ejansson wrote:We did move around and try different channels, the noise floor was in the 90's, we go the same results on higher channels where the noise floor was in the -80 to -70. Besides with a signal of -64 you should be able to get through the noise i would think.
Boo wrote:Why is it every card produced by UBT has problems with noise, esd, and excuses for it, I've been through many SR2's all with the system grounded and they go deaf.
Boo wrote:Why is it every card produced by UBT has problems with noise, esd, and excuses for it, I've been through many SR2's all with the system grounded and they go deaf. we hear the excuse of the dervisity switch. well then fix it, cm9's perform better and do not have this problem. SR9's work fine as long as you reboot the system once or twice an hour. they cannot handle thier own noise(this was tested in lab). I have not tried the XR series, I,ve got a business to run and can't keep loosing money on this. Who know's how many promises Robert at UBT broke with me.
O.K. I feel better now but will UBT ever own up to this Robert?
rodneal wrote:OK - I worked on the problem more today and found that the modulation was acting more like a "G" connection then a "B" connection. Now I know you RF Gods out there are gonna chew on this but I freely admit that I am NOT a RF God. Just an observation.
The 2ghz-5mhz and 10mhz where trying to connect at 6-9-12-18+ rates and we all know that "G" is notorious for behaving more like "A" then "B" in modulation.
When I turned off the data rates for the "G" and tried to make them "B" only the 2ghz-5mhz-10mhz complained and behaved badly.
I then set the interfaces to "B" and the data rates to 1-11 only and everything behaved much better. I'm still tweaking the connections and signal testing the antenna angles but I think we have a beginning solution that we can implement and then build on.
The only real aspect of the winbox data was the ack timeout - it really gets bad(408+) when the connections are not set right. Good (30-) 3mb thru-put down; 1mb up
Would love feedback to enhance my knowledgebase.
BTW - my connection is 1 mile thru heavy wooded area and a hill.
Omni(SR9) is 90 feet on tower and elevation is 20 lower then the CPE(18dbi yagi w/SR9) which is on a 30 foot roof - which means they are pretty darn close to equal height.
They are both vertical polarization.
Both are using "default" power settings.
there was offset in 1 or 2 Mhz frequencies that makes then incompatible.
I'm glad you told me that - I definately will NOT buy anymore SR9's and I will turn in the ones I have.
I have to have parity accross our network!
It amazes me when Vendors like UB do not make their equipment backward compatible.
I guess they expect us struggling businesses to pick up the expense when I just lost thousands of dollars on the SR2 debacle - I have stacks of SR2's that I can not do anything with 'cause they are out of warrantee and they are "deaf".
I love the product when it works but this sucks!!!!!
What also amazes me that this isn't listed anywhere that the SR9's are sold. Don't you think that it should say on UB XR9 website "this is not compatible with SR9's". Would'nt that at least show us a little respect?
Instead thay send all the cards back I sent them - after struggling for a year or so trying to figure out what we had done wrong - saying that they were out of warrantee and yet they all had a defect built into them from the beginning. Doesn't this scream "class action"? How many of you guys have SR2's sitting around that you couldn't figure out what the hell was wrong with them?
Thank you for that little tidbit(SR9) uldis - I obviously didn't know that they were not backward compatible.
I'm very glad we have the forum to share info - I would have been trying for weeks+ to figure that one out!
Users browsing this forum: ethernet and 8 guests