BCD436HP/BCD536HP: UHF Reception Issues due to Noise from Battery Compartment

Status
Not open for further replies.

plaws

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
1,717
Location
E Hawkesbury Twp, ON
Yes!

Thanks go to you for the post, wish there were more technical related threads like this here.

You speak for many of us, I think!

My only regret is that nearly everything near me is either 850 MHz or 150 MHz, with very little (that I am interested in) in between! :lol:
 

bravo14

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
5,140
Location
Polk County FL
So far today I'm still picking up Cap+ very well on the 436. I'm going to do some more tests on other systems like SLERS and p25 trunking.
 

bearcat

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
741
Please keep the conversation going on this thread even though I mentioned closing it. I did not know how long I was permitted to let these things go. So disregard the thread "Shielded Battery Case Performance" keep the conversation here.
 

bearcat

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
741
My internet is like turtle slow and the provider said they will be out this afternoon or tomorrow, If I do not get back to your questions bare with me. If somebody else knows the answer please chime in and pass along the info. I am not a fan of typing long messages on my phone. I will get back to everybody once they fix the problem.
 

troymail

Silent Key
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,981
Location
Supply (Lockwood Inlet area), NC
Well, the tape arrived -- I was really hoping for "big bang" event but so far, my reception hasn't improved. I've even layered on 2 sheets inside the cover. Still not receiving any better.

I really, really wish I could report better news.....
 

KevinC

The big K
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
12,716
Location
I'm everywhere Focker!
Well, the tape arrived -- I was really hoping for "big bang" event but so far, my reception hasn't improved. I've even layered on 2 sheets inside the cover. Still not receiving any better.

I really, really wish I could report better news.....

Do you have a terminal emulation program that you can "talk" to the radio serially with?
 

wuudogg

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 26, 2016
Messages
2
Amateur RC Multicopter pilots have been using copper tape and aluminum tape to isolate/minimize SD Card write RF noise caused by GoPros from impacting GPS receivers positioned on the same aircraft. Those GPS signals are critical for positioning. Things don't end well when the bird loses a bunch of SATs due to the SD card interference. I've always just used slug tape for this. It's copper and sticky backed. If you can't wait for FEDEX, just get it at home depot or lowes in your garden section.
 

Attachments

  • 51NY2PrhZbL.jpg
    51NY2PrhZbL.jpg
    41.3 KB · Views: 494

KevinC

The big K
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
12,716
Location
I'm everywhere Focker!
I have the radio parked on 450 Mhz and send PWR to the radio numerous times --

door on or off 226-248 -- mostly in the 230's

Not really seeing alot of difference either way.

Something is different between our radios then, I have a considerable difference.

With the antenna off I'm guessing you have 60-70's?

I know the RSSI won't be the same between radios/locations/antennas, but yours seems high to me for a static frequency.
 

troymail

Silent Key
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,981
Location
Supply (Lockwood Inlet area), NC
Something is different between our radios then, I have a considerable difference.

With the antenna off I'm guessing you have 60-70's?

I know the RSSI won't be the same between radios/locations/antennas, but yours seems high to me for a static frequency.

No antenna 75-78 door on or off batteries in or out

170 antenna on batteries out door off

180 antenna on batteries out door on

same w/recording disabled or enabled - in the 225 range...
 

AggieCon

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
1,448
Location
Texas
I really think everyone is reading too much into the RSSI readout of the radio.

I'd find some marginal signals in the UHF range. Test their reception before and after. Signal to noise is what matters the most anyhow. I think we're trying to be too scientific with a very basic speck of information. I like numbers too, but, yea...

Now if someone does have access to better equipment, please do share your findings.

And if you really want to go the onboard RSSI route, you could solder on to the RSSI pin of the demodulator chip and use your voltmeter to get instant feedback.
 

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,634
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
Any leads or wires on the scanner would likely affect some characteristics, like adding a groundplane to it. RSSI wouldn't necessarily indicate the amount of reduction in quiescent noise floor unless that's what you guys are measuring. If so, then carry on. I missed it.

Otherwise, what I would have done is generate a UHF signal with a service monitor using the scanner's antenna and lower the attenuator until I have a quantifiably noisy level (I'd try to jack into the audio circuit for a 12 dB SINAD measurement, but the leads might affect the test). Then I'd do the tape hookie-dookie and look for the delta between no tape and tape. If I can lower the signal level on the attenuator and get the same result in noise, then I'd declare great success. Otherwise, the more thingies attached to the radio, the better the possibility of changing some of its characteristics.

And, we have the possibility that it's not shielding that's making the difference, it's adding more of a groundplane surface. Maybe?

Wow, I haven't had this much fun on here in a long time!
 

KevinC

The big K
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
12,716
Location
I'm everywhere Focker!
Any leads or wires on the scanner would likely affect some characteristics, like adding a groundplane to it. RSSI wouldn't necessarily indicate the amount of reduction in quiescent noise floor unless that's what you guys are measuring. If so, then carry on. I missed it.

Otherwise, what I would have done is generate a UHF signal with a service monitor using the scanner's antenna and lower the attenuator until I have a quantifiably noisy level (I'd try to jack into the audio circuit for a 12 dB SINAD measurement, but the leads might affect the test). Then I'd do the tape hookie-dookie and look for the delta between no tape and tape. If I can lower the signal level on the attenuator and get the same result in noise, then I'd declare great success. Otherwise, the more thingies attached to the radio, the better the possibility of changing some of its characteristics.

And, we have the possibility that it's not shielding that's making the difference, it's adding more of a groundplane surface. Maybe?

Wow, I haven't had this much fun on here in a long time!

The RSSI of a received signal doesn't change with or without the shield, so I don't think we're adding a ground plane. And you (or I at least) can clearly see the noise on a spectrum analyzer.

The RSSI measurement changes as the noise floor changes, so it "should" be a good indicator.

I had posted earlier I could do a desense measurement, but I'm no that motivated since I've eliminated almost all of this noise.
 

bearcat

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
741
Well, the tape arrived -- I was really hoping for "big bang" event but so far, my reception hasn't improved. I've even layered on 2 sheets inside the cover. Still not receiving any better.

I really, really wish I could report better news.....
Is it possible the aluminum is doing better than copper? I am not sure if we have heard from any copper users other than you
 

W5JCK

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
158
Location
Everman, TX
I think there are other problems with some of the 436 scanners causing RX issues. As I mentioned in one of the DMR threads, my 536 consistently receives 2 bars more than my 436 when I attach them to the same external high gain antenna and monitor UHF DMR. If the 536 receives 4 bars the 436 will receive only 2 bars. So whatever issue is causing this 12 dB drop between the two scanners is likely not going to be fixed by shielding the battery cover. Shielding the battery cover might improve reception with an HT antenna on the 436. I still have not seen any data in this thread that really backs that up. Mostly just seeing anecdotal data, which is rather useless IMO. What I would like to see is a video showing terrible reception on UHF, especially DMR, with the battery door unshielded, then decent reception on same system with the door shielded. Not all 436's seem to have the same issues nor the same amount of issue. Some here seemed to be having better reception while others don't with this shielding experiment. I've never really noticed the hissing issue on UHF. My issue seems to be total deafness on UHF DMR when using an HT antenna.
 

nosoup4u

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Messages
2,201
Location
High Bridge, NJ
I think there are other problems with some of the 436 scanners causing RX issues. As I mentioned in one of the DMR threads, my 536 consistently receives 2 bars more than my 436 when I attach them to the same external high gain antenna and monitor UHF DMR. If the 536 receives 4 bars the 436 will receive only 2 bars. So whatever issue is causing this 12 dB drop between the two scanners is likely not going to be fixed by shielding the battery cover. Shielding the battery cover might improve reception with an HT antenna on the 436. I still have not seen any data in this thread that really backs that up. Mostly just seeing anecdotal data, which is rather useless IMO. What I would like to see is a video showing terrible reception on UHF, especially DMR, with the battery door unshielded, then decent reception on same system with the door shielded. Not all 436's seem to have the same issues nor the same amount of issue. Some here seemed to be having better reception while others don't with this shielding experiment. I've never really noticed the hissing issue on UHF. My issue seems to be total deafness on UHF DMR when using an HT antenna.
I can attest to this also. My 536 receives UHF much better than my 436 on the same antenna.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top