Just Sharing This My Channel Master 1.8 project.

i would dump the old pole and get a replacement and cement it in ground spot on level.
 
I had (have??) a similar issue with the Gibby (it's a heavy bugger!) on the Dark Motor, the total mass of which caused the 2" scaffold pole to bend slightly forward!

Given I had no chance of "upgrading" the pole to something thicker, I installed 3 steel "construction" braces for the pole:
- one fits between the pole and the side of the garage about 5ft away, and because it's actually slightly longer than that distance then it's in compression and is slightly bent due to the force applied by the combined dish/motor/pole combo!
- the other two fit laterally and rearwards between the pole and the (neighbours'!) fence posts about 4ft either side of, and 18" behind, it.
- All 3 braces are secured to the pole with car exhaust clamps :D

The net effect was to "push/pull" the pole back up much closer to the vertical, and that seems to work "quite well" for pretty accurate tracking from 40W to 53E (just) - although I know that CH has made a couple of somewhat distainfull comments about the Heath-Robinson nature of the arrangement! :-rofl2
 
i have used wire rope and turn buckles to help with this problem or you could get longer bracing bars and mount them higher up the pole.
 
Until the pole is confirmed as suspect (by imaging the movement east and west), there should be no requirement to spend time and effort sorting it.

Similar tracking errors can be caused by a faulty polarmount bearing, flexing in the post, a failed chemical bolt or even soft ground under the whole assembly.
 
the pole is 100% true and solid now - the issue i have is when the polar mount sits on the top of it as there is a gap, that - in theory gets closed up a little when the 4 bolts are tightened up - it certainly alters the signal on 1w when tightening up

i will spend more time later - thanks all
 
Manikm909 said:
the pole is 100% true and solid now - the issue i have is when the polar mount sits on the top of it as there is a gap, that - in theory gets closed up a little when the 4 bolts are tightened up - it certainly alters the signal on 1w when tightening up

i will spend more time later - thanks all
Click to expand...
How much gap is there between inside and out ?

You could drill / thread two more bolt holes in the polarmount to ensure the assembly stays vertical.
 
FWIW, further to what I wrote (and to correct "something") here is a pic of the method used to "verticalise" the pole for the TD110 (not the Gibby as stated last night)
 

Attachments

  • TD110 pole stabiliisation 2019.webp
    TD110 pole stabiliisation 2019.webp
    114.6 KB · Views: 56
On the smaller cm mount there is a emery cloth/non slip liner fitted it reduces the gap and also grips the pole when the bolts are tightened, i presumes this would be the same on the 1.8m mount is yours missing ?
 
Bare metal mate. I have the smaller one too. And I'm sure that's bare metal too. Will check in the morning. Thanks. I was thinking of doing something like that actually to pack it out but couldn't think of that to use other than reams of gaffer tape
 
In general with one,s latitude correct and the pole 100% vertical, is the only adjustment left , the dish angle.
 
moonbase said:
Let's hope the "packing out" resolves the arc issue.
The equipment has been refurbed to a good standard and has nice potential as a motorised setup.
Click to expand...
until i get my longer actuator - im interested to see what the signals are like beyond 23.5e and 28.2e - maybe its a case that the LNB is overloaded and returning a lesser signal than the 1.2m....im not sure...i was going to change the LNB - might do that in a mo - see what happens. ive seen something similar with 19.2e
 
Or an attenuator?
 
Manikm909 said:
until i get my longer actuator - im interested to see what the signals are like beyond 23.5e and 28.2e - maybe its a case that the LNB is overloaded and returning a lesser signal than the 1.2m....im not sure...i was going to change the LNB - might do that in a mo - see what happens. ive seen something similar with 19.2e
Click to expand...

You can try the frequencies with weaker signal levels per satellite, they would not overload the receiver tuner.
A comparison with known weaker signal levels between the 1.2m dish and the 1.8m dish is probably preferred to using the stronger frequencies per satellite.

Personally, I would carry out that test before changing the LNB, then you can repeat the test with the different LNB for comparison.
 
well well well - i think i know the issue - the arm of the jack is slightly bent, i noticed it when i went to inspect how things look when dish is at 28.2e

im hoping this might explain things - roll on delivery of my 24" QARL !!!!!

not going to waste any more time on this, until it arrives.
 
Manikm909 said:
the bent arm might help explain things
Click to expand...


In my personal opinion, the bent arm would be impacting the v-box pulse count rather than the accuracy of arc tracking.
If the polar mount bolts are tightened and there is no play in the oilite bushes, the moving part of the frame that the dish is secured to simply traverses East/West. It should not pulled from this trajectory by a slightly bent actuator.

As regards tuner overload, it would affect both East and West satellites and not just East.

It might be that the original owner never had the arc accurately aligned and they used the dual axis motorisation to fine tune per satellite.
Why not attach both actuators to the mount and test it out in dual axis mode on the weaker signals per satellite?
 
Back
Top