-
To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:
Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.
If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.
To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.
The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.
For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).
This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.
Icom FR4000 "noisy hollow pipe" sound, seems duplexer related?
- Thread starter ElroyJetson
- Start date
I would still start with terminating the transmitter with a load and listen to the repeat audio. If its normal then connect the duplexer but terminate the antenna output with a load and listen, should be very easy to isolate the problem to the repeater or duplexer or cables/antenna. You should have enough info to pinpoint the problem in less than 5min. No need to complicate things or go off on tangents, just concentrate on the basics.
ElroyJetson
Getting tired of all the stupidity.
It's a larger duplexer than that, about 7x9 inches overall size, with N connectors.
I know, LMR isn't optimal for this application but it's not expensive and is easy to work with and is the de facto standard
for lower cost radio installations, at least in central florida. It's almost rare to find anything else in use.
I don't spec what goes in, that's not my job. I maintain and install what I'm told to maintain and install.
If it were my job to spec out systems, I'd be trying my best to sell better products and systems to my customers.
But this is lowest competent bidder work. Keep that in mind. The safety of your kids at school may depend on the
performance of repeaters and portable radios that were selected because of LOW COST. Feel better now?
And I've got to make it run right when it misbehaves...and its normal state of operation is never all THAT far from misbehaving.
I know, LMR isn't optimal for this application but it's not expensive and is easy to work with and is the de facto standard
for lower cost radio installations, at least in central florida. It's almost rare to find anything else in use.
I don't spec what goes in, that's not my job. I maintain and install what I'm told to maintain and install.
If it were my job to spec out systems, I'd be trying my best to sell better products and systems to my customers.
But this is lowest competent bidder work. Keep that in mind. The safety of your kids at school may depend on the
performance of repeaters and portable radios that were selected because of LOW COST. Feel better now?
And I've got to make it run right when it misbehaves...and its normal state of operation is never all THAT far from misbehaving.
So are ya gonna get a dummy load and start testing?It's a larger duplexer than that, about 7x9 inches overall size, with N connectors.
I know, LMR isn't optimal for this application but it's not expensive and is easy to work with and is the de facto standard
for lower cost radio installations, at least in central florida. It's almost rare to find anything else in use.
I don't spec what goes in, that's not my job. I maintain and install what I'm told to maintain and install.
If it were my job to spec out systems, I'd be trying my best to sell better products and systems to my customers.
But this is lowest competent bidder work. Keep that in mind. The safety of your kids at school may depend on the
performance of repeaters and portable radios that were selected because of LOW COST. Feel better now?
And I've got to make it run right when it misbehaves...and its normal state of operation is never all THAT far from misbehaving.
Exactly. That's why I asked.
Testing with a dummy load as has been mentioned already would give you an idea whether you have "in house" problems or not. I completely understand about the LMR400 being less expensive than other options, but as others have stated, certainly is not good for duplex operation. A slight increase in cost will get you LMR400DB, which is the "direct burial" version, and the braid is flooded with sticky mess, which actually helps alleviate semiconductor-like properties of oxidized/loose metal-to-metal contact between the braid and foil of the cable. I doubt it's your sole problem at only 40 watts of power. I am still thinking you have local mixing. Any secondary source can be a suspect. Nearby broadcast transmitters, WX service transmitters, cell sites, etc. If the agency isn't willing to spend some money on infrastructure to correct the problem (post-filters on the TX, a good BP/BR duplexer, Heliax-type cable, etc) then I guess they should be willing to accept sub-par performance.
ElroyJetson
Getting tired of all the stupidity.
The dummy load test was done. As was dropping the power output of the repeater. The duplexer is suspect, still, and will be replaced with a slightly different type as soon as it is shipped.
Project25_MASTR
Millennial Graying OBT Guy
I might have missed it but what actual tests were performed? All I've seen thus far checking the tuning with a R8000, an insertion loss test and some sort of dummy load test. 0.5 dB of insertion loss is very suspect as having dealt with some 2000 RFS/Celwave flatpacks over a three year span...you should be seeing something more akin of 1.5-2 dB of insertion loss. Wouldn't be the first time I've seen it and it doesn't always mean bad duplexer though.
I'd be more interested to see what the receive sensitivity is through the duplexer is, how much desense is present as RFS/Celwave flat packs rated at 50W will always begin to show signs of desense around 32 W of input power unless you are using an additional preselector. A FR4000 specifically will typically hit 12 dB SINAD around -116 dBm to -117 dBm. How much desense was present? What was the effective receive sensitivity? Did your numbers change any after eliminating the desense and testing the receive sensitivity while the repeater was enabled?
Personally, I think RFS/Celwave makes a well known product using low cost materials at a premium price post RFS acquisition due the the name and the fact it's made in the US (or at least used to be). That being said, they tend to make a fairly consistent product (which CommScope was never able to say after moving the DB line to Mexico production facilities). I remember one specific RFS failure where the duplexer looked fine on the R8000 but as soon as you applied power to it it would show issues to the point where anything more than 2W was a problem.
I'd be more interested to see what the receive sensitivity is through the duplexer is, how much desense is present as RFS/Celwave flat packs rated at 50W will always begin to show signs of desense around 32 W of input power unless you are using an additional preselector. A FR4000 specifically will typically hit 12 dB SINAD around -116 dBm to -117 dBm. How much desense was present? What was the effective receive sensitivity? Did your numbers change any after eliminating the desense and testing the receive sensitivity while the repeater was enabled?
Personally, I think RFS/Celwave makes a well known product using low cost materials at a premium price post RFS acquisition due the the name and the fact it's made in the US (or at least used to be). That being said, they tend to make a fairly consistent product (which CommScope was never able to say after moving the DB line to Mexico production facilities). I remember one specific RFS failure where the duplexer looked fine on the R8000 but as soon as you applied power to it it would show issues to the point where anything more than 2W was a problem.
Ubbe
Member
I looked at the FR4000 schematics and it has a tiny SMD two diode voltage clipping circuit at its RX input. I've never seen that in a professional repeater. They will work as a mixer when the input signal goes above 1,2V peak to peak, that's 30mW. So it will probably be very sensitive to any RF coming into the RX. Those diodes recovery time are 4nS at max that equals to 250MHz. At 400MHz they will never recover and be saturated. Diodes will work as mixers and create multiples of frequencies.
This calls for a very high quality duplexer not letting anything from its own TX pass thru and not having anything from other RF sources going thru the duplexer. I bet the repeater have excellent sensitivity at the test bench but will be extremely prone to RF issues at a site, if not installed far from any other RF sources.
/Ubbe
This calls for a very high quality duplexer not letting anything from its own TX pass thru and not having anything from other RF sources going thru the duplexer. I bet the repeater have excellent sensitivity at the test bench but will be extremely prone to RF issues at a site, if not installed far from any other RF sources.
/Ubbe
ElroyJetson
Getting tired of all the stupidity.
I can't do a thing about the cost-conscious/cheap-ass/budget-oriented approach of my customers. And yet at the same time, these modern schools built to hurricane-proof construction standards are quite often a challenge from an RF propagation perspective. You'd THINK that 40 watts would be enough power to cover a school campus that's not even a quarter mile in size, but even with the antenna located centrally in the main building, quite often there are portable radio coverage issues at the ends of the building. Less than a hundred yards away.
Ubbe
Member
I'm sursprised by the bad specification for that Icom FR4000 repeater. It says intermod for the receiver is typical 70dB. Then I read this:
The IEC requirement for intermodulation rejection ratio is 68 dB, calculated as the ratio of the unwanted signal to the level of the wanted signal which degrades the receiver SINAD from 20 to 14 dB. It's just 2dB above the minimum value permitted.
If the receiver sensitivity are something like -120dBm 0,25uV that 70dB will be at -50dBm that equals microwatts that the receiver can handle until it's sensitivity degrades. I would say that this is not a receiver suitable to be used in a repeater configuration or on a site with other transmitters.
I would split the RX out from the duplexer to a spectrum analyzer and when that hollow sound appears to look at the spectrum where another transmitters peak appear and then use a notch filter for that. Or a narrow bandpass for RX. As it doesn't happen every time the repeater transmits it has to be another transmitter that has to be involved. It could even be a portable in the same system that are too close to the repeater when transmitting. I would remove that D1 protection diodes at the receiver input as that will only create problems.
/Ubbe
The IEC requirement for intermodulation rejection ratio is 68 dB, calculated as the ratio of the unwanted signal to the level of the wanted signal which degrades the receiver SINAD from 20 to 14 dB. It's just 2dB above the minimum value permitted.
If the receiver sensitivity are something like -120dBm 0,25uV that 70dB will be at -50dBm that equals microwatts that the receiver can handle until it's sensitivity degrades. I would say that this is not a receiver suitable to be used in a repeater configuration or on a site with other transmitters.
I would split the RX out from the duplexer to a spectrum analyzer and when that hollow sound appears to look at the spectrum where another transmitters peak appear and then use a notch filter for that. Or a narrow bandpass for RX. As it doesn't happen every time the repeater transmits it has to be another transmitter that has to be involved. It could even be a portable in the same system that are too close to the repeater when transmitting. I would remove that D1 protection diodes at the receiver input as that will only create problems.
/Ubbe
Project25_MASTR
Millennial Graying OBT Guy
I've found that issue to be an antenna selection issue 90% of the time. It was rare I would ever run more than 20-30W (10-15W was more typical) on school repeaters mainly due to the fact you are just uplinking with portables. Your schools are built to withstand hurricanes…mine are built to withstand tornados.
paulears
Member
I've just once, had this sort of issue that in the end was not RF induced as in the usual intermod mixing but was actually RF getting into the transmit audio stage - and the FM signal being superimposed on the analogue audio producing a sort of phasey-swirly sound, a bit like the ringing in a PA system when feedback is approaching. In my example the audio link screen between the RX and TX unit had become detached and while the circuit was completed by the chassis ground, it let in the RF. re-soldering the cable fixed it.
