# Whole Home and Internet Random dropouts.



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Hello All. I have a SWM 16 with whole home added. Here is a list of the receivers attached to the system.

1 @ H21-200
2 @ HR21-700
1 @ HR22-100
2 @ H23-600
2 @ H24-700
1 @ H25-100
1 @ H25-500

I have *DECA-2 Pro For DirecTV With Power Supply Broadband* attached. It goes directly into one of the 8way's no splitter.
H21, HR21, HR21, HR22, H23, All have the DECA attached. (One of the H23's does not need whole home, hence no DECA)
Not a single one of my DECA units has the GREEN light. They are all the orange or yellow. it looks more orange to me.

I have assigned static ips in all the receivers and manually added them to the router as well.
Most of the receivers connect to the router and the network. If they do connect they randomly drop out. I have been watching them on http://www.whoisonmywifi.com/
1 H25 and 1 H21 have never connected to the router or the network. Even after manually adding the static ips. Restarting them, unplugging them, I think I have tried everything.

When I added the Deca 2 PRO, some forums said to unplug all the receivers, SWM and DECA PRO and power back up in reverse order. I did that.
I started out trying to use DHCP but changed to STATIC.

Anyone have any suggestions?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Rigger01 said:


> I started out trying to use DHCP but changed to STATIC.


I guess the first question is why?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Also a SOLID amber ligt indicares a poor MoCA connection. a BLINKING amber light indicates the DECA is in "discovering" mode


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

If you don't have green network LEDs, then you have a problem with the RF/coax network.
Your H24/25s can access a menu to check the coax networking.
On the front panel press guide and right arrow at the same time. It may take a few attempts but when you see a screen with coax on the left, select coax.
The next screen should show each DECA node and the loss to them from the test receiver.


----------



## west99999 (May 12, 2007)

Rigger01 said:


> Not a single one of my DECA units has the GREEN light. They are all the orange or yellow. it looks more orange to me.


You don't need to be looking at ip's you need to fix this issue 1st. They all need to be green most likely cabling issues.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

I changed to static mainly because posts on this forum suggested it might help with the whole home network. When you say cabling issues, what do you mean by that? I could have a bad run of cable? Please expand.


----------



## west99999 (May 12, 2007)

Maybe too much signal loss. 1st thing is why the 8ways 2 4 ways would work for your 7 receivers and bbdeca then you should have a dedicated line for the 29 volt power supply this would be the optimal install.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> I changed to static mainly because posts on this forum suggested it might help with the whole home network. When you say cabling issues, what do you mean by that? I could have a bad run of cable? Please expand.


You have a problem with the RF networking, so any of the "IP" adjustments won't help at this time.

You need to run the test I posted.

The RF networking signal doesn't currently have enough signal to noise ratio.

There could be several reasons for this, but you'll need to start with the coax test to measure the loss between each.
There is a second test screen that shows the mesh rates, which will be of interest after knowing the loss.


----------



## west99999 (May 12, 2007)

Wait sorry I see you have 2 of some of those receivers.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

west99999 said:


> Maybe too much signal loss.


Could be loss or too much noise also.
I've got "just a bit" of experience with this from the test group.
Splitters that aren't green labels can be a problem.
In rare cases it's a phase problem where "the noise" is actually the DECA signal from another path causing the problem.

"STEP 1" is to run the coax network tests.


----------



## west99999 (May 12, 2007)

You should have your receivers with the farthest cable runs on a 4 way then put the others on a 8-way power supply for the SWM16 should be connected to the power port. How far are the cable runs and have you ran the test yet?


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

Since I don't see it mentioned, do your 8 way splitters have terminators on all unused ports? If not add them.

Also the H23 without a DECA attached to it should have a bandstop filter (I doubt this is causing your issue, but you should fix it).


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Thank you all for the insight so far. I read your posts last night and came in early today. I inherited this install. I noticed some connectors that were not crimped correctly. I ended up replacing 6 connectors. Here is a list of the lengths.

H25 245'-0"
HR22 140'-0"
HR-21 138'-0"
H23 180'-0"
H24 150'-0"
H21 330'-0"
H24 197'-0"
H25 179'-0"
HR21 242'-0"
H23 178'-0"
H25 175'-0"

I used a Snap Shot to get the lengths. http://t3innovation.com/snapshot

Here is the result of the test you told me to run. The N/A is -43 when done from another receiver. I did the test on all 24's and 25's and nothing varied more than 5 in either direction.










All the DECA's are still orange BUT everything is working and I have not had any drop out's since.

Thoughts?

**EDIT**
All Empty ports on the 8-ways have Terminators.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

you really have some "low" values there, but this is to be expected since you are running very long cables. are these RG6?

Also post the PHY Mesh screen as well.


----------



## west99999 (May 12, 2007)

Where are you measuring the distances from? Are these totals from the dish to the receiver, receiver to splitter,.....? They are very long regardless where they are from. Low 40's are as high as you should have on that test


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> Thank you all for the insight so far. I read your posts last night and came in early today. I inherited this install. I noticed some connectors that were not crimped correctly. I ended up replacing 6 connectors. Here is a list of the lengths.
> 
> H25 245'-0"
> HR22 140'-0"
> ...


OK, you've got some work here.
You will have reduced networking when close to -45, so "Here's what I would do":

1) move the H25 245'-0", H21 330'-0", HR21 242'-0", and HR22 140'-0" or HR-21 138'-0" to a 4-way splitter. This will reduce the loss by 3 dB and keep the longest runs on the same splitter so the loss between them is the least.

2) move the HR22 140'-0" or HR-21 138'-0", H24 197'-0", H23 180'-0", H24 150'-0", H25 179'-0", H23 178'-0", and H25 175'-0" to the same 8-way splitter. The shorter lengths will help with the loss of the 8-way.

3) Connect the broadband DECA with a 2-way splitter to the line for the HR22 or 21 on the 4-way as this is the shortest run and the PI to the -16 power port.

4) get two of these: http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=std-9501&d=nas-std-9501m-satellite-/-off-air-diplexer-power-passing-%28std-9501%29
Add them between the splitters and the SWiM-16 outputs and connect the OTA ports to each other. This will bridge the DECA between the two outputs instead of using the internal bridge of the -16 and decrease the loss by about 5 dB.

This should bring the losses down to less than 40 and get the network within specs.

After these changes, I'd check the LEDs and both test screens. The levels should be under -40 and the mesh "should be" around 240+.
If there still is a problem with the LEDs, the mesh screen should also show it with low numbers.

Before going into any further steps, please post the results of the two screens.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

west99999 said:


> Where are you measuring the distances from? Are these totals from the dish to the receiver, receiver to splitter,.....? They are very long regardless where they are from. Low 40's are as high as you should have on that test


These measurements are from the 8 way splitters to each receiver. The actual distance from DISH to SWM is about 40 feet.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

I failed to mention before that the current DECA that is connected to the router is 115'-0" and it is fed directly into the 8 way. The router is in the same room as HR24-700 150'-0"

_"Add them between the splitters and the SWiM-16 outputs and connect the OTA ports to each other. This will bridge the DECA between the two outputs instead of using the internal bridge of the -16 and decrease the loss by about 5 dB."_
I am not exactly sure what you mean by "OTA"

_ "Connect the broadband DECA with a 2-way splitter to the line for the HR22 or 21 on the 4-way as this is the shortest run and the PI to the -16 power port."_
Is This the right one? http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=SS4002&ss=40313 or http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?mc=02&p=SPLIT2MRV&d=DIRECTV-SWS2-Satellite-2Way-Wide-Band-MRV-Compatible-Splitter-(2-2150-MHz)&c=Satellite%20Splitters&sku=874409002404

Can I use this 4 way?










or this one?

http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?mc=02&p=SPLIT4MRV&d=DIRECTV-SWS4-Satellite-4Way-Wide-Band-MRV-Compatible-Splitter-(2-2150-MHz)&c=Satellite%20Splitters&sku=185463000832


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Thank you all for the help. I am not an installer. I am just a normal guy trying to make the best of this scenario.


----------



## lzhj9k (Mar 14, 2009)

Hello

All of your splitters should be "Green Label" splitters


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

A schematic would be very useful.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Yeah the splitter you have there will not work. Green label Ones can be gotten from solid signal.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Drucifer said:


> A schematic would be very useful.


I would gladly do one. Is there any tool to help with this? or Am i on my own?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Your mesh numbers show what I expected.
Green labeled splitters are a much because they're made for the DECA networking.
I've tried to explain how to maximize your networking by reducing the loss.

"OTA" is a port on the NAS diplexer. This part is approved by DirecTV and has three ports.
The common would be connected to the splitter, the SAT port to the SWiM, and the OTA taps the DECA signal out so you can connect it to the other diplexer.

Here's an image where the diplexer is used to combine the DECA signal between two SWiMs.
It's more complex and not what you need, "but" shows the splitter and diplexer:
http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/196584-when-one-swim-isnt-enough/


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Ordered the needed parts.


----------



## coolman302003 (Jun 2, 2008)

Rigger01 said:


> I would gladly do one. Is there any tool to help with this? or Am i on my own?


If you have a Google Account, you can use Google Drive (Docs) and create a drawing.

Once you sign in click here or go to https://docs.google.com click 'Create' > 'Drawing'

once you finish go to File > Download as > JPEG or PNG image and attach it to a post here.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Here it is. This is my first attempt at this. Please be gentle. This is my current setup before any of the changes that old school suggested. I am going to start one that reflects his suggestions even though I am not entirely sure I understand all of it. (4 40' runs from Dish to SWM)


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Silly question, but you do have the unused ports terminated properly on the splitters yes? Also, how did you set up your power supply for your swim16? I would connect it to the power only port on the swim16 myself.

And trust me,vos knows.. . Take your time figuring it out,he will lead you to better signals.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

inkahauts said:


> Silly question, but you do have the unused ports terminated properly on the splitters yes? Also, how did you set up your power supply for your swim16? I would connect it to the power only port on the swim16 myself.
> 
> And trust me,vos knows.. . Take your time figuring it out,he will lead you to better signals.


None of the empty ports on the 8way's are "open". They have the screw on covers that come with it. Do I need something different? The power is plugged directly in to the Grey SWM 16 Power port. I just did a sketch. I think I have it. Will post it soonish.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> OK, you've got some work here.
> You will have reduced networking when close to -45, so "Here's what I would do":
> 
> 1) move the H25 245'-0", H21 330'-0", HR21 242'-0", and HR22 140'-0" or HR-21 138'-0" to a 4-way splitter. This will reduce the loss by 3 dB and keep the longest runs on the same splitter so the loss between them is the least.
> ...


Ok. I think this is what veryoldschool suggested. Please let me know what I need to change if anything.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

I would make the following changes. move the H24 197 to the 4 way so that way you have the longest runs in a smaller splitter (less loss. move the HR22 140 to the 8 way. since the DECA BB is "home run" I would leave it on the 8 way to avoid using another splitter. remove the 2 way

Click for large view - Uploaded with Skitch


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Ok. That makes sense. Hopefully veryoldschool will put in his 2 cents. The parts are ordered and should be here by Wednesday. We are expecting a big snow storm on Monday now so everything will get delayed I am sure.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Peds picked up on something I thought about later.
There will be a free port on the 8-way splitter that the DECA can use.
*Do Not *change a HR for a H on the 8-way because you already will have 8 tuners.
While the coax run is longer, the tuner limit means it has to be on the 8-way.

The diplexers were connected backwards and "the common" port has to go to the splitter.

I just got back from the hospital, so this is a quick and dirty edit, but should get the right info across [I hope]:


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> *Do Not *change a HR for a H on the 8-way because you already will have 8 tuners.


uhhh, missed that, sorry


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

peds48 said:


> uhhh, missed that, sorry


You caught the DECA and "I know' you were looking at the cable loss, "but" even in my condition, I didn't think you could catch me twice. :lol:
I had a week of poor health and now don't have a gallbladder, but feel better.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Beerstalker said:


> Since I don't see it mentioned, do your 8 way splitters have terminators on all unused ports? If not add them.
> 
> Also the H23 without a DECA attached to it should have a bandstop filter (I doubt this is causing your issue, but you should fix it).





veryoldschool said:


> Peds picked up on something I thought about later.
> There will be a free port on the 8-way splitter that the DECA can use.
> *Do Not *change a HR for a H on the 8-way because you already will have 8 tuners.
> While the coax run is longer, the tuner limit means it has to be on the 8-way.
> ...












OK. I added the bandstop filter that Beerstalker suggested and I made the changes that oldschool stated. Let me know if this is now set in stone.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> You caught the DECA and "I know' you were looking at the cable loss, "but" even in my condition, I didn't think you could catch me twice. :lol:
> I had a week of poor health and now don't have a gallbladder, but feel better.


Sorry to hear about that. Feel better and take it easy.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> Sorry to hear about that. Feel better and take it easy.


After a rough week, I do and have a full bottle of pain pills so "I'm set" !rolling

Your latest drawing looks good.
When you get the diplexers, check the markings for which port is which. They make two models, and "more than likely" what you'll get will be reversed from the image.
It's a minor change and "only means" to look before you connect. :lol:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


>


Hopefully with these changes the highest will be 40-42 [or less].


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> I had a week of poor health and now don't have a gallbladder, but feel better.


who needs one of those.... !rolling

Wishing you a speedy recovery


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

peds48 said:


> who needs one of those.... !rolling


Surprising what one will give up to get some good pain pills. !rolling


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

All the parts arrived today. So the question is...










Which port connects to itself? The 806 MHz or the 950?


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

The port labeled TV goes to the splitter that connects to the CCK . Sat port goes to Swim output and in-out goes to Swim Splitter.

In my installation, I don't have a CCK (bridged through HR34) so the output of that splitter is terminated.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

dennisj00 said:


> The port labeled TV goes to the splitter that connects to the CCK . Sat port goes to Swim output and in-out goes to Swim Splitter.
> 
> In my installation, I don't have a CCK (bridged through HR34) so the output of that splitter is terminated.


So if you all give the final approval, I will add all this tomorrow.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

the picture has them pointed correctly, BUT!!!!!!!! TV to TV is the DECA bridging you need [which I think you got].


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> the picture has them pointed correctly, BUT!!!!!!!! TV to TV is the DECA bridging you need [which I think you got].


TV port is bridged to TV port. I will get this all installed hopefully tomorrow at the latest Friday. As soon as I get it done. I will post the new readings.
:grin:


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Rigger01 said:


> So if you all give the final approval, I will add all this tomorrow.





Rigger01 said:


> TV port is bridged to TV port. I will get this all installed hopefully tomorrow at the latest Friday. As soon as I get it done. I will post the new readings.
> :grin:












Node # *8* BD0F -44 is the 330' Run
Node # *9 *6718 -40 is the 245' Run



















*Thank you to everyone that helped*. I really don't know what to say other than you are all Awesome. Big shout out to veryoldschool and Peds48. 
 :goodjob: :joy: :biggthump 
I finally figured out how to resize the .jpg's ha!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

You have reached the limit and "just squeaked by".
Node 9 doesn't bother me, while node 8 "I wouldn't add an inch".
The only thing that could be done for node 8 would be to change the coax from RG6 to RG11, which would reduce the 44 down to about 38.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> You have reached the limit and "just squeaked by".
> Node 9 doesn't bother me, while node 8 "I wouldn't add an inch".
> The only thing that could be done for node 8 would be to change the coax from RG6 to RG11, which would reduce the 44 down to about 38.


This setup is backstage at a Theater in NYC. The guy that had the 330' run just got fired. If his replacement does not want to keep it in his office, the next guy on the waiting list will be probably a 200' run maybe more like 250'. I will use RG11 for that run.  Should I just use RG11 from now on? Even the short runs?

veryoldschool, Can I ask what your background is? How is it that you are the Yoda of this forum?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> This setup is backstage at a Theater in NYC. The guy that had the 330' run just got fired. If his replacement does not want to keep it in his office, the next guy on the waiting list will be probably a 200' run maybe more like 250'. I will use RG11 for that run. Should I just use RG11 from now on? Even the short runs?
> 
> veryoldschool, Can I ask what your background is? How is it that you are the Yoda of this forum?


I was wondering what & where this system was, as 330' runs aren't "normal".
This setup isn't something most installers would know how to deal with either.
RG11 is expensive, so I'd only use it where it was needed on very long runs. You can get about "half again" the distance over RG6 for the same loss.
I have some concerns with the lengths for the SWiM signals.
150' with an 8-way splitter is about the max for "safe" levels, and 200' with a 4-way.
Using RG11 would change this to 225' & 300'.
Another option is to add and amp between the diplexer and the SWiM output.

As to my background, let's just say I've been doing this for a very, very long time, and spent a lot of it on programs I can't talk about.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

From the test screen node 8 is the only run that needs RG11.
The other runs could use this amp for the SAT/SWiM levels: http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=SWMA2-T&ss=51173


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> From the test screen node 8 is the only run that needs RG11.
> The other runs could use this amp for the SAT/SWiM levels: http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=SWMA2-T&ss=51173


VOS, now I am confused. How a SWM amplifier is going to improve the DECA "signals"


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Something like this? Do I need one on the 8 way as well?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

peds48 said:


> VOS, now I am confused. How a SWM amplifier is going to improve the DECA "signals"


It wouldn't, so the 330' drop should be RG11.
Amps would be to stretch the RG6 runs for the SWiM/SAT signals, and get "a margin" back.
I see 5 drops off the 8-way that may be at or lower than -65 dBm.
The 4-way has two and the third needs RG11.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> It wouldn't, so the 330' drop should be RG11.
> Amps would be to stretch the RG6 runs for the SWiM/SAT signals, and get "a margin" back.
> I see 5 drops off the 8-way that may be at or lower than -65 dBm.
> The 4-way has two and the third needs RG11.


That was my thinking. But since this thread started with "DECA issues" the amp got me "confused"


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

peds48 said:


> That was my thinking. But since this thread started with "DECA issues" the amp got me "confused"


Yeah once things got working, looking at the others was the issue,


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

This should get the system off the ragged edge.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> This should get the system off the ragged edge.


I am going to wait and see what happens with the 330' guy before I add the amplifiers. For future reference, I thought I would mark this post as "solved" since this will make it 100%.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

hat run to


Rigger01 said:


> I am going to wait and see what happens with the 330' guy before I add the amplifiers.


You came for one problem and it looks like it's fixed.
While looking at your diagram, I see problems with the long runs.
I would add the amps, and "wait and see" what happens with the 330' guy "before" I change that run to RG11.
If the 330' run isn't going to be used, no point changing it to RG11.
I only count 3 runs, out of all of them, that without amps I'm comfortable with.

BTW the amp on the left is backwards.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> hat run to
> You came for one problem and it looks like it's fixed.
> While looking at your diagram, I see problems with the long runs.
> I would add the amps, and "wait and see" what happens with the 330' guy "before" I change that run to RG11.
> ...


Amps ordered. Everything you have told me so far has helped 100%. AMP on the left is now fixed. I will let you know when the amps are installed.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

I don't know who installed this system, "but" it was way out of design spec.

The diplexer usage comes from my own design modification for another application, which has less loss than using the crossover of the SWiM-16.
With them in use, the amps can be used where they're now placed.

Without using the diplexers, adding amps would help the SWiM signals to the receivers but hurt the DECA signals.
Wiring everything with RG11 would be the only option.

Your latest drawing has [except for the 330' run] all the runs "within spec", which is to say there is some reserve for everything to work in the "worst case", which is the way you want to build a system.

Upgrading the 330' run to RG11 would complete this "should the need arise".

This would get "the VOS seal of approval" :lol:

.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> I don't know who installed this system, "but" it was way out of design spec.
> 
> The diplexer usage comes from my own design modification for another application, which has less loss than using the crossover of the SWiM-16.
> With them in use, the amps can be used where they're now placed.
> ...


Like I said earlier. I inherited this. Originally it was just designed for a couple users. The Theater now has a show that will be here for years so people that will be here want access to DTV. Once the system grew to what it is now and we started having issues, I called DirectTV. Can I say that every tech they sent out here was not how can I say, a Rockstar. I finally decided to handle it myself. Next time I will start here and get a proper design. The 330' run is real horrible run. If that one goes away and I install that other run (250') I will use RG11. But to redo the 330' with RG11 is going to be a very last resort. I am going to add the AMPs.

I have learned so much since the start of this thread and I thank you and everyone else that helped. The biggest lesson learned is to start here and get a plan the next time I have to do an install in another Theater.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> Like I said earlier. I inherited this.
> Originally it was just designed for a couple users.
> Once the system grew to what it is now and we started having issues, I called DirectTV.
> Can I say that every tech they sent out here was not how can I say, a Rockstar.


This system grew well beyond their training, so I really can't blame any of them.
It needed re-engineering.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

"I'd say" if the run is 250', you can use RG6, and if it's longer then go with RG11.
You already have 242' & 245' working, and "the problem is" adding another 100'.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

After doing some number crunching, using RG11 and the NAS diplexers for the DECA crossover, the max coax runs look to be:

8-way = 275',
4-way = 375',
2-way = 475'

No amp would be needed.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Since I already purchased the AMP's. Would it hurt the system to put them in? or should I just return them for store credit?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> Since I already purchased the AMP's. Would it hurt the system to put them in? or should I just return them for store credit?


Once you see the cost of RG11, you'll see the amps are a better choice for you.
Since the amps don't boost the DECA signal, RG11 is needed for runs like the 330'.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> After doing some number crunching, using RG11 and the NAS diplexers for the DECA crossover, the max coax runs look to be:
> 
> 8-way = 275',
> 4-way = 375',
> ...


So how far can you push the limit?

DECA is the limiting factor, so to exceed these lengths, you have to "steal" from the other side of the SWiM-16.

You can add an amp on one side and extend the max distance by 200', *BUT *you have to reduce the max distance on the other side of the SWiM by 200'.

IE: using two 8-ways, one side could be 475' with an amp, and the other side *MUST BE *25' max.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> IE: using two 8-ways, one side could be 475' with an amp, and the other side *MUST BE *25' max.


Now you opened "pandora's box" :rotfl:

why you would use two 8 ways since SWM limits this to 8 tuners one one side? and wouldn't 2 ways ways be too much loss for DECA port to port?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

peds48 said:


> Now you opened "pandora's box" :rotfl:
> 
> why you would use two 8 ways since SWM limits this to 8 tuners one one side? and wouldn't 2 ways ways be too much loss for DECA port to port?


The two 8-ways were used to show the extreme of one side being only 25', and also was the starting point of this thread.

A 2-way with 675' of RG11 on each output is right at the limit, so if you need 675' on one, the other should be 625' for the node loss to be -43.

The 4-way and 8-way can have more than one output at the max, so either 575' or 475'


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> The two 8-ways were used to show the extreme of one side being only 25', and also was the starting point of this thread.


After I took a break and re-read what you said, it now makes sense. I though you meant stacking two ways in one side, compared to two 8 ways, one on each side since the total loss for the DECA includes both runs of the nodes communicating.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

peds48 said:


> After I took a break and re-read what you said, it now makes sense. I though you meant stacking two ways in one side, compared to two 8 ways, one on each side since the total loss for the DECA includes both runs of the nodes communicating.


The max lengths are "end to end", but this is with the splitters located at the SWiM-16.

The 2way could have 675' on both outputs if the splitter was located closer to the receivers, thus lowering the node to node loss of the 2way, while still having the same end to end loss..


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Hopefully the Amp's will be here tomorrow morning. Finger's Crossed.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

They arrived today. I am going to install them on Tuesday. Will I see any difference in picture? Is there a test I should run after they are installed?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Rigger01 said:


> They arrived today. I am going to install them on Tuesday. Will I see any difference in picture? Is there a test I should run after they are installed?


NO, there would not be any difference picture quality., but you might see more reliability when is comes to rain fade, specially for the longest run


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> They arrived today. I am going to install them on Tuesday. Will I see any difference in picture? Is there a test I should run after they are installed?


As Peds48 posted, this is more like "insurance".
You might check the transponders on all the SATs before and after, on the longest run.
You might see a change, "but then again" you might not.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

I just thought I would add an update. Everything has been rock solid since I applied all the changes. Thank you all.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Great. Thanks for the follow-up.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Awesome. Thanks for the update.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

Well, It seems I have cursed myself by coming on here and saying everything is fine.










It seems that fu**ing orange light is back. I did a self test and I got this msg.










The diagnostic code is 48-72-507
B4:F2:E8:34C:04 is a H25-700 Receiver. It's one of the longer runs at 245'. Does anyone know what I can do to fix this error?
I am going to include these two pictures.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

> Does anyone know what I can do to fix this error?


"More than likely"

First off can you relate the nodes [0-10] to your layout drawing above with receivers and cable runs [lengths]??


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

veryoldschool said:


> "More than likely"
> 
> First off can you relate the nodes [0-10] to your layout drawing above with receivers and cable runs [lengths]??


yes. I will do it tomorrow when I get back to work.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

And just to make sure, are the Phy levels and Mesh results taken yesterday and not from back then, correct?


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

peds48 said:


> And just to make sure, are the Phy levels and Mesh results taken yesterday and not from back then, correct?


Yes, taken yesterday.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> yes. I will do it tomorrow when I get back to work.


The Phy levels were from a 245' run [node 10].
It would help to also get a reading from the "other side" off a H24 or H25 in the 150' range.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

When I have time tomorrow, I will post all phys levels from the other 24's and 25's


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

The more tests from different receivers, the better we'll know what's up.

The only improvement that can be done is changing RG6 over to RG11.

"The problem is" the difference is not going to be significant as for every 100' it will only be about 1.75 dB.
Changing these four coax runs to RG11 looks to model "just within" the limits.









The more Phy levels and mesh data, the more "what is" can be related to "what should be".


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

ATO_H25_170'








If I am reading this right. The zeros are #4 DECA and #8 is BP.

BTH_H24-197'









DSR_H25_175








The zeros are #1 PRP and #4 DECA

FF_H24_150









WRD_H25_245








The zeros are #5 BTH and #9 MG

Please correct me if I am wrong in my interpretation of the zero lines.

I can't imagine the zero's are good.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

If I simply look at the nodes with zeros, I'd see the 8-way splitter is in common, so I'd check/inspect it and the connectors carefully.

If nothing was found bad, then this would seem to be more of a concern.
The bottom is the "as is" modeling and the top is what changing some to RG11 should be.









With four lengths of RG11, it models [at the top] with 4-5 dB below the limit.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

What exactly do the zero's mean? Does it mean that particular receiver can not see the other one?
For example on the ATO Receiver DECA and BP can't reach any of the other nodes. right?

I will check all the connectors tomorrow and start there.


----------



## Rigger01 (Feb 27, 2014)

This morning I went trough and checked a couple connectors. I found 2 that were suspect, I replaced connectors on PRP and WRD. On WRD I found 20' of excess cable that I promptly took out of the mix. Below are the readings from FF which I make my standard as it's the receiver that is in front of me. As you can see WRD went from -42 to -39. It makes it clear to me that every foot counts.










Below are the new readings from WRD as you can see 90% of all the readings went down -2 or at least -1.










The GREEN light is back on DECA II now.
I still have the zeros on the phy mesh. Now when I do a system test on FF I get the reduced network error on WRD and BTH. Where as before it was just on WRD.

VOS, Am I correct in saying that RG11 is the next step? Should I start with WRD and BTH and then see if the reduced network error goes away? I am going to get 1000ft so if I have to I can do all that you recommended.

Does anyone have a good site to buy RG11 in bulk? I looked on amazon and was getting $180 for 1000'


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

It's weird to get zeros imho with only -39 isn't it VOS? I'd probably swap a couple good number units with the two with zeros to see if it follows the units. Just in case before I went and repulled that much cable.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rigger01 said:


> This morning I went trough and checked a couple connectors. I found 2 that were suspect, I replaced connectors on PRP and WRD. On WRD I found 20' of excess cable that I promptly took out of the mix. Below are the readings from FF which I make my standard as it's the receiver that is in front of me. As you can see WRD went from -42 to -39. It makes it clear to me that every foot counts.
> 
> Below are the new readings from WRD as you can see 90% of all the readings went down -2 or at least -1.
> 
> ...


Your 20' is worth ≈ 1 dB
The Phy level test has a ±1-2 dB
Look at your mesh numbers for those below [or close to] 221. Then look at the nodes involved. Disregard nodes: "0 to 0" through "10 to 10"
This should give you some idea of the nodes involved.
RG11 is the only thing at this point because of the long distances and that there is NO DECA amp



inkahauts said:


> It's weird to get zeros imho with only -39 isn't it VOS? I'd probably swap a couple good number units with the two with zeros to see if it follows the units. Just in case before I went and repulled that much cable.


The zeros are a bit strange. I've seen them before in my own testing, but they were at or beyond the limits/range.

I don't have a good answer about them because the phy level test does find the node(s) and they report back the loss, but during the phy mesh test they aren't reporting.
Mesh comes from a SNR so while the loss might be within limits, the noise is higher than expected.
I'd need to play with it for a while to give a better answer.

Swapping receivers and retesting IS something I'd do before "dropping the bucks" for the RG11


----------



## samisamsung (Oct 26, 2012)

veryoldschool, what is the advantage of using a sonora SD SWMD2 over sd swmd3. 
i have to bridge 2 swm 16 switches, i see the diagrams showing the use of nas diplexers and was looking for more affordable switches and was looking to understand the difference between the sd swmd2 and sd swmd3.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

samisamsung said:


> veryoldschool, what is the advantage of using a sonora SD SWMD2 over sd swmd3.
> i have to bridge 2 swm 16 switches, i see the diagrams showing the use of nas diplexers and was looking for more affordable switches and was looking to understand the difference between the sd swmd2 and sd swmd3.


Here's the specs for the Sonora: http://www.sonoradesign.com/pdfs/MoCA_E_Diplexers.pdf

The NAS has been tested, so it's known to be compliant.
Either of the Sonoras "should be", but haven't been tested by me.


----------



## samisamsung (Oct 26, 2012)

veryoldschool said:


> Here's the specs for the Sonora: http://www.sonoradesign.com/pdfs/MoCA_E_Diplexers.pdf
> 
> The NAS has been tested, so it's known to be compliant.
> Either of the Sonoras "should be", but haven't been tested by me.


Thanks veryoldschool. Appreciate the spec sheet. So just to clarify, why would one use the swmd2 instead of the swmd3 or vice versa?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

samisamsung said:


> Thanks veryoldschool. Appreciate the spec sheet. So just to clarify, why would one use the swmd2 instead of the swmd3 or vice versa?


Sometimes Sonora seems to offer "a solution" for a problem that doesn't exist.
the swmd3 "is merely" a swmd2 with a bandstop filter on the SWiM port.

With a NAS 9501M, a BSF wasn't needed. :shrug:


----------

