+1 on that!
So what I gather on the cap is that it's a .01uF in a 0603 package (or at least, that seems to work well). But what's this about a missing resistor? Where? Value?
BCD436HP/BCD536HP: UHF Reception Issues due to Noise from Battery Compartment
- Thread starter bearcat
- Start date
- Status
+1 on that!
So what I gather on the cap is that it's a .01uF in a 0603 package (or at least, that seems to work well). But what's this about a missing resistor? Where? Value?
k3fs
Member
The resistor, or at least the board has markings indicating such, has not been missing on any of the newer boards (V01.09.02), that we have seen. It's the capacitor that has been a variable. The older boards did not have either of them. The board had the markings, but didn't even have the pads for either. There are just round test pads in those areas.
The resistor is right next to the capacitor. Their solder pads are right next to each other.
Yes, 0.01uf capacitor.
The resistor is right next to the capacitor. Their solder pads are right next to each other.
Yes, 0.01uf capacitor.
OK Thanks Frank. I thought we were saying there was also a resistor missing on the 1.09.02 boards.
BOBRR
Member
Return Unit To Check On Cap And Resistor: Good Idea ?
Hello,
As my 436 is only a few months old (purchased from Amazon), I would really like to
know if it has "all" the capabilities that I feel I have paid for. S/N is 376Z68003818
Certainly whether it has that Cap and Resistor that this thread addresses.
Am 80 now, and frankly don't feel all that competent with opening the case up to take a
look at the board with my eyesight now. And, there's the warr. void issue too.
Nor do I feel I should have to.
Unbelievable that Uniden can't/won't say which S/N's have it, and which don't.
Sound like the automotive philosophy to try and hide everything.
Have always had Uniden scanners, and not what I would expect from them.
They certainly must know which do, and which don't.
Anyway, am close to deciding about returning it to them, and thought I'd get some of your opinions first.
As the unit is fairly new (about 3 months old) what would likely be Uniden's response if I return the unit to them, and ask them to check ?
Or, is this even feasible (or a good idea) ?
*Anyone actually do this ?
Would there be a charge if the Cap and Resistor are not there ? Amount ?
Would there be a charge if the Cap and Resistor are actually there ? Amount ?
Just trying to get a feeling of what I am in for if I do return it. Pros and cons ?
BTW: what is there "typical" turn around time ?
Side question: the power button is raised about only 1/2 the distance above the case
compared to all the other buttons. Normal ?
Thanks, as always,
Bob
Hello,
As my 436 is only a few months old (purchased from Amazon), I would really like to
know if it has "all" the capabilities that I feel I have paid for. S/N is 376Z68003818
Certainly whether it has that Cap and Resistor that this thread addresses.
Am 80 now, and frankly don't feel all that competent with opening the case up to take a
look at the board with my eyesight now. And, there's the warr. void issue too.
Nor do I feel I should have to.
Unbelievable that Uniden can't/won't say which S/N's have it, and which don't.
Sound like the automotive philosophy to try and hide everything.
Have always had Uniden scanners, and not what I would expect from them.
They certainly must know which do, and which don't.
Anyway, am close to deciding about returning it to them, and thought I'd get some of your opinions first.
As the unit is fairly new (about 3 months old) what would likely be Uniden's response if I return the unit to them, and ask them to check ?
Or, is this even feasible (or a good idea) ?
*Anyone actually do this ?
Would there be a charge if the Cap and Resistor are not there ? Amount ?
Would there be a charge if the Cap and Resistor are actually there ? Amount ?
Just trying to get a feeling of what I am in for if I do return it. Pros and cons ?
BTW: what is there "typical" turn around time ?
Side question: the power button is raised about only 1/2 the distance above the case
compared to all the other buttons. Normal ?
Thanks, as always,
Bob
Yes, to reduce the possibility of accidentally turning the unit on or off.
Back on topic:
This whole noise issue is WAY overblown.
If you use any external antenna--i.e. any antenna not directly attached to the scanner, such as an outdoor base antenna, or a mobile antenna mounted outside the vehicle, the battery compartment noise has ZERO effect on reception. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
If you use a BNC duck/whip antenna like the Diamond RH77CA and the SMA-BNC adapter included with the scanner, the antenna is moved far enough away from the body of the scanner that the battery compartment noise has very little impact on the received signal. This has about triple the noise reduction effect gained by shielding the battery door, and has the added benefit of making it easy to switch between handheld, mobile, and base use, and all of the contact wear associated with switching antennas happens to the SMA-BNC adapter, rather than to the SMA connector on the radio. So it's not a "kludge" to avoid a noise problem, it's a good practice with several tangible benefits.
The ONLY circumstance where the noise is a significant issue is when using a relatively short SMA antenna such as the stock duck (longer antennas pick up less of the noise because more of the active element is farther from the scanner body) connected directly to the scanner. And that is easily avoided by using the included BNC adapter on the radio and then putting a BNC adapter on the duck, to move it away from the radio a little. Which has a greater effect on reducing the noise than shielding the battery door.
https://www.amazon.com/Maxmoral-Female-Coaxial-Adapter-Connector/dp/B0114MWLX6/
troymail
Silent Key
I must disagree.
First, it doesn't make alot of sense for users of a handheld radio to attach an external antenna. While I have on occasion tried an external antenna (some wen just trying to figure out why in the hell I wasn't receiving UHF DMR systems), attaching an external antenna defeats the whole purpose of having a handheld.
The only antennas I routinely use on the 436 is the Radio Shack 800 Mhz and/or the stock antenna (rarely).
I first noticed reception was better when I attached the external antenna and moved it as far as the cable would allow. I was then hearing things I had not been able to receive prior to that.
Then, I started reading this thread... and bought some copper tape.
On my first attempt, I removed the foam pad, put the tape directly on the door, and replaced the pad. It had no affect.
Then, I put the tape directly over the pad - BOOM! They radio started working and receiving UHF systems.
If/when you pay for a DMR upgrade that results in suddenly starting to listen to UHF when you usually only listen to 800 Mhz trunk systems, it exposes that there is clearly a problem with this radio - one that is STILL unacknowledged by Uniden after all of the posts and discussion, and findings in this thread.
Uniden doesn't have to issue a formal recall or "repair campaign" - all they need to do is tell us (me) that I can send in my radio with this problem and it will be repaired at no charge.
It's not a big deal at this point -- my 436 has been pushed to the side for the last week (not even turned on). However, with all of the issues (to include feature issues, numerous recall/repair campaigns) and a lack of response from Uniden on this one after all of this time will have a serious impact on my intentions to purchase another Uniden product - and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I must disagree also.
I have used the RH77CA and the adapter and several other antennas with the adapter. In fact I always use the adapter. Long before the noise was found. Weak signal reception was zero. Once the door was shielded those weak signals were coming in fine.
I will say that I am happy that your configuration works for you.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2002
- Messages
- 1,968
Absolute nonsense! The radio should work properly with its supplied antenna.
k3fs
Member
I disagree totally also. As our county is all UHF, and the county next to us is all VHF, I noticed the poor reception right away. I was shocked that it out performed the 396XT when hooked up to the outside antenna.
My experiences were very similar to troymail. I was using a window clip mount while mobile to get any type of reception. I had to mount an antenna on the back of my bike, so I could hear something while on the trail. Anything to get some distance from the radio and antenna when I could.
BNC adapter was not even remotely enough to make a difference. Tall antennas, short antennas, and even antennas in between, did not fix the issue.
A portable is intended to be used as portable, and should work as a portable. I should not be tethered to LMR400 to listen to my portable while fishing, or on the hammock while smoking ribs.
Uniden's lack of response, and yet taking the steps to correct the issue is deceptive, to put it nicely. I am still waiting for the advanced analysis features of the Home Patrol Extreme upgrade, a $100 value. Paul's words, not mine. Not good support for the customers of their "Flag Ship" scanner.
And this thread still fails to get a sticky.
When there is a problem, admit it as soon as possible.
Customers are not stupid. Ignoring or denying a legitimate problem is not the way to handle it.
My experiences were very similar to troymail. I was using a window clip mount while mobile to get any type of reception. I had to mount an antenna on the back of my bike, so I could hear something while on the trail. Anything to get some distance from the radio and antenna when I could.
BNC adapter was not even remotely enough to make a difference. Tall antennas, short antennas, and even antennas in between, did not fix the issue.
A portable is intended to be used as portable, and should work as a portable. I should not be tethered to LMR400 to listen to my portable while fishing, or on the hammock while smoking ribs.
Uniden's lack of response, and yet taking the steps to correct the issue is deceptive, to put it nicely. I am still waiting for the advanced analysis features of the Home Patrol Extreme upgrade, a $100 value. Paul's words, not mine. Not good support for the customers of their "Flag Ship" scanner.
And this thread still fails to get a sticky.
When there is a problem, admit it as soon as possible.
Customers are not stupid. Ignoring or denying a legitimate problem is not the way to handle it.
Last edited:
The customers are getting restless! No NXDN support for "flagship scanners", putting foil on battery compartments on the "flagship portable scanner" to have decent reception and silence from a large scanner manufacturing corporation? I have to admit, I'm getting more disappointed as days ware on. Don't forget the ever persistent P25 simulcast issues that has plagued these digital scanners since their birth. Yes I know, we can all go buy commercial radios and these problems will be resolved...blah blah blah.
I just put a TRX-2 with a 32gb SIM card in my Amazon cart and very tempted to pull the trigger. I downloaded the EZ Scan software and have been playing around with it to sort of get the feel for what I might be getting myself into. While I don't think I'm missing much without NXDN support, at least I'd have the option to check it out for myself. I have been a die hard Uniden scanner customer for many years, so I would hate to leave my comfort zone, but giving it some thought.
Whistler Wendy (If that is really her/his name?) seems to respond to the customers a little more often. The secret squirrel stuff is a little old after awhile, and I think as customers supporting this company, we deserve a little better treatment. I've posted this before and I'll say it again, I don't think an upcoming firmware release announcement is such a big issue now that the competition has already released a few updates.
Maybe UPMan does agree but because of some "policy" at Uniden, he can't publicly post. Maybe some of you already know the answers to all these questions but are also under the "tight-lipped" policy we see here. I come here daily to check for some good news or some firmware updates so I don't have to spend another $500 of my hard earned money. Maybe UPMan can take these posts/threads to his bosses and show them our frustration with these products. This nonsense has to stop...acknowledge the issues, acknowledge NXDN is/isn't in the works and let us the consumer make the decision.
I just put a TRX-2 with a 32gb SIM card in my Amazon cart and very tempted to pull the trigger. I downloaded the EZ Scan software and have been playing around with it to sort of get the feel for what I might be getting myself into. While I don't think I'm missing much without NXDN support, at least I'd have the option to check it out for myself. I have been a die hard Uniden scanner customer for many years, so I would hate to leave my comfort zone, but giving it some thought.
Whistler Wendy (If that is really her/his name?) seems to respond to the customers a little more often. The secret squirrel stuff is a little old after awhile, and I think as customers supporting this company, we deserve a little better treatment. I've posted this before and I'll say it again, I don't think an upcoming firmware release announcement is such a big issue now that the competition has already released a few updates.
Maybe UPMan does agree but because of some "policy" at Uniden, he can't publicly post. Maybe some of you already know the answers to all these questions but are also under the "tight-lipped" policy we see here. I come here daily to check for some good news or some firmware updates so I don't have to spend another $500 of my hard earned money. Maybe UPMan can take these posts/threads to his bosses and show them our frustration with these products. This nonsense has to stop...acknowledge the issues, acknowledge NXDN is/isn't in the works and let us the consumer make the decision.
BOBRR
Member
Battery Compartment Shielding Thoughts
Hi,
Thought I'd play around with some battery compartment shielding, and see if I can
discern any differences.
a. I remember several posts saying that the shielding only work/works best if on top of the foam.
Why ?
Purely due to minimal distance above batteries if placed on top, or... ?
b. What other battery compartment shielding, other than the "conductive paint" has proven effective ?
c. I have some coax, and slit and removed the foil from it. Probably AL, but not sure..
I'm a retired ME, and not an EE, hence my ignorance in these matters.
But, I imagine we are trying to shield the electric field portion, and not the magnetic field, of the radiated EMR noise, as nobody has mentioned using a high perm material like Mu-Metal for the shielding.
Also, the shielding apparently needn't be grounded to the circuit ground.
So, I guess the idea is to try and absorb, and dissipate as heat, as much as possible.
If this is so, I "think" the following would be true:
- the higher the freq., the more effective any shielding would be.
- Cu would be better than AL due to it's greater conductivity
- thicker would be better, due to being lossier.
- no advantage to laminating
Any thoughts ?
Really surprised to read that it must be placed on top of the foam, and that under the foam does
not appear to be effective.
Can't understand the reason for, other than perhaps the air-gap (if placed under) allows leakage ?
Must the shielding actually touch the battery ? Can't understand why, if so ?
BTW: what's a good (nationwide) freq that I can probably pick up here outside of Boston to play with
that is high enough to show these effects ?
Thanks,
Bob
Hi,
Thought I'd play around with some battery compartment shielding, and see if I can
discern any differences.
a. I remember several posts saying that the shielding only work/works best if on top of the foam.
Why ?
Purely due to minimal distance above batteries if placed on top, or... ?
b. What other battery compartment shielding, other than the "conductive paint" has proven effective ?
c. I have some coax, and slit and removed the foil from it. Probably AL, but not sure..
I'm a retired ME, and not an EE, hence my ignorance in these matters.
But, I imagine we are trying to shield the electric field portion, and not the magnetic field, of the radiated EMR noise, as nobody has mentioned using a high perm material like Mu-Metal for the shielding.
Also, the shielding apparently needn't be grounded to the circuit ground.
So, I guess the idea is to try and absorb, and dissipate as heat, as much as possible.
If this is so, I "think" the following would be true:
- the higher the freq., the more effective any shielding would be.
- Cu would be better than AL due to it's greater conductivity
- thicker would be better, due to being lossier.
- no advantage to laminating
Any thoughts ?
Really surprised to read that it must be placed on top of the foam, and that under the foam does
not appear to be effective.
Can't understand the reason for, other than perhaps the air-gap (if placed under) allows leakage ?
Must the shielding actually touch the battery ? Can't understand why, if so ?
BTW: what's a good (nationwide) freq that I can probably pick up here outside of Boston to play with
that is high enough to show these effects ?
Thanks,
Bob
I cannot answer most of your technical questions, because frankly I am not 100% sure why the shielded door works, but it does.
There are pictures on this thread at
PAGE 2 MSG #26
PAGE 5 MSG #83
PAGE 10 MSG #189
PAGE 11 MSG #214
Some do not show the shielding over the foam as it should be.
Here is my suggestion for you test. It appears on RRDB that Boston PD uses 460 mhz. I would attempt to hear the input side of those repeaters 465 mhz. Setup a custom search from 465.0 - 465.5.. See if you can hear any of those signals. I would think a city the size of Boston should be fairly busy. Then do the same search with the shielded door attached. If you start hearing the input freqs remove the door while they are talking and see if the radio stops receiving that signal.
I do not know of anyone who used the shielding from coax so I do not know that it actually works.
Last edited:
seth21w
Member
Mine just recently picked 436 new has had very good uhf reception, i am sure its the latest stock because a few days before i ordered i was waiting for more stock from uniden, and im scared to take it apart while in warranty.
BOBRR
Member
From OP For Bearcat
Hi,
Thanks for help.
"I would attempt to hear the input side of those repeaters 465 mhz."
Is 465 a uhf freq. ?
If not, might you suggest one; would like a suggestion for a uhf freq, near the
top end of the unit's capability to try the shielding experiment on. (Live outside of Boston)
Thanks,
Bob
Hi,
Thanks for help.
"I would attempt to hear the input side of those repeaters 465 mhz."
Is 465 a uhf freq. ?
If not, might you suggest one; would like a suggestion for a uhf freq, near the
top end of the unit's capability to try the shielding experiment on. (Live outside of Boston)
Thanks,
Bob
Yes generally speaking 380 - 500 are UHF freqs
Setup a custom search range 465.0000 - 466.0000 NFM 12.5 step size and see if it stops on any frequencies. The top of the range of the scanner is 1300 mhz the 800 mhz and up freqs are not bothered by the RF noise.
UHF is typically 380 mhz - 512 mhz
Do not just listen to 465.0000. I want you to listen to the input freqs for the Boston PD. You will be listening directly to the patrol cars before the signal goes through the repeater.
460.4500 is listed as Boston PD Downtown, so you if listen to 465.450 that would be the freq the patrol cars transmit on. This is just a test as to the sensitivity of the unit. You would normally always want to listen to the repeater output which is 460.45. I hope that makes sense.
seth21w
Member
Bob hi to give you some help your serial number is one of the newest batches and i would say it is most likely has the resistor in place and if your reception on what you listen to is good no worries! Also your power/backlight button is supposed to be half way as all of them are this is normal as well. Enjoy your new scanner and dont worry about what you see on this forum unless your experiencing reception problems.
Spoken like a loyal Uniden employee. Are you one?
Should people stick their head in the sand and accept a poorly performing receiver or be pro active and rule out they have an affected radio? "Most likely" doesn't cut it here and people should be able to determine if they have the noise problem via visual inspection of the radio or an easy to perform receiver test.
I think many people would not realize they have the problem and just assume there is little or lousy UHF reception in their area when in fact the Uniden scanner is jamming itself with internally generated noise. I think its irresponsible to persuade people not to worry and say their scanner is probably ok, when nobody really knows.
prcguy
Should people stick their head in the sand and accept a poorly performing receiver or be pro active and rule out they have an affected radio? "Most likely" doesn't cut it here and people should be able to determine if they have the noise problem via visual inspection of the radio or an easy to perform receiver test.
I think many people would not realize they have the problem and just assume there is little or lousy UHF reception in their area when in fact the Uniden scanner is jamming itself with internally generated noise. I think its irresponsible to persuade people not to worry and say their scanner is probably ok, when nobody really knows.
prcguy
seth21w
Member
I am a member of lots of forums one of which is mustang6g and I joined when I bought my brand new mustang gt, but if I just read every thread and thought it applied to my car I would be tearing my whole car apart to find out if I had or would have the problem others have had, and I am in no way affiliated with Uniden I'm just using common sense here and trying to help the guy out, as he seems worried about his brand new scanner after reading a post online.
- Status
Similar threads
