angry failure.

That RADAR site was at Ft. Rucker, and the problem was in the area
reserved for the new IFF hardware in the mid '70s. Weathervision was
assigned to the space while I was there, but were were in the process of
moving to another building when I was told I had orders for Vietnam. I
ended up in Alaska instead. Two weeks later that AFRTS station in
Vietnam was overrun and the engineers killed. They shipped parts of the
transmitter that survived the gunfire to the station in Alaska. :(

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:47:54 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

> The Box is a CISCO RNG100
>Only data I know how to get is;
>Tuner 537.00 Mhz 2dbmv
>TDC 75.25 Mhz 5dbmv
>RDC 20.00 Mhz 30.0dbmv Yes 30.0
>

It's the same as the Cisco Explorer 1540C with some features removed
by Comcast.
<http://www.cincinnatibell.com/shared_content/pdf/tv/exp1540_uguide.pdf>

How to get into the diagnostics:
Press and hold SELECT on front of unit until the MAIL light
starts to flash, then press INFO.
Or
Press and hold PAUSE on remote until MAIL light starts to
flash (around 10-15 seconds), then press PAGE-UP (-).
On some remotes, PAGE (+) might need to be used instead.

I'll guess(tm) that TDC is downstream power, and RDC is upstream
power. (20MHz is in the frequency range used by upstream path).
30dBmV is acceptable as the upper limit is about 55dBmv. Remember,
this is dB's above 1mv into 75 ohms, not dB's above 1mw into 50 ohms.
dBm = dBmV - 48dB
So, your 30dBmv is really -18dBm

The downstream values are also in the ballpark. See:
<http://www.dslreports.com/faq/16085>
The numbers are for cable modems, but the levels should be similar for
DTV. The typical delivered values should be:
-10 dBmV to +10 dBmV "Recommended".
-11 dBmV to -14 dBmv / +11 dBmV to +14 dBmV "Acceptable".
-15 dBmV & +15 dBmV "Maximum".
5dBmV is fairly is good enough and should result in a usable picture.

See if you can excavate the SNR numbers. Maybe there's RF garbage on
the systems (oscillating distribution amp, ingress, whatever, etc).


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

[tom]

On 2/10/2012 8:07 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> He was a cable grunt when Time Warner built Cube in Cincinnati, so I'd
> say that he's at least 50 and still a very angry failure.
>

Sounds correct. He's got problems alright.

> That RADAR site was at Ft. Rucker, and the problem was in the area
> reserved for the new IFF hardware in the mid '70s. Weathervision was
> assigned to the space while I was there, but were were in the process of
> moving to another building when I was told I had orders for Vietnam. I
> ended up in Alaska instead. Two weeks later that AFRTS station in
> Vietnam was overrun and the engineers killed. They shipped parts of the
> transmitter that survived the gunfire to the station in Alaska. :(

Sorry to hear that. Had friends that survived intact but were still
damaged goods from that war.

tom
K0TAR

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:38:44 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>I think the official minimum pull test is 55 lbs, but
>I'm too lazy to Google for it now.

40 lbs outdoors, 30 lbs indoors.

<http://www.scte.org/documents/pdf/standards/SCTE_124_2011.pdf>
6.2.2
Axial Pull Force: The male “F” pin type connector, when
attached to cables manufactured to SCTE approved standards,
shall withstand a minimum axial pull force of 40 lbs for
outdoor and 30 lbs for indoor applications when tested
per ANSI/SCTE 99 2009, Test Method For Axial Pull
Connector/Drop Cable.

I doubt that the crimp connectors could pass the test.

[Sal]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:jtKdnZTeWo1RVajS...@earthlink.com...

< snip >

> Still easier than having to use blasting caps to find the ends of a
> broken conduit under the finished concrete floor in a new RADAR site.
> An old fish tape & blasting cap pushed as far as it would go and
> BOOM!!!. Then repeat for the other end. Then they used a jackhammer to
> break out the concrete between the huge floor divots to install new
> conduit. The electrical contractor had failed to tie the conduit to the
> rebar & wire mesh before the pour. :)

Good story. It brought to mind a promotional video I saw for a company that
had a process called explosive bonding (of dissimilar metals). They must
have been too cheap to rent lights, so they did the demo outside on an old
wooden table. It was two guys in overalls and, I swear, they could have
retitled it "Gomer and Bubba Find Some Dynamite" and nobody would have
noticed.

"Sal"

[Michael A. Terrell]

No one wants to let rednecks with dynamite indoors. ;-)

[Joerg]

In medical I tend to push the envelope and so do the standards
committees. Sometimes based on what we do. I designed all my cardiac
stuff defibrillator-proof, always, although it was not the law yet. Then
they made it law, because it makes sense.

Believe it or not but I like to have to meet specs in medical because
they protect people. Including you.


> ... Would you like to pay

> an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better
> service?

Out here we do not pay extra. Our cable companies out tend do use modern
technology, not cheap stuff from the 70's. A cable company that isn't
competent enough to do more than a measly 100ft would lose their
franchise rather quickly.

Oh, that's right. You're too cheap to even have cable TV.

Read more carefully. I said TV doesn't matter to us, it is not about cost.

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 10, 11:38 am, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:17:03 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
>

> <http://www.showmecables.com/images/catalog/product/F-connector-RG59.j...>

>
> Good:
> <http://images.lowes.com/product/converted/783250/783250926510lg.jpg>
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann     je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com

> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-255

Sorry Jeff but I never used my connectors to support my cables. You
may be right but completely irrelevant to me. To me F connector and
good connection shouldn't even be used in the same sentence. They are
what that are, cheap connectors at best that uses the center conductor
of the cable for a contact. Now that is Yech. Heat shrink has nothing
to do with the pull test or hiding poor workmanship but it does help
keep corrosion down which is the biggest problem with F connectors.
Ive never seen one pull apart except in the shoddiest of
installations. One of the best things I have found to insure you
maintain a good connection is to apply something like DeOxit to the
connectors when you assemble them. Best done while all the parts are
new.

Jimmie

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 10, 11:38 am, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:17:03 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
>

> <http://www.showmecables.com/images/catalog/product/F-connector-RG59.j...>

>
> Good:
> <http://images.lowes.com/product/converted/783250/783250926510lg.jpg>
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann     je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com

> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

You are correct that the problem is in the hex crimp and part of this
is because they started making the crimp made on to the connector. The
other part is that you have to have a special tool to crimp them. All
the pictures that you showed are require a special crimp tool. If
these tools are worn or dont fit the particular plug/ cable
combination you will get a bad crimp. The old style that is probably
40 years old now that you could crimp the little ring with a pair of
pliers worked the best. Unfortunately you can no longer get them,
well I do have a few.

Jimmie

[Ian Jackson]

In message
<eebd0122-a586-4055...@t2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
JIMMIE <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> writes

There little wrong with good quality F-connectors. They are generally
good enough for what they were intended for. Problems are usually down
to who installs them, and how.

For personal outdoor use, I always give any connectors a squirt of WD40
- both during and after installation. [I guess DeOxit would be similar
or better.] After cleaning off most of the WD40, I then seal with
self-amalgamating tape. Obviously, heatshrink would be better, but for
me, is usually less convenient.

Mechanically, even screw-on Fs can be hard to dislodge, provided just
the right amount of braid is trapped under the screw thread. However, I
suppose that sometimes they might not provide the ultimate in screening.

In the UK, in the large CATV networks, crimped connectors are well and
truly a thing of the past. Anyone using them (even the good ones) would
be liable to be hung, drawn and quartered, and then severely punished.

The standard connector is of the 'Snap and Seal' type (and similar). In
themselves, these are pretty well watertight, and the screening is
excellent. It should be almost impossible to pull one off the cable.

However, it is unusual for F-connections to appear naked in the open
air. The final RF distribution to the home is invariably from a street
cabinet which houses an optical node or an RF distribution / line
extender amplifier feeding a bank of taps/splitters. The 'traditional'
cascade of in-line taps has not been used for a very long time. Under
these relatively benign conditions, the F-connectors probably suffer
much less from corrosion than those used on taps hanging on aerial
messenger wires, USA-style. Nevertheless, there are various purpose-made
short 'chunky' rubber sleeves which can be installed first on the tap
ports before the cable connectors are screwed on. These seal the screw
threads. Personally, I would have liked to have seen a bit of WD40 used
but I never managed to drum up much enthusiasm for this as an approved
practice.
--
Ian

[Michael A. Terrell]

You do it because they wouldn't hire you if you couldn't meet specs,
just like every other consultant, engineer or tech. They might even
jail you for your incompetence for not meeting the specs.

> Believe it or not but I like to have to meet specs in medical because
> they protect people. Including you.

Believe it or not, most technical people have that same standard.
You're nothing special.

> > ... Would you like to pay
> > an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better
> > service?
>
> Out here we do not pay extra. Our cable companies out tend do use modern
> technology, not cheap stuff from the 70's. A cable company that isn't
> competent enough to do more than a measly 100ft would lose their
> franchise rather quickly.

Once again the all knowing Jeorge shows his ignorance.


1: You don't know what you're talking about, about the cost of
service. Any extra operating costs become part of the basic service
that everyone pays. You won't work for nothing, and the utilities don't
give them free electricity. The service companies don't repair the
equipment for free. Do you have any idea how many amplifiers, taps and
set top boxes are needed for 10,000 active ports? To provide hotter
ports require more amplifiers, and raises the system noise floor. You
'designed an amplifier'. Big deal. A lot of engineers 'designed and
amplifier' and those companies are long out of business. Current CATV
amplifiers use hybrids designed specifically for the application and
they use them for many reasons. That just leave the design of the 60V
modified sine wave to DC power supplies, equalizers, gain control,
equalization and remote switching. Some locations also have remote
monitoring so the headend can check system status on a continuous
basis. It can also report outages when some of the equipment doesn't
respond. They can even detect power failures and monitor the battery
status in the standby power supplies to give them time to get a portable
generator to the area if it is an extended outage. The local
Brighthouse system remained in operation here for over four weeks after
a hurricane even though the only way to watch TV or access broadband was
with battery power or a generator.

2: '70s CATV tech was 12 channel with no return path. It was crude,
discrete point to point designs that looked like a ham put together from
junk TVs while drinking cheap beer. They were touchy as hell, their
tempco sucked, and they were impossible to service without a fully
equipped test bed. the power supplies were simple, poorly regulated
linear supplies with 85 C electrolytics that died quickly in the
southern sun. The large diecast aluminum housing ran hot to the touch
without the sun hitting them. That stuff was pretty well all scrapped
out by the mid to late '80s by 36 or more channels with return
capability. There was so much construction of upgraded systems that
there was a severe shortage of new hardware through most of the mid
'80s.

That '80s tech was gone in all but the smallest systems by 2000.
Today most systems are 450 MHz or higher, and are 'Fiber Enhanced' to
provide telephone, broadband, movies on demand and pay per view services
by breaking the system into cells that cover a few hundred homes, or
less.

3: You know nothing about CATV franchises. 'A measly 100 feet' is
more than adequate for a hell of a lot of drops & house wiring. If that
is what the franchise calls for, THAT IS THE SPECIFICATION, no matter
how much you whine like Sloman. A city or county won't pull a franchise
over one or two people complaining about weak signals. They receive a
fixed percentage of the system revenue every month, and the percentage
was set when the economy was up. If they pull the franchise, another
provider will offer a much lower percentage. It also involves legal
fees, and causes the rates to go up for the users. Why put up with all
that for a fraction of a percent of problems. Like people who built a
private road a mile long and want to pay the standard install fee when
it will cost about $15,000 to run a feeder for that one house. Or like
that marina. It isn't a street. It's private property. If they want
better service, let them pay for upgrades with .500 cable to each boat,
with a .500 to 'F" connector for each boat. That would only cost a few
hundred dollars a boat for materials. More if the cable is jacketed.
If it isn't it won't last long in salt air. Double that for the
hardware and labor to get a good idea of the costs.

> Oh, that's right. You're too cheap to even have cable TV.
>
> Read more carefully. I said TV doesn't matter to us, it is not about cost.

Then why are you being such an ignorant prick about the issue when
you have no horse in the race? You sound more like Dimbulb every day.
I used to think highly of you, but no longer

[Michael A. Terrell]

Then you would hate most microwave connectors lit SMA.

> Now that is Yech. Heat shrink has nothing
> to do with the pull test or hiding poor workmanship but it does help
> keep corrosion down which is the biggest problem with F connectors.

You didn't need heat shrink on good 'F' connectors.

> Ive never seen one pull apart except in the shoddiest of
> installations. One of the best things I have found to insure you
> maintain a good connection is to apply something like DeOxit to the
> connectors when you assemble them. Best done while all the parts are
> new.

Not needed, if you use flooded outdoor cable.

[Michael A. Terrell]

A 'special tool' that only cost about $20 and would do thousands of
crimps before it was worn out. I've bought them new, on sale for $8
US. You admitted to using pliers on the cheap crap, and you certainly
can't do that with a hex crimp.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:02:37 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
<JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:

>Sorry Jeff but I never used my connectors to support my cables. You
>may be right but completely irrelevant to me.

Umm... you've never tripped over a cable, had the equipment fall off
the table with the cables attached, run RG6a/u up a pole to where it
has to support its own weight, moved furniture with cables still
attached, flexed the connector when used as a test lead, pulled cable
through the wall or conduit with connectors attached, etc? These are
all very common situations which will stress the connector to cable
connection. While it might not be a problem for a fixed (stapled in
place) installation, it certainly will be a problem for the average
home user.
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/slides/mess01.html>

I find it odd that outdoor CATV uses quad shielded cable to prevent RF
leakage and ingress, and having the cable swept to perfection, while
you recommend using inferior F connectors.

>To me F connector and
>good connection shouldn't even be used in the same sentence. They are
>what that are, cheap connectors at best that uses the center conductor
>of the cable for a contact. Now that is Yech.

I do have some issues with RG6a/u that uses copper plated steel core
center wire. Mostly, it's a corrosion problem for outdoor connections
where the home owner does their own wiring, and uses F connectors
without the necessary rubber o-ring needed for waterproofing. I've
swept F connectors on the bench and find them quite good and often
superior to the rare 75 ohm TNC and BNC connectors near the top end
(2GHz for satellite). Incidentally, most of the antennas (that
survived a recent storm) on my roof use RG6a/u coax. The mismatch
loss between 50 and 75 ohms is minimal. Some use F connectors, but
most use BNC's made for RG6a/u.

>Heat shrink has nothing
>to do with the pull test or hiding poor workmanship but it does help
>keep corrosion down which is the biggest problem with F connectors.

Ahem. I worked for a marine radio company during the 1970's. I
learned a few things about waterproofing and corrosion. Heat shrink
doesn't work. Capillary action along the heat shrink to connector
boundary will suck the water into the connector.

What I use (when needed) is a layer of 1" PTFE tape (or 1/2" if that's
all I can find) over the connector. Once in place, a layer of Scotch
66 or other electrical tape to hold it in place. The PTFE will cold
flow into the irregularities on the connector surface, and there will
be zero capillary action. If I want UV resistance, I spray the tape
with clear Krlyon (acrylic) spray.

While we're on the topic, I've experimented with various allegedly
waterproof enclosures and packages. The only ones I consider
genuinely waterproof are sealed and pressurized with dry air. Anything
less will eventually leak.

>Ive never seen one pull apart except in the shoddiest of
>installations.

I have and all too often. I was at the neighbors trying to
troubleshoot their Comcast cable tv and modem mess. They had some
friend of theirs do the wiring. All the F connectors were crimp ring
type and were falling apart. The coax was mostly RG-59 with maybe 80%
coverage. I replaced the most disgusting and will finish the job when
I have time.

>One of the best things I have found to insure you
>maintain a good connection is to apply something like DeOxit to the
>connectors when you assemble them. Best done while all the parts are
>new.

DeOxit and Cramolin contain oleic acid, which will slightly corrode
copper. It's good for CLEANING connectors by removing the oxides, but
should not be left on the connector. If you want to make sure that
you can take the connector apart after the threads rot in place due to
galvanic action between the aluminum receptacle, and the nickel plated
crimp type F connector, some silicon or lithium grease would probably
be better.

Some notes on the contents:
<http://www.antiqueradios.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=82058&start=40&sid=71ca160c8f607686916a0f355e9ecc34>

>Jimmie

As for special tools, I love them. My various cable preparation tools
for various coax cable have saved me countless hours of fumbling with
a pocket knife and diagonal cutters. Using the various compression
tools on F connectors almost guarantee a good connection, unless I did
something dumb. Same with crimp lugs, various LMR-xxx coax cables,
and Anderson Power Pole connectors. The days of using a hammer or
vice grips to crimp a connector are over. The cost can be
substantial, but is well worth it if you work with connectors
regularly.
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/antennas/Misc/slides/crimpers.html>
About $35/ea.

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com

[Joerg]

Correct. And the spec for a competent cable company is typically 300ft,
as I have shown in the link. Plus the one below.

>
>> Believe it or not but I like to have to meet specs in medical because
>> they protect people. Including you.
>
>
> Believe it or not, most technical people have that same standard.
> You're nothing special.
>

Never said I was. Except that I do exceed standards at times where I
believe it is necessary. In the case of med electronics that has likely
saved lives. I do not subscribe to the idea that a standard is always
good enough. Because sometimes they are not.

>>> ... Would you like to pay
>>> an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better
>>> service?
>> Out here we do not pay extra. Our cable companies out tend do use modern
>> technology, not cheap stuff from the 70's. A cable company that isn't
>> competent enough to do more than a measly 100ft would lose their
>> franchise rather quickly.
>
>
> Once again the all knowing Jeorge shows his ignorance.
>

No. I suppose you know what MoCA is. Do you consider them ignorant?
Because they say the very same thing that I said. What matters is
today's state-of-the-art. Nobody cares about what it was in the 80's.
Today this is state-of-the-art:

http://www.cablefax.com/ct/sections/features/Testing-And-Deployment-Making-MoCA-In-Home-Networking-Easier_44237.html

Quote "The Multimedia Over Coax Alliance (MoCA) provides a standard ..."

then

Quote "The maximum cable distance supported between the root and the
last outlet is 300 feet, with a maximum attenuation of 25 dB". And this
is for MoCA, not just cable TV.

>
> 1: You don't know what you're talking about, about the cost of
> service. Any extra operating costs become part of the basic service
> that everyone pays. You won't work for nothing, and the utilities don't
> give them free electricity. The service companies don't repair the
> equipment for free. Do you have any idea how many amplifiers, taps and
> set top boxes are needed for 10,000 active ports? To provide hotter
> ports require more amplifiers, and raises the system noise floor. You
> 'designed an amplifier'. Big deal. A lot of engineers 'designed and

> amplifier' and those companies are long out of business. ...


So how many linear RF amplifiers above 1W have you personally designed
and guided through layout?

Hint: All my clients are still in business and I am sure will be for a
long time to come.


> ... Current CATV

> amplifiers use hybrids designed specifically for the application and
> they use them for many reasons. That just leave the design of the 60V
> modified sine wave to DC power supplies, equalizers, gain control,
> equalization and remote switching. Some locations also have remote
> monitoring so the headend can check system status on a continuous
> basis. It can also report outages when some of the equipment doesn't
> respond. They can even detect power failures and monitor the battery
> status in the standby power supplies to give them time to get a portable
> generator to the area if it is an extended outage. The local
> Brighthouse system remained in operation here for over four weeks after
> a hurricane even though the only way to watch TV or access broadband was
> with battery power or a generator.
>

If that company can't do more than 100ft they'd fail miserably in our
market. It's not just our house, it's also the neighbor to the west, and
the one after that, and ...

> 2: '70s CATV tech was 12 channel with no return path. It was crude,
> discrete point to point designs that looked like a ham put together from
> junk TVs while drinking cheap beer. They were touchy as hell, their
> tempco sucked, and they were impossible to service without a fully
> equipped test bed. the power supplies were simple, poorly regulated
> linear supplies with 85 C electrolytics that died quickly in the
> southern sun. The large diecast aluminum housing ran hot to the touch
> without the sun hitting them. That stuff was pretty well all scrapped
> out by the mid to late '80s by 36 or more channels with return
> capability. There was so much construction of upgraded systems that
> there was a severe shortage of new hardware through most of the mid
> '80s.
>
> That '80s tech was gone in all but the smallest systems by 2000.
> Today most systems are 450 MHz or higher, and are 'Fiber Enhanced' to
> provide telephone, broadband, movies on demand and pay per view services
> by breaking the system into cells that cover a few hundred homes, or
> less.
>
> 3: You know nothing about CATV franchises. 'A measly 100 feet' is

> more than adequate for a hell of a lot of drops & house wiring. ...


No, it is not. If you don't believe me check out Cameron Park, CA,
especially the area of the Estates. Then tell me how you want to do that
with 100ft drops.


> ... If that
> is what the franchise calls for, THAT IS THE SPECIFICATION, ...


And the franchise would get kicked out of the market around here. You
can't serve this market with a sub-par spec. The big automotive
companies had once exhibited a "Well, this is the spec and that's that"
attitude like you do in this thread. Then they learned, the hard way. In
part by essentially going on welfare which was embarrassing.


> ... no matter

> how much you whine like Sloman. A city or county won't pull a franchise

> over one or two people complaining about weak signals. ...


They will if there's a whole big crowd showing up at the next meeting.
Now I won't because I only watch the evening news via antenna. But I
know a whole lot of folks who would be miffed to be declined service
because they are literally addicted to the sports channels. Many would
just get satellite though, they market that quite aggressively these days.


> ... They receive a

> fixed percentage of the system revenue every month, and the percentage
> was set when the economy was up. If they pull the franchise, another
> provider will offer a much lower percentage. It also involves legal
> fees, and causes the rates to go up for the users.

The county folks have one much more important thing on their mind: How
to get re-elected. That's what'll matter most to them. They know that
seeing complaints about what many people perceive as a utility service
they have "rights to" in the paper is not the way to get re-elected.


> ... Why put up with all

> that for a fraction of a percent of problems. Like people who built a
> private road a mile long and want to pay the standard install fee when
> it will cost about $15,000 to run a feeder for that one house. Or like
> that marina. It isn't a street. It's private property. If they want
> better service, let them pay for upgrades with .500 cable to each boat,
> with a .500 to 'F" connector for each boat. That would only cost a few
> hundred dollars a boat for materials. More if the cable is jacketed.
> If it isn't it won't last long in salt air. Double that for the
> hardware and labor to get a good idea of the costs.
>

Then answer a question I asked you before but you did not comment on it:
Why did Mike's cable provider not decline service? Obviously it worked
reliably in the analog days and now with DTV it doesn't. If they can't
handle the 170ft drop after the digital switch, why did they not inform
Mike, cancel the service on their part and send someone out to pick up
the set-top box?

[...]

[Michael A. Terrell]

Did you miss: "IN THE NEXT DECADE"?

A big crowd is what percentage of their customer base?

> > ... They receive a
> > fixed percentage of the system revenue every month, and the percentage
> > was set when the economy was up. If they pull the franchise, another
> > provider will offer a much lower percentage. It also involves legal
> > fees, and causes the rates to go up for the users.
>
> The county folks have one much more important thing on their mind: How
> to get re-elected. That's what'll matter most to them. They know that
> seeing complaints about what many people perceive as a utility service
> they have "rights to" in the paper is not the way to get re-elected.

No one has a 'right to' cable TV. I was at one meeting where a
citizen was demanding that they revoke our franchise. They told him
that one complaint out of 10,000 customers wasn't enough reason to
revoke. he was as arrogant as you. Everything had to be his way. He
got really pissed when they told him to buy a satellite dish and go
away. His demand was a s ignorant as yours. He was demanding that he
bring back CBS ARTS, and wouldn't listen that CBS had dropped the
service. One other complaint was from a woman demanding that our
franchise be pulled because CSPAN was down for a couple days during the
modification of a 5 meter dish to multiple feeds.

> > ... Why put up with all
> > that for a fraction of a percent of problems. Like people who built a
> > private road a mile long and want to pay the standard install fee when
> > it will cost about $15,000 to run a feeder for that one house. Or like
> > that marina. It isn't a street. It's private property. If they want
> > better service, let them pay for upgrades with .500 cable to each boat,
> > with a .500 to 'F" connector for each boat. That would only cost a few
> > hundred dollars a boat for materials. More if the cable is jacketed.
> > If it isn't it won't last long in salt air. Double that for the
> > hardware and labor to get a good idea of the costs.
> >
>
> Then answer a question I asked you before but you did not comment on it:
> Why did Mike's cable provider not decline service? Obviously it worked
> reliably in the analog days and now with DTV it doesn't. If they can't
> handle the 170ft drop after the digital switch, why did they not inform
> Mike, cancel the service on their part and send someone out to pick up
> the set-top box?

Sigh. Just because there is a new agreement for the industry doesn't
mean that all existing have to comply. Some companies are FIOS. By your
standards, everything else should be replaced overnight. Then the
distance won't matter at all. I doubt that the income from that marina
will ever pay back the construction costs. the system worked for
analog, when it was installed. There are no guarantees in life. Stop
trying to walk on water, you'll drown.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Joerg wrote:
>
> http://www.cablefax.com/ct/sections/features/Testing-And-Deployment-Making-MoCA-In-Home-Networking-Easier_44237.html
>
> Quote "The Multimedia Over Coax Alliance (MoCA) provides a standard ..."
>
> then
>
> Quote "The maximum cable distance supported between the root and the
> last outlet is 300 feet, with a maximum attenuation of 25 dB". And this
> is for MoCA, not just cable TV.

MoCA is home networking, hence the 300 foot figure. A drop at +10
dBmv already allows a 25 dB loss for the cable modem, since they are
designed to work to -15 dBmv. That webpage also mentions verifing that a
"drop amplifier does not block Moca". In other words, it's home
networking for multimedia devices and has nothing to do with the length
of the cable drop. It is to allow customers to stream audio and video
within their home, and use services like Netflix & Hulu on their TV
sets.

[Joerg]

Where do you live? The parts of FL I have seen were are technologically
advanced, I guess. This stuff is rolled out here in CA, big time. Things
like the DCX3200M box and their DVR are MoCA.

In case you've missed it, MoCA has already release 2.0. More than a year
ago ...

[Joerg]

It is the modern cable TV, like it or not. Companies not playing will
likely be packing some day. Personally I doubt it'll do much for home
networking, at least not appliance control. Computing, yes, and that's
the new game in town. Cable companies offering "all-in-one" packages
where you get phone, Internet, TV and all that from the "company store".
Pretty pricey, last time I looked it was $99/mo and that only for the
first year. Probably goes up afterwards.

[amdx]

On 2/10/2012 8:11 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:47:54 -0600, amdx<am...@knologynotthis.net>
> wrote:
>
>> The Box is a CISCO RNG100
>> Only data I know how to get is;
>> Tuner 537.00 Mhz 2dbmv
>> TDC 75.25 Mhz 5dbmv
>> RDC 20.00 Mhz 30.0dbmv Yes 30.0
>>
>
> It's the same as the Cisco Explorer 1540C with some features removed
> by Comcast.
> <http://www.cincinnatibell.com/shared_content/pdf/tv/exp1540_uguide.pdf>
>
> How to get into the diagnostics:
> Press and hold SELECT on front of unit until the MAIL light
> starts to flash, then press INFO.
> Or
> Press and hold PAUSE on remote until MAIL light starts to
> flash (around 10-15 seconds), then press PAGE-UP (-).
> On some remotes, PAGE (+) might need to be used instead.

> See if you can excavate the SNR numbers. Maybe there's RF garbage on
> the systems (oscillating distribution amp, ingress, whatever, etc).

Hi Jeff,
I don't seem to be able to follow your directions, I don't think I
have enough buttons. To get the info I posted, Push and hold the power
button until the power light blinks, then push power again and the info
screen comes up.
I don't know what the MAIL light is, I don't have a select button nor
a INFO button.
Hey started pushing buttons on the remote, found I can scroll through
15 pages off stuuf I don't have a clue about.

Got some "RF Statistics on page 5"
Current FDC
Freq. 75.250
Level 5 dbmv
S/N 29db
Errs/Ave 0/0

Current Qam
Freq. 513 Mhz
Level -1dbmv
S/N 35db
Errs/Ave 11/0 or 11/1 or 11/3 but mostly 11/0

That's all I can see.
Mikek

[Michael A. Terrell]

Joerg wrote:
>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:

> ? Joerg wrote:
> ?? http://www.cablefax.com/ct/sections/features/Testing-And-Deployment-Making-MoCA-In-Home-Networking-Easier_44237.html
> ??
> ?? Quote "The Multimedia Over Coax Alliance (MoCA) provides a standard ..."
> ??
> ?? then
> ??
> ?? Quote "The maximum cable distance supported between the root and the
> ?? last outlet is 300 feet, with a maximum attenuation of 25 dB". And this
> ?? is for MoCA, not just cable TV.
> ?
> ?
> ? MoCA is home networking, hence the 300 foot figure. A drop at +10
> ? dBmv already allows a 25 dB loss for the cable modem, since they are
> ? designed to work to -15 dBmv. That webpage also mentions verifing that a
> ? "drop amplifier does not block Moca". In other words, it's home
> ? networking for multimedia devices and has nothing to do with the length
> ? of the cable drop. It is to allow customers to stream audio and video
> ? within their home, and use services like Netflix ? Hulu on their TV
> ? sets.
> ?

>
> It is the modern cable TV, like it or not.

Sigh. You never back down, even when you are shown that you are
wrong. You are wrong and it's eating you alive. Even the title of the
article in your link states: "Testing And Deployment: Making MoCA
In-Home Networking Easier" and the article starts with: "Market growth
and competition for enhanced video services revenue have MSOs and telcos
scrambling for technology and operational advantages. In the next
decade, consumer electronics with embedded Internet and IP video support
will be widely available." No where does it mention a cable drop. It
is a method to transmit digital data between a DVR and any TV connected
to the system. Nothing more. It's no wonder you can't get a computer
to run properly, when you can't even read a simple networking article
like this and understand it.


Show me anywhere in that article that states a 300 foot cable TV drop
is required. The word drop shows up twice and the first is part of
another word:


1: "Additionally, the technician can monitor the MoCA channel for
bit errors based on corrected or dropped MoCA packets."
^^^^

2: "A drop amplifier that does not bypass the MoCA spectrum."
^^^^
This means that some installations require a bi-directional amplifier
to compensate for long drops just as they always have. 'Drop Amplifier'
refers to a single output CATV amplifier as opposed to the multiport
CATV distribution amplifiers used in apartment complexes and condos.

> Companies not playing will likely be packing some day.

Maybe in 30 years, when tiny rural systems can't find anything
cheaper on the market and upgrade in bits and pieces. YOU know all
about being a cheapskate.

> Personally I doubt it'll do much for home networking, at least

> least not appliance control.


Why should it? Why would your DVR need to talk to your
refrigerator? It is strictly a streaming system for home
Entertainment. It's been available here, for years. Hell, even my
dad's Direct TV sat system w/DVR does it. Appliances don't need a TV
tuner and other crap for a simple ethernet interface.

Computing, yes, and that's the new game in town. Cable companies
> offering "all-in-one" packages where you get phone, Internet, TV
> and all that from the "company store".

Phone and internet are delivered via a cable modem that works to -15
dBmv.

> Pretty pricey, last time I looked it was $99/mo and that only for the
> first year. Probably goes up afterwards.

It goes a hell of a lot higher than that. That $99 doesn't get you
basic cable, internet and phone here. Add on more tiers and hgher
bandwith internet and it can pass $250 a month.


You are so ignorant that it's scary. Read ALL of the page you linked
to and look at the images. It is a lousy home network via coax
streaming media standard and nothing more. Not that I ever expect you
to be man enough to admit you are wrong. Everything is always someone
else's fault. No one ever does anything right but you. The fact that
you design medical electronics scares the hell out of me.

[Michael A. Terrell]

amdx wrote:
>
> On 2/10/2012 8:11 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> ? On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:47:54 -0600, amdx?am...@knologynotthis.net?
> ? wrote:
> ?
> ?? The Box is a CISCO RNG100
> ?? Only data I know how to get is;
> ?? Tuner 537.00 Mhz 2dbmv
> ?? TDC 75.25 Mhz 5dbmv
> ?? RDC 20.00 Mhz 30.0dbmv Yes 30.0
> ??
> ?
> ? It's the same as the Cisco Explorer 1540C with some features removed
> ? by Comcast.
> ? ?http://www.cincinnatibell.com/shared_content/pdf/tv/exp1540_uguide.pdf?
> ?
> ? How to get into the diagnostics:
> ? Press and hold SELECT on front of unit until the MAIL light
> ? starts to flash, then press INFO.
> ? Or
> ? Press and hold PAUSE on remote until MAIL light starts to
> ? flash (around 10-15 seconds), then press PAGE-UP (-).
> ? On some remotes, PAGE (+) might need to be used instead.
>
> ? See if you can excavate the SNR numbers. Maybe there's RF garbage on
> ? the systems (oscillating distribution amp, ingress, whatever, etc).

>
> Hi Jeff,
> I don't seem to be able to follow your directions, I don't think I
> have enough buttons. To get the info I posted, Push and hold the power
> button until the power light blinks, then push power again and the info
> screen comes up.
> I don't know what the MAIL light is, I don't have a select button nor
> a INFO button.
> Hey started pushing buttons on the remote, found I can scroll through
> 15 pages off stuuf I don't have a clue about.
>
> Got some "RF Statistics on page 5"
> Current FDC
> Freq. 75.250
> Level 5 dbmv
> S/N 29db
> Errs/Ave 0/0
>
> Current Qam
> Freq. 513 Mhz
> Level -1dbmv
> S/N 35db
> Errs/Ave 11/0 or 11/1 or 11/3 but mostly 11/0

It shows that you have a 6 dB slope, and the high end is 1 dBmv below
the standard level. It also shows a lot of errors in the recovered
data. QAM is the digital TV signal. Unscrambled channels are referred
to as Clear QAM

[amdx]

On 2/12/2012 10:27 AM, amdx wrote:
> On 2/10/2012 8:11 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:47:54 -0600, amdx<am...@knologynotthis.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The Box is a CISCO RNG100
>>> Only data I know how to get is;
>>> Tuner 537.00 Mhz 2dbmv
>>> TDC 75.25 Mhz 5dbmv
>>> RDC 20.00 Mhz 30.0dbmv Yes 30.0
>>>
>>

I just noted I didn't have a picture on ch 42.
I went to the RF page, my 537 Mhz numbers were

Level 6dbmv
S/N 0 db
Errs/Ave 0/7 changed to later 0/1742
Status Unlocked

VS. When it was working

Level -1dbmv
S/N 35db
Errs/Ave 11/0 or 11/1 or 11/3 but mostly 11/0

Status Locked

Mikek

[Ian Jackson]

In message <Jr6dnXpGyI3kY6rS...@earthlink.com>, Michael A.
Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> writes

Presumably 75.25MHz is an analogue signal? In the UK, at least while the
cable system has carried a mixture of analogues and digitals, the
digitals have been run 10dB below the analogues. If 75.25MHz had been
digital, it would be set at -5dBmV, so there would be a rising slope of
4dB, LF to HF.

In any case, if the 513MHz digital is -1dBmV, and other HF signals are
similar, that is more than sufficient for a digital set-top box. I would
think it should work reliably down to around -15dBmV. If I'm right,
whatever the problem is, it isn't being caused by a lack of signal
level.
--
Ian

[Joerg]

Because I am not.

http://publicservice.vermont.gov/consumer/cons_alerts_cable.html

Quote "If its under 300 feet, its free to the consumer".

Yes, it is as simple as that. You are within 300ft and the cable company
must serve you. This is state-of-the-art. Now you'll probably declare
the whole State of Vermont to be wrong?

[...]

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

The whole state? Na, there's probably three sane people left.

[Joerg]

:-)

But it's everywhere. Here is an example from South Carolina about what
happens when a company wants to push through a sub-par 125ft and the
city insists state-of-the-art 300ft:

http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/329657/orangeburg_city_council_adopted_franchise_without_cable_company_agreement/

They threatened to not renew the franchise. And this was six years ago.

[Michael A. Terrell]

The FCC says the requirement is 100 feet in CFR 47-46.606, section
three, quoted below:
---
(3) The visual signal level, across a terminating impedance which
correctly matches the internal impedance of the cable system as viewed
from the subscriber terminal, shall not be less than 1 millivolt across
an internal impedance of 75 ohms (0 dBmV). Additionally, as measured at
the end of a 30 meter (100 foot) cable drop that is connected to the
subscriber tap, it shall not be less than 1.41 millivolts across an
internal impedance of 75 ohms (+3 dBmV). (At other impedance values, the
minimum visual signal level, as viewed from the subscriber terminal,
shall be the square root of 0.0133 (Z) millivolts and, as measured at
the end of a 30 meter (100 foot) cable drop that is connected to the
subscriber tap, shall be 2 times the square root of 0.00662(Z)
millivolts, where Z is the appropriate impedance value.)
---


That mess in Vermont involves Adelphia cable, and the settlement of a
huge fraud lawsuit. They agreed to build to a minimum of 14 homes per
mile, when the industry usually stops at 35-40 homes per mile as ever
paying back the construction costs. Vermont had them by the balls, if
they wanted to renew their franchisee. Adelphia is also heavily invested
in FIOS.


The other franchises I looked at only had a 300 foot limit if it was
Fiber to the structure, which doesn't have the roll off and insertion
loss of coax.

Here is a typical RG6 from Belden:

Freq. (MHz) Attenuation (dB/100 ft.)
5 .67
55 1.60
211 2.87
270 3.24
300 3.43
350 3.72
400 4.00
450 4.26
550 4.71
750 5.59
870 6.00
1000 6.54

This shows the loss at 12.78 dB at 450 MHz which would be a very old
system.

[josephkk]

Geez Michael, one stupid thread and you trash years of positive
experience?

Just the same, i didn't expect him to even think of pretending knowledge
where he was not well versed in the specific area under discussion.

[Michael A. Terrell]

I'm in a lot more pain lately, and I'm having a harder time
controlling my temper. I am dropping a lot of things, between carpal
Tunnel & nerve damage to my hands. I am also tired of hearing lies from
doctors. For some reason, my medication for enlarged prostrate was put
on hold for 90 days, and not being able to sleep more than an hour or
two at a time is starting to get to me after two months without more
than four hours sleep a night. There are days that I want them to cut
my damn legs off, to get rid of the constant pain. they hurt when I lay
down. They hurt when i get up. They hurt when I'm sitting, and when
I'm walking. I have been waiting over a year for the proper surgical
support stockings, only to be told a few days ago that it's no longer
available. I waited over five years for a pair of diabetic shoes. I
couldn't find anything that fit, so I was wearing a pair of old shoes
that should have been tossed three years ago. 10 years ago my feet were
8.5 wide. Because of Diabetes and circulation problems, they are now 11
EEEEEE (yes, 6E) and some days I have trouble even getting those on. I
have 'Turned the other cheek' so many times that I no longer care.

[AI4QJ]

On Feb 8, 4:36 pm, Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.f...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:

Those amps with power inserters, available from Radio Shack for around
$40-50 as I recall, do work well, HOWEVER, I have had 2 of them burn
out on me. They do run rather hot. But when they work, they usually do
the trick. You power it from the TV end and the inline amp has a
blocking cap so you don't put DC on the whole system. Theoreticaslly,
that is what you need. I think you should put one amp every 50 feet
but that may not be possible for you.


> Use a 15dB gain drop amp with power inserter, but that's just a guess.
> Would help if you actually knew signal levels like what the receiver
> requires for optimum reception and what the cable co sources. Putting
> the amplifier at source gives you a typical system noise figure of
> 3dB, but putting it at your end limits your NF to 10dB minimum from
> the start.

[Robert Macy]

On Feb 20, 8:44 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> ...snip...

>    I'm in a lot more pain lately, and I'm having a harder time
> controlling my temper. I am dropping a lot of things, between carpal
> Tunnel & nerve damage to my hands.  I am also tired of hearing lies from
> doctors.  For some reason, my medication for enlarged prostrate was put
> on hold for 90 days, and not being able to sleep more than an hour or
> two at a time is starting to get to me after two months without more
> than four hours sleep a night.  There are days that I want them to cut
> my damn legs off, to get rid of the constant pain. they hurt when I lay
> down.  They hurt when i get up.  They hurt when I'm sitting, and when
> I'm walking. I have been waiting over a year for the proper surgical
> support stockings, only to be told a few days ago that it's no longer
> available.  I waited over five years for a pair of diabetic shoes.  I
> couldn't find anything that fit, so I was wearing a pair of old shoes
> that should have been tossed three years ago.  10 years ago my feet were
> 8.5 wide.  Because of Diabetes and circulation problems, they are now 11
> EEEEEE (yes, 6E) and some days I have trouble even getting those on.  I
> have 'Turned the other cheek' so many times that I no longer care.
>
> --
> You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Does 100% oxygen environment help at all?

I vaguely remember reading about successful treatment of diabetically
induced poor circulation and neuropathy being treated by high pressure
100% oxygen environments. The patient sits in one of those 'bends'
cure tanks foran hour a day over some sequence of time to have all
their symptoms start mitigating. Downside [again from memory] was the
dnagerous 100% oxygen higher pressure atmosphere required extreme care
to administer, and not many people have that experience.

If all the people that have followed your replies/postings over the
years and have gained respect for you/your comments, could take on as
burden 1/1000th of your pain, you'd be pain free today.

Regards,

[Michael A. Terrell]

AI4QJ wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 4:36 pm, Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.f...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
>
> Those amps with power inserters, available from Radio Shack for around
> $40-50 as I recall, do work well, HOWEVER, I have had 2 of them burn
> out on me. They do run rather hot. But when they work, they usually do
> the trick. You power it from the TV end and the inline amp has a
> blocking cap so you don't put DC on the whole system. Theoreticaslly,
> that is what you need. I think you should put one amp every 50 feet
> but that may not be possible for you.

What kind of coax has 10 dB loss per 50 feet, and at what frequency?
Those RS amps have no equalization, so the low channels would overlaod
the front end, and the high channels would still be snowy if you need
more than one or two..

[Michael A. Terrell]

Robert Macy wrote:
>
> I vaguely remember reading about successful treatment of diabetically
> induced poor circulation and neuropathy being treated by high pressure
> 100% oxygen environments. The patient sits in one of those 'bends'
> cure tanks foran hour a day over some sequence of time to have all
> their symptoms start mitigating. Downside [again from memory] was the
> dnagerous 100% oxygen higher pressure atmosphere required extreme care
> to administer, and not many people have that experience.

The only hyperbaric chamber in this area was used for race horses.
It recently exploded, killing the horse and one of the Veterinary staff.

http://www.ocala.com/article/20120210/articles/120219990


It's not available at the VA clinic I use, and the VA hospital is an
hour away. They do have X-ray, MRI, Ultrasound & Cat scan along with
two operating rooms for minor surgery but some things are too hard to
have justified for the VA to purchase for use outside a full scale
hospital. I've seen hospitals that were smaller than this clinic. It
has 100 exam rooms. :)

> If all the people that have followed your replies/postings over the
> years and have gained respect for you/your comments, could take on as
> burden 1/1000th of your pain, you'd be pain free today.

Thank you. :)