40.5W SES6 & NSS806

[moonbase]

The throat of the titanium is about 65mm which just clears the Chaparral scalar by a mm or so...

The Titanium LNBF's have a slight lip at the throat, I filed it down and removed the lip for easier insertion into the polo pipe.

 

[amdade]

The Titanium LNBF's have a slight lip at the throat, I filed it down and removed the lip for easier insertion into the polo pipe.

OK @moonbase thanks, what is the OD of the other end ? Looks from the photo its designed to fit a standard scalar directly, hopefully my chaparral :-)

 

[moonbase]

The throat of the titanium is about 65mm which just clears the Chaparral scalar by a mm or so...

Your other option if you are thinking of importing some kit would be to consider getting a cheap Chinese orthomode with a pair of WR229 flange LNB's from AliExpress.
You could insert the Chinese feed into the AV-COMM polo pipe and see how that setup fared as opposed to a twin probe LNBF?

There are plenty variations on kit with this C-Band caper, it can keep you busy.

 

[moonbase]

OK @moonbase thanks, what is the OD of the other end ? Looks from the photo its designed to fit a standard scalar directly, hopefully my chaparral :-)

For the AV-COMM pre-machined version I measured the O/D of the scalar end at 65.9mm with a vernier caliper.

 

[amdade]

For the AV-COMM pre-machined version I measured the O/D of the scalar end at 65.9mm with a vernier caliper.

Perfect thank you, will ping an enquiry over to them now.

Yes you are right tinkering about with C Band is fun but can be time consuming LOL

 

[nelson_b]

O.k. - Results here .

Using the AV-Com with "all" my l.n.b.f ,s (six in all ) would not not lock either of the sports transponders ....

the only l.n.b. i tried that would lock them was a Gardiner C95-33 block type single polarity l.n.b and feed barrel - see pictures -


i got decent db level locks on both sports transponders (comparable to original setup ) - but - l.o.l. ..... not with the same l.n.b depth position - to compromise and get both locking with similar db levels (was not easy ) and reduced them both by up to 0.5 db ... which then made both of them a rather marginal lock. - also the FS 123 transponder was overall the weaker of the two with this setup - the opposite of my original BSC + plate setup ?.

With stand alone l.n.b.f,s + "vipersan" plate i managed to lock ESPN on all of them- with varying d.b levels some only just into lock - except the Zinwell which is a different design and will not fit the plate - (it would not lock using its standard plate). the best of the bunch - were the Titanium and the BSC - the difference between those two was marginal.

Overall though, these two sports transponders are not easy to catch and hold at my location on a c.m. 1.8 offset dish and both transponders become marginal and prone to short signal losses at certain times of day - the loss of signal issue seems more exaggerated with the AV-comm setup even when each transponder is separately tuned to its maximum, as both were lost completely for an hour or more this morning.

Back to original setup ....

ESPN 9.8 db ... FS 123 ... 10 .2 currently

Cheers. :-)

 

[moonbase]

O.k. - Results here .

Using the AV-Com with "all" my l.n.b.f ,s (six in all ) would not not lock either of the sports transponders ....

the only l.n.b. i tried that would lock them was a Gardiner C95-33 block type single polarity l.n.b and feed barrel - see pictures -

i got decent db level locks on both sports transponders (comparable to original setup ) - but - l.o.l. ..... not with the same l.n.b depth position - to compromise and get both locking with similar db levels (was not easy ) and reduced them both by up to 0.5 db ... which then made both of them a rather marginal lock. - also the FS 123 transponder was overall the weaker of the two with this setup - the opposite of my original BSC + plate setup ?.

With stand alone l.n.b.f,s + "vipersan" plate i managed to lock ESPN on all of them- with varying d.b levels some only just into lock - except the Zinwell which is a different design and will not fit the plate - (it would not lock using its standard plate). the best of the bunch - were the Titanium and the BSC - the difference between those two was marginal.

Overall though, these two sports transponders are not easy to catch and hold at my location on a c.m. 1.8 offset dish and both transponders become marginal and prone to short signal losses at certain times of day - the loss of signal issue seems more exaggerated with the AV-comm setup even when each transponder is separately tuned to its maximum, as both were lost completely for an hour or more this morning.

Back to original setup ....

ESPN 9.8 db ... FS 123 ... 10 .2 currently

Cheers. :-)

@nelson_b

Thank you for sharing your test results.

Interesting and perhaps unexpected that the AV-COMM polo pipe could not perform as well as an LNBF with dielectric plate?
I found the opposite on tests I did with a prime focus dish 'ere down Saarf where the polo pipe had the edge by about 1dB, possibly a little more.
However, it was a while ago that I did the tests and C-Band signal levels on these satellites seems to be changing quite a bit.

Perhaps due to a 1.8m dish being on the threshold for these signals from 40.5W the results would be different if you hit it with one of your big lads?
Tests for another day perhaps, from the 2.4m CM or the Patriot 3.0m?



For anyone interested, last time I checked AliExpress a few days ago, one of the stores had stocks of some Gardiner WR229 block LNB's. I don't think they were the exact same model used by @nelson_b in his tests but they were the same block design by Gardiner. The same store also had stocks of WR229 single feeds and WR229 orthomodes at small wad.

 

[John]

O.k. - Results here .

Using the AV-Com with "all" my l.n.b.f ,s (six in all ) would not not lock either of the sports transponders ....

the only l.n.b. i tried that would lock them was a Gardiner C95-33 block type single polarity l.n.b and feed barrel - see pictures -
View attachment 144550 View attachment 144551

i got decent db level locks on both sports transponders (comparable to original setup ) - but - l.o.l. ..... not with the same l.n.b depth position - to compromise and get both locking with similar db levels (was not easy ) and reduced them both by up to 0.5 db ... which then made both of them a rather marginal lock. - also the FS 123 transponder was overall the weaker of the two with this setup - the opposite of my original BSC + plate setup ?.

With stand alone l.n.b.f,s + "vipersan" plate i managed to lock ESPN on all of them- with varying d.b levels some only just into lock - except the Zinwell which is a different design and will not fit the plate - (it would not lock using its standard plate). the best of the bunch - were the Titanium and the BSC - the difference between those two was marginal.

Overall though, these two sports transponders are not easy to catch and hold at my location on a c.m. 1.8 offset dish and both transponders become marginal and prone to short signal losses at certain times of day - the loss of signal issue seems more exaggerated with the AV-comm setup even when each transponder is separately tuned to its maximum, as both were lost completely for an hour or more this morning.

Back to original setup ....

View attachment 144552 ESPN 9.8 db ... FS 123 ... 10 .2 currently

Cheers. :-)

Did you have a quick tweak with moving the single feed & Gardiner in and out a mill at a time in the AV-Comm barrel Nelson ?

 

[suedschwede]

I have tested many C-Band LNBs, the "Kaonsat LNB C Band Single Premium KS-N201G 13K" has been the best of them all so far.
It is used by most DX'ers in Germany and everyone is very happy with it.
Source of supply is ebay.com (Indonesia)

 

[nelson_b]

@nelson_b

Thank you for sharing your test results.

Interesting and perhaps unexpected that the AV-COMM polo pipe could not perform as well as an LNBF with dielectric plate?
I found the opposite on tests I did with a prime focus dish 'ere down Saarf where the polo pipe had the edge by about 1dB, possibly a little more.
However, it was a while ago that I did the tests and C-Band signal levels on these satellites seems to be changing quite a bit.

Perhaps due to a 1.8m dish being on the threshold for these signals from 40.5W the results would be different if you hit it with one of your big lads?
Tests for another day perhaps, from the 2.4m CM or the Patriot 3.0m?



For anyone interested, last time I checked AliExpress a few days ago, one of the stores had stocks of some Gardiner WR229 block LNB's. I don't think they were the exact same model used by @nelson_b in his tests but they were the same block design by Gardiner. The same store also had stocks of WR229 single feeds and WR229 orthomodes at small wad.

I was surprised to not get any locks at all with the L.N.B.f,s on the AV- com ....

With the Gardiner l.n.b and AV-com i managed to exceed the regular setup - briefly this morning i had the best result from ESPN that i,v had from the 1.8 - for around an hour ... then it dropped off fast and by midday was gone completely for an hour ... it seems very sensitive - and position fussy between transponders .. i had similar issues when i had it on the 2.4 for a while ... think i had a thread on here about it a few years ago . The Av-com does not seem to suit my offset dishes so well

I,v had good results from Paksat in the past with another Gardiner l.n.b which has now died unfortunately.

The AV- com will be going on the 3m Prodelin at some point which is performing well currently in linear with a Zinwell l.n.b,f ..... that dish is a whole different ball game ... my trusty BSC l.n.b,f is hopeless by comparison to the Zinwell on that dish !

 

[nelson_b]

Did you have a quick tweak with moving the single feed & Gardiner in and out a mill at a time in the AV-Comm barrel Nelson ?

I spent ages on it last night to be honest .... Gardiner and feed fully in would lock ESPN with quite a margin but the FS123 was just under lock ..... no small movements would improve those results ... and as i brought the l.n.b and its feed further out i lost ESPN and both signals got weaker .. until i got to about 5 - 6 mm from fully out and suddenly i,m getting ESPN at around 9.8 db and i,m just and so locking FS123 now also ... a further 3 mm out and i now have 9.7 db on FS123 but have lost 0.5 db or more on ESPN ..... so to have both in lock at the same time was a balancing act with loss from both - ending up with not much margin on either one ..... most frustrating - l.o.l.

 

[John]

I spent ages on it last night to be honest .... Gardiner and feed fully in would lock ESPN with quite a margin but the FS123 was just under lock ..... no small movements would improve those results ... and as i brought the l.n.b and its feed further out i lost ESPN and both signals got weaker .. until i got to about 5 - 6 mm from fully out and suddenly i,m getting ESPN at around 9.8 db and i,m just and so locking FS123 now also ... a further 3 mm out and i now have 9.7 db on FS123 but have lost 0.5 db on ESPN ..... so to have both in lock at the same time was a balancing act with loss from both - ending up with not much margin on either one ..... most frustrating - l.o.l.

Nice one , emphasises the point though that when chasing that last ounce of weak signal on whatever frequency, that a 'one position fits all' scenario just 'aint true.. lol.

 

[moonbase]

Nice one , emphasises the point though that when chasing that last ounce of weak signal on whatever frequency, that a 'one position fits all' scenario just 'aint true.. lol.

+1, agreed 100%

I have attached below a small table I created a year or two ago where I was checking out 43.1W in C-Band. I think the table might also be uploaded into the 43.1W topic?
As can be seen, the maximum signal levels for a few frequencies from the satellite were all achieved with different combinations of the feed distance from the dish and the scalar along the feed barrel.

In the below table the maximum signal level per frequency tested is shaded in green.
The feed rim aperture distances from the dish were 745mm, 750mm and 755mm.
The scalar distances along the feed barrel were measured as the distance from the feed rim aperture to the dish facing side of the scalar and are listed in the first column of each mini table.

This trend is applicable to most C-Band satellites I have tested from my UK location.

.

 

[John]

+1, agreed 100%

I have attached below a small table I created a year or two ago where I was checking out 43.1W in C-Band. I think the table might also be uploaded into the 43.1W topic?
As can be seen, the maximum signal level for a few frequencies from the satellite are all achieved with different combinations of the feed distance from the dish and the scalar along the feed barrel.

In the below table the maximum signal level per frequency tested is shaded in green.
The feed rim aperture distances from the dish were 745mm, 750mm and 755mm.
The scalar distances along the feed barrel were measured as the distance from the feed rim aperture to the dish facing side of the scalar and are listed in the first column of each mini table.

This trend is applicable to most C-Band satellites I have tested from my UK location.

.
View attachment 144564

Nice work MB .

 

[nelson_b]

Before i take this 1.8 test setup down (as i need access to my garage again ) I decided to try and repeat my findings from a few months ago.... that a C band l.n.b. above K/u gives the same signal strength result - (no loss) - as when in the center focus on my 1.8 channel master.


I,v tested with the FS -1,2,3 , transponder as well as the ESPN one this time


Pics below confirm previous findings ..

ESPN - FS -1,2,3,

 

[Manikm909]

Before i take this 1.8 test setup down (as i need access to my garage again ) I decided to try and repeat my findings from a few months ago.... that a C band l.n.b. above K/u gives the same signal strength result - (no loss) - as when in the center focus on my 1.8 channel master.


I,v tested with the FS -1,2,3 , transponder as well as the ESPN one this time


Pics below confirm previous findings ..

ESPN - View attachment 144572 View attachment 144573 FS -1,2,3, View attachment 144574 View attachment 144575

thanks @nelson_b thats really useful.

thats my setup, and i think im keeping it (Cband above KU)

FYI - i have just taken delivery off 2 x Chinese CBand LNBs with 5G filtering, and seperate delivery of a AVCOMM pipe, with a Zinwell....i will be doing some testing tomorrow...thanks to @s-band

 

[Manikm909]

so, with the Zinwell in polo pipe - i had the usual interference.

the cheapie china LNB with a @nelson_b plate - is pretty decent, and pulls in channels my 5G tit couldnt (AMC etc, due to the cheapie handling a lower freq)

my next question is, should the cheapie LNB be ok, in a polo pipe or do they need cutting down to match the length of the rather stumpy shorter Zinwell, or can it go into the pipe in its usual form (why is the Zinwell so stumpy)

thanks!

 

[scopus]

so, with the Zinwell in polo pipe - i had the usual interference.

the cheapie china LNB with a @nelson_b plate - is pretty decent, and pulls in channels my 5G tit couldnt (AMC etc, due to the cheapie handling a lower freq)

my next question is, should the cheapie LNB be ok, in a polo pipe or do they need cutting down to match the length of the rather stumpy shorter Zinwell, or can it go into the pipe in its usual form (why is the Zinwell so stumpy)

thanks!

Any ESPN or Fox Sports?
I cut about some off my Mediastar 5G LNB for the polo pipe. The exact length I cannot remember. John posted that info in the original AV Comm thread I think, I followed his instructions. I would try it first before doing any cutting though...

 

[moonbase]

so, with the Zinwell in polo pipe - i had the usual interference.

the cheapie china LNB with a @nelson_b plate - is pretty decent, and pulls in channels my 5G tit couldnt (AMC etc, due to the cheapie handling a lower freq)

my next question is, should the cheapie LNB be ok, in a polo pipe or do they need cutting down to match the length of the rather stumpy shorter Zinwell, or can it go into the pipe in its usual form (why is the Zinwell so stumpy)

thanks!

As indicated by @scopus in his reply, if you try the cheapie Chinese LNBF as it is in the polo pipe without cutting it will give you a comparison between using a dielectric plate and the polo pipe.
Once you see how that comparison stacks up you can take a view on cutting away some of the barrel of the cheapie Chinese LNBF.

If the cheapie Chinese LNBF has a slight lip on the rim at the opening aperture you might need to file it off to get it to fit inside the polo pipe, it just depends on the O/D of the LNBF and the I/D of the polo pipe.
I had to use some wet and dry paper to remove some of the paint from the barrel of one of these LNBF's to get it to fit as well as filing away the lip on the end.

If you abrade away too much and it is flapping about it the pipe you can always shim it with some thin aluminium tape.

 

[Manikm909]

thanks guys!

theres a lot of factors involved here...i.e where to place the polo pipe exactly on the LNB bracket (i.e how far away or how close to the dish should it be), does the pipe need rotating to peak gain, or only the LNB within the pipe? then theres the scalar hood , where to place that.

also, what happens on satellites that use linear? does the polo pipe "work it out"

its good to have these options of course, just adds to the tweaking time.