Tests of 120cm antennas

[RimaNTSS]

Today we had better weather conditions. Windy but sunny, no clouds. Temperature more or less same both days.

 

[skomedal]

Different test dates between the fibo 24. 02. 15 and the CM 27. 02. 15.
Were test conditions ( weather, temp, cloud, rain ) similar?

3 days between tests according to your post 239

Thought tests should be performed at least on the same day, recording ( variable ) weather conditions at the test time

 

[RimaNTSS]

Yes, 3 days. So what?

 

[skomedal]

Thought tests should be performed at least on the same day, recording ( variable ) weather conditions at the test time

 

[RimaNTSS]

..... So what? Please continue . Your conclusion than is...?

 

[skomedal]

..... So what? Please continue . Your conclusion than is...?

Test invalid due too time lapse

 

[RimaNTSS]

O ye, great! Could you show some your valid tests in that case? Except this I did not see any. Or that one, how to use laser pointer to point LNB towards dish without knowing where to point? You know what, I have solution: stop spying on me, especially if you have nothing to say. This is funny!

 

[skomedal]

Refuse too get into more controversy with your superior knowledge of testing conditions!

Just hope a 3 day lapse is considered justified.

Wish you luck with your ongoing projects including your faulty CM lnb focus point

End of

 

[RimaNTSS]

Even more funny! And miserably

 

[Lazarus]

Mod Note: Can we be cooperative rather than confrontational, please?

 

[RimaNTSS]

Yes, Mod, please delete some stupid posts starting from 240, which was posted to start hullabaloo. Unfortunately we experience presence of users who only like to criticize without doing any practical things.

 

[Archived-1]

I am guilty of being a critic sorry Rimants, it would be nice for Rimants to do his test and maybe take the negatives to another thread, something like (Rimants Tests of 120cm antennas critic discussion)

If admin is ok with this would you create a thread and word it accordingly please and let Rimants continue his test.

 

[RimaNTSS]

That is how new LNB holder looks mounted and with surrounded INOX parts.

 

[jase1]

That is how new LNB holder looks mounted and with surrounded INOX parts.

On the original bracket the three arms are very close together where they attach. In the photo they look like they've been opened up a good way to take the new holder. Are these the original arms?

 

[RimaNTSS]

Jason! If you scroll back several pages you will probably see why I did it. Feedarms are original, but with original LNB holder it is not very convinient to make multifeds on this antenna. It is also good to have sidearms wider to get them out of the way towards satellite, especially when antenna is not polarmounted.
So, I turned side arms little bit to get them wider. It is actually possible to widen them even more.

 

[Captain Jack]

Good job there. I hate the CM feedarms - can't do anything with them (unless I am you).

 

[RimaNTSS]

So, after getting clear LOS towards 7,3*W, did couple of tests today. First - put CM120 original LNB holder, IBU in it, tuned antenna as good I could to 7,3*W and scanned all 45 available frequencies. Excluded from list frequencies belonging to 7*W. Recorded signal levels.
Than removed very fast original LNB holder, installed self-made holder and inserted same IBU. Of course, adjusted dish properly to get maximum signal on same frequency as I did for original holder. Scanned same frequencies again. I do not think that between 2 tests more than 20 minutes passed. In those 20 minutes weather conditions did not change at all.
Only on 3 frequencies signal level was better with original LNB holder. On other 42 frequencies I observed better signal level.
My conclusion- after putting LNB in antenna's focus and proper aiming of it, it is possible to get some increase of performance of system.

 

[jase1]

Only on 3 frequencies signal level was better with original LNB holder. On other 42 frequencies I observed better signal level.
My conclusion- after putting LNB in antenna's focus and proper aiming of it, it is possible to get some increase of performance of system.

Thanks for taking the time to do this Rima. How do you feel now it's done?
Is it really worth the effort to make the modified holder? I guess the 1.2CM is set up pretty well to start with.

 

[RimaNTSS]

How do you feel now it's done?

Can it ever be done? This is everlasting process so, not done.

Is it really worth the effort to make the modified holder?

I think yes, especially if you care about some increase of performance of your system and also going to build multifeed which will not be obstructed by side feedarms.

 

[RimaNTSS]

Did little bit more tweaking today (such a tweaks original CM LNB holder can not provide), basically adjusted LNB's position in more proper position. Scanned all the channels again and got even better results (marked magenta). Now difference between today's results- my LNB holder and yesterday's - with original holder is more than 3% average. Both tests were made at about 21:00 local time. OK, difference between tests is one day and some will say (as usually ): tests are not valid and this is all bull sh*t, CM is best company and they could not make any mistakes. But, TBH, after all this, I do not wish to put original CM LNB holder back, as it does not hold LNB in right position and, therefore, system is not performing as good as it could.