DiSEqC and USALS on same feed?

P

PaceUser75

Member
My Satellite Setup
Sky+HD (Pace 9F3002)
My Location
London SW18
Hi,

I was wondering if anyone has any experience with a DiSEqC switch in a system using a USALS motor?

My current setup is as follows:

1. Dish pointing towards 28.2E with a quad LNB (2 used for Sky+HD, 1 for Radio - Sky Gnome, 1 not in use)
2. Dish with a singe feed LNB as well as an USALS motor (TM-2100).
3. Sky+HD box connected to the 28.2E dish
4. TM6900HD connected to the USALS Dish.

I would want to connect a DiSEqC Switch to the TM6900 so I can utilize the extra free LNB connection on the quad LNB without interfering with the working USALS motor to get BBC One HD (amongst others) as my current Sky Subscription is an Irish Subscription.

Do i connect the DiSEqC Switch before or after the USALS (and before the LNB) on the single LNB feed dish OR before the motor? Will it have a huge impact on the motor performance (i.e. speed) and/or quality level?

I'm pulling in signals from 1W with a current Quality reading of around 78% and would want to keep it around there...
 
I have successfully used a Monoblock with both Ports active and with Port A being also used in USALS mode ................. but only with an ancient Fortec Star Lifetime Classic. None of my other Receivers will allow this mix-and-match.
 
With the TM6900 the switch must go between the motor and the LNB.

If it is put receiver side of the motor, the switch wont switch and the motor wont move.

Without modifying the channel list via a computer, the motor will still move to go to 28E, even though it doesn't need to. This is beacuse it is not possible to turn the motor off for individual satellites via the receiver menu.

It is possible to do it with a channel editor though, though I don't know what the current one to use for the TM6900 is. I used to use the TMEditor for my TM1000.

As an aside, with my TM600, I could put the switch on the receiver side of the motor and it worked fine, also tried an Icecrypt receiver and that worked too.
 
An 'uncommitted' signal is sent to the diseqc switch to choose the right port then the signal to activate what ever is connected.

So you need a receiver that can generate an 'uncommited' signal and a diseqc 2.0 or better switch (most of the cheap ones are now 2.0) to have total control.
 
An uncommitted switch isn't Diseqc 2.0 though. An uncomitted switch would be Diseqc 1.1 or Diseqc 2.1.


Never got round to testing an uncomitted switch, to see if it would work in this config. Have you? Hexah?
 
It is supposed to work with DVB Viewer and a pc card.

Most cheap disecq switches on the continent are now 2.0 at least due to the popularity of Wave Frontiers etc with loads of LNBs. Diseqc 2.0 passes through 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 (+1.3) and also receives back confirmation of committed switching having occurred, though not of which particular uncommitted branch. 1.1 and above are meant to handle uncommitted signals.

Not tested it myself but apparently some pc users have such systems. As you know, you can alter timings etc on the pc so it is the most flexible way of switching.
 
hexah said:
I

Diseqc 2.0 includes 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 (+1.3)
Click to expand...

Not correct as I have always understood it:-

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DiSEqC

and this:-

_http://www.eutelsat.com/satellites/pdf/Diseqc/Reference%20docs/logos_&_cond.pdf

(see page 9)

Nevertheless, as you suggest, I defo think an un-comitted switch is worth a try.
 
Yes, I think it is down to the manufacturers, as they are churned out in China and may support more than advertised (achieving economy of scale through using one microprocessor in all switches and few instruction sets). Hence people have reported using uncommitted commands via pc with 2.0 switches. But as usual nothing is guaranteed, you have to try it out! At least 4 way switches are very cheap now.
 
hexah said:
Diseqc 2.0 includes 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 (+1.3) and also receives back confirmation of committed switching having occurred, though not of which particular uncommitted branch. 1.1 and above are meant to handle uncommitted signals.
Click to expand...
2.0 does not include 1.1, or 1.2, and there's no such thing as 1.3, at least not in the official DiSEqC specs.

Robbo said:
I defo think an un-comitted switch is worth a try.
Click to expand...
It's not a case of commited or uncommited, it's a case of command order. Some receivers send the motor command before the DiSEqC 1.0 command whereas others send it after the 1.0 command. If the receiver sends the motor command before the switch command the motor must come before the switch. If the receiver sends the motor command after the switch command the motor can be before or after the switch or you can even have more than one motor (one motor on each leg of the switch). It's just a case of the switch needing to be closed before you can send a command through it.

One of the nice things about the Linux boxes is the command order is configurable.
 
I meant it passes through the signal after switching the initial port.
As it is a 4 way switch it only requires the lowest level for the initial switching.

Huevos said:
...and there's no such thing as 1.3, at least not in the official DiSEqC specs.
Click to expand...

That's because it seems to have been invented by Rod Usals, the fabled record producer.....


O-no
 
Robbo said:
With the TM6900 the switch must go between the motor and the LNB.

If it is put receiver side of the motor, the switch wont switch and the motor wont move.

Without modifying the channel list via a computer, the motor will still move to go to 28E, even though it doesn't need to. This is beacuse it is not possible to turn the motor off for individual satellites via the receiver menu.

It is possible to do it with a channel editor though, though I don't know what the current one to use for the TM6900 is. I used to use the TMEditor for my TM1000.

As an aside, with my TM600, I could put the switch on the receiver side of the motor and it worked fine, also tried an Icecrypt receiver and that worked too.
Click to expand...

Thanks Robbo, just the answer (and more) which I was after :-)
 
I think Huevos, as usual has hit the nail on the head above, and certainly gives a logical explanation as to why some receivers work OK and others don't.
 
Is there anything specific I need to look for when buying the Switch?

I guess I just need a bog standard outdoor Switch for use with two dishes. Does it have to be 1.1, 1.2, (1.3) or 2.0 and/or will any of these protocols cause interference with my TM6900HD and SG2100 motor (wrote TM-2100 in my OP but that's wrong)?

I did have a look at the channel Editor and have a question regarding this as well:

I guess I have to set the USALS to OFF for this position so the SG-2100 doesn't move. This then gives me open options to change the 1.1 and 1.2 options.
- The 1.0 option gives me a choice between 1, 2, 3 and 4
- The 1.1 option gives me a choice between 1 and 16 (I think).

So, I'm thinking that if I choose option 1.1 it's DiSEqC 1.2 and this can control 4 different ports (i.e. from up to four dishes right?). Is the one I should be using?

What now if the switch reads 2.0 only? Will I not be able to use it with my receiver then?
 
You just want a 1.0 switch (although if it is 2.0 that is fine too). You only need a 1.1 switch if you are going to go above 4 LNBs or are going to set up a cascade (and you need a compatible receiver as well which lots are not). Decent 1.1 switches are about 5 times the price of 1.0 so there's no point spending the money if you don't need to. DiSEqC 1.2 is for motor control so you don't need to worry about it when selecting a switch.
 
Hi M8 ..
fwiw I have discovered that it depends very much on the receiver used ..and the delays implemented by the box manufacturer ..
For exmple this never worked on my IP9000HD ..but works just fine using an OpenboxS9HD ..
Please look at my last post showing the interconnections for my complex system ..
_http://www.satellites.co.uk/forums/dish-setup-single-sat-multi-sat-motorised-systems/180551-new-interconnects-diagram-accomodate-new-box.html
Ignore most of what you see on post 17 ...but you will notice I have 2 usals motors using diseqc 1.3 both of which are successfully driven _after_ passing through both smart priority switches ...and a 4 way diseqc switch which in turn is driven using diseqc 1.1 protocols ..
So the Openbox first selects the correct diseqc port ie ...either a fixed dish or indeed a motorized usals motorised dish using diseqc 1.1 ...
The presence of a voltage selects the correct route through the priority switch ...which then allows a delayed diseqc 1.3 protocol signal to move the selected motor..
So the answer is _yes_ its possible ..but depending on the set top box ...the switch ...and the order & delays applied to diseqc protocols..
In other words ..you just got to try it and the result is a 'suck it and see' job..
rgds and good luck..
VS
 
Thanks for the valuable info guys. Highly appreciated.

I'll give it a go and most likely come back with problems and/or my final verdict :)

Cheers
 
Just to say well worth trying as I use a motor and diseqc OK. I was told as long as I used the "1" terminal on the 4 way diseqc it would pass commands straight through to the motor on dish 2. I use terminals 2, 3 & 4 for 13, 19 and 28 on fixed LNB's (sharing one dish but that makes no difference). So my set up is receiver - diseqc - motor working fine on TF7710 HDPVR on both original firmware and Enigma2 AAF version.

Jem
 
developers said:
Just to say well worth trying as I use a motor and diseqc OK. I was told as long as I used the "1" terminal on the 4 way diseqc it would pass commands straight through to the motor on dish 2. I use terminals 2, 3 & 4 for 13, 19 and 28 on fixed LNB's (sharing one dish but that makes no difference). So my set up is receiver - diseqc - motor working fine on TF7710 HDPVR on both original firmware and Enigma2 AAF version.

Jem
Click to expand...

Hi Jem,

Does this mean that on the DiSEqc switch the four LNB cable connectors (numbered 1 to 4) should be as follwos:

1. Connected to the USALS,
2. Connected to the fixed dish,
3. No connection
4. No connection.

As it seems like different methodes are apparently in use, I'll start with the first scenario:

Technomate TM6900HD -> SG-2100 USALS -> DiSEqC Switch => 1. USALS Dish, 2. Fixed Dish (28.2E)

and move on to the second scenario if it shouldn't work satisfactory:

Technomate TM6900HD -> DiSEqC Switch => 1. SG-2100 USALS dish & LNB 2. Fixed Dish (28.2E)

I shall report back with my findings as I'll try and get the switch and extra cable tomorrow.

Again, thanks for the replies and pointers :-)
 
Hi Paceuser ..
Sadly I'm not familliar with your Technomate box ..
But assuming you can 'stack' your command protocols ..
Ie set first the switch ...then the motor ..
I would use this arrangement to try ..
Technomate >(first issue diseqc 1.1 to select the correct port...then issue usals diseqc 1.3 command) > 4 way diseqc switch > usals motor

The set top box in theory will select the correct port and pass the second diseqc 1.3 command and move the motor..
If a fixed dish port is selected ..it will simply connect to it and therefore ignore the following diseqc 1.3 command ..
If the motorised dish port is selected ..using the intitial diseqc 1.1 command ...the slightly delayed 1.3 command will then be sent to the motor ..and it (in theory) should move..

rgds
VS
 
Sadly, on the non linux Technomate models one does not have a choice as to what order the commands are sent. I don't know what order they are sent in, but mine only worked when the motor was first.
 
Back
Top