Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Complete Control by URC Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Previous page Next page Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Page 3 of 3
Topic:
Improving RFX-250 Performance
This thread has 44 replies. Displaying posts 31 through 45.
Post 31 made on Saturday January 13, 2007 at 15:23
jkinsd
Lurking Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 2006
6
On January 3, 2007 at 04:50, learninght said...
I will soon be setting up to do a routing test installation.
I am planning to use an MSC-400 but I will go ahead and
set it up using the MRF-350 to see how it goes. I'll get
back to you when done. I have two Oppo DVD players.

As I understand the problem, you assign two like devices
A and B to different IR channels of the MRX-350 and create
a device for each in the remote. Apparently this works
with short cabling between RFX-250 and MRF-350 but fails
when the cable is made long? What is the failure symptom?
Do commands simply fail to go through or are do all commands
appear on all channels regardless of routing setup?

Would it be a good test of your situation if I placed
each on a separate IR channel, loaded each with a different
DVD and then issued commands to each DVD and verified
that each responded properly?

I'm happy to do the test. I just want to make sure I'm
testing the right thing.

Hi!
Yes, you have the problem description exactly correct. I happen to have 4 DVR boxes, 2 LCD's, 2 Denon DVD's all hooked to two MRF-350's (previously 300's). The 350's are daisy chainied on the IR out.

The IR commands are always received and sent. But the IR routing table information is lost.

So what I see on the other end is ALL devices that are like components responding to the command even though in my MX-3000 programming I have setup the RF Hub to route the IR commands per device (hub two line 1 for DVD1, hub two line 2 for DVD2, etc..).

It became apparent how global this problem was when I hooked up DVR device number 4 to my "second RF hub" and was getting IR flash out on that line...the only problem was, I had assigned ALL of my DVR devices to Lines 1 through 4 on the primary hub in the MX editor. Being that it was on a completely different station ID I had eliminated the MRFs from the problem source. As soon as I move the RFX to within 20 feet or so, everything starts working flawlessly.

If you happen to have two DVR's or cable boxes to do the test that would be fantastic. I know that these devices are a bit hyper sensitive to IR flash and it would be great to join the Favorites Macro test with the IR routing test (:

Thanks in advance, we really appreciate your efforst on improving this project. I am sure Eric Johnson at URC will be implementing these changes and improvements.
Post 32 made on Saturday January 13, 2007 at 22:10
Kurt77++
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2005
256
i have been using 2x 47uf tantalum capacitors on the RFX-250 over the past 2 weeks and have noticed a 80% increase in realiabiltiy. A great idea and works really well. URC should build these into all the RFX-250's!
Post 33 made on Sunday January 14, 2007 at 13:15
Eric Johnson
Universal Remote Control Inc.
Joined:
Posts:
May 2001
705
Kurt,

Please give me a call and describe under what circumstances you find an increase in reliability.

To Everyone Else,

Please remember that John found most of his improvement in a 500 foot wire run. We have not been able to recreate any improvement in short wire runs.

Best Regards,

-Eric
Best Regards,
Eric
OP | Post 34 made on Monday January 15, 2007 at 02:54
learninght
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2006
18
On January 11, 2007 at 19:02, Ridenour said...
Just curious, I have been out on yet another service call
for possible RF on an older (about a year) MRF-300 with
the RFX-150 reciever (not narrow band). The runs of Cat5e
to the two RFX-150s are about 80 feet long each. I tested
the voltage on the MRF-300's phoenix terminal and it showed
5 volts. At the RFX-150 I got 4.8 volts off of the mini
plug. Do you think that just adding a 5volt power supply
to the recievers would be enough? Or would I still need
the caps? The system is wired with two MRF-300s: on has
both of the cat5e wires from the recievers wired into
the phoenix connector with a mini from the "RF out" to
the "RF In" of the other. So would the caps have to be
in the same phoenix that the cat5s are in or would they
be effective in the other, which does not have any wire.

It is important to point out that your devices are quite differnt than mine. I have no idea if the same problem exists on your models of UR equipment. Presuming they are the same. you should absolutely include the capacitors as well as the external supply. As outlined in my original post, I had a signficant improvement in operation when I added the cap to my external supply.

Also, make sure you disconnect the +5V wire at the RFX-150 and the MRF-300 devices.

Finally, please understand that you cannot truly measure voltage with a VOM in this instance. VOMs cannot record brief changes in supply voltages. When the RFX-250 goes active, it draws several ma of additional current. It takes time for the power supply to react to this change through wire. The longer the wire, the longer the reaction time. Use a fast oscilloscope if you want to measure. You'll also need to carefully connect the scope lead tip and ground to avoid distorting, or misrecording transients like this.
John Acres
OP | Post 35 made on Monday January 15, 2007 at 02:56
learninght
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2006
18
On January 13, 2007 at 15:23, jkinsd said...
Hi!
Yes, you have the problem description exactly correct.
I happen to have 4 DVR boxes, 2 LCD's, 2 Denon DVD's all
hooked to two MRF-350's (previously 300's). The 350's
are daisy chainied on the IR out.

The IR commands are always received and sent. But the
IR routing table information is lost.

So what I see on the other end is ALL devices that are
like components responding to the command even though
in my MX-3000 programming I have setup the RF Hub to route
the IR commands per device (hub two line 1 for DVD1, hub
two line 2 for DVD2, etc..).

It became apparent how global this problem was when I
hooked up DVR device number 4 to my "second RF hub" and
was getting IR flash out on that line...the only problem
was, I had assigned ALL of my DVR devices to Lines 1 through
4 on the primary hub in the MX editor. Being that it was
on a completely different station ID I had eliminated
the MRFs from the problem source. As soon as I move the
RFX to within 20 feet or so, everything starts working
flawlessly.

If you happen to have two DVR's or cable boxes to do the
test that would be fantastic. I know that these devices
are a bit hyper sensitive to IR flash and it would be
great to join the Favorites Macro test with the IR routing
test (:

Thanks in advance, we really appreciate your efforst on
improving this project. I am sure Eric Johnson at URC
will be implementing these changes and improvements.

I had to leave on a road trip earlier than expected and I will not return until Jan 22. I will do the test then. Sorry for the delay.
John Acres
Post 36 made on Monday January 15, 2007 at 03:22
Kurt77++
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2005
256
Eric

I have sent you an e-mail as it will cost alot to ring the US.

Kurt
Post 37 made on Tuesday October 30, 2007 at 16:18
hiker
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2005
440
On January 4, 2007 at 22:16, learninght said...
You could indeed put all 4 in the terminal block but because
of the inch or so of distance, it is unlikely the .1uf
would have much effect. On the terminal block, I'd just
do a 100, 10 and 1 uf.

The voltage of the cap must be > peak voltage applied
to it in any circumstance. In design, that value is usually
doubled for extra margin. Since the MRX-250 expects a
5V input, the 6.3V should work but doesn't leave much
margin. On the other hand, the worst that will happen
is the capacitor will fail. A 10V cap is probably best.
You can use a 25V or even 50V capacitor but these do get
physically bigger as the voltage grows.

In other wrds, if you have one on hand, there's no harm
in trying a 6.3V. If you are buying one, try for a 10V
or 25V.

Any cap of this capacitance will probably be an electrolytic.
Make sure and attach the + side to the 5V screw and the
negative side to the ground screw.

How long is your cable run? What are your failure symptoms?

I'm confused why you would need more than one capacitor. I'm no electronics engineer but I did study electronics in college. I still have one of my textbooks from 1964 (yes you probably can figure out my age now) and I looked up the equation for using capacitors in parallel. And yes my memory was correct, the total capacitance is equal to the sum of the individual capacitances.
CT = C1 + C2 + C3 .......
So effectively 100uF, a 10uF, a 1uF and a .1uF would give you 111.1uF total capacitance.

Why wouldn't using just one 100uF capacitor be roughly the same?
Post 38 made on Tuesday October 30, 2007 at 17:22
dualtriamp
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2004
96
On October 30, 2007 at 16:18, hiker said...
I'm confused why you would need more than one capacitor.
I'm no electronics engineer but I did study electronics
in college. I still have one of my textbooks from 1964
(yes you probably can figure out my age now) and I looked
up the equation for using capacitors in parallel. And
yes my memory was correct, the total capacitance is equal
to the sum of the individual capacitances.
CT = C1 + C2 + C3 .......
So effectively 100uF, a 10uF, a 1uF and a .1uF would give
you 111.1uF total capacitance.

Why wouldn't using just one 100uF capacitor be roughly
the same?

On December 26, 2006 at 18:12, learninght said...
I’d put in a 100uF, a 10uF,
a 1uF and a .1uF capacitor right at the power entry point.
Different size capacitors respond to different duration
transients. The biggest capacitor (100uf) provides a long
term reserve storage of power that could last for milliseconds.
The smaller ones respond to shorter requirements and are
needed because larger capacitors take a bit of time to
start supplying power.
Better is the nemesis of good.
Post 39 made on Tuesday October 30, 2007 at 17:43
hiker
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2005
440
OK, thanks. To put it in a simplistic way, it's a timing thing.
Post 40 made on Tuesday November 6, 2007 at 23:53
jhunt
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
April 2005
22
I have an mx3000 and have not been able to get the rf to work with any reliability. the receiver and antenna are next to each other with ir leads only 3-4 ft away, all in the eqpt room. i get an interference glow practically every where, and yet do not get response in some places with no glow. lights are florescent but usually off.

i am really at my wits end trying to get the system to work with rf. i even ran the antenna into the other room and yet could not find a quiet place or reasonable workings consistency.

HELP!!!!! I think i understand that adding a cap will not help short runs, so what am i to do at this point?
thx
Post 41 made on Wednesday November 7, 2007 at 09:35
remotejr
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
June 2007
206
Jhunt,
I think your best bet is to go with an IR repeater system. RF is not practical in all environments / applications; and if you've tried it all, no need to keep beating at something with the same result.
You win some, you loose some...
Post 42 made on Wednesday November 7, 2007 at 10:16
jhunt
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
April 2005
22
to use the ir system is not quite an easy switch. the current rf is hidden back with all eqpt. to set up for ir involves running wires and drywall work to put a ir receiver at the front of the room. plus how can i be sure that the line from receiver to base unit do not pick up interference?

any suggestions for rf fixes/setup?
thx
Post 43 made on Monday August 3, 2009 at 17:12
thedishking
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
June 2005
21
Hi John, Thanks for your investigation into this.

Question though, you had mentioned 3 caps- 1 uf, 10 uf and 100 uf.

Since they are all wired in parallel, this essentially becomes a 111 uf cap.

I would like to know your thoughts on this.

Thanks!

Travis Misterek
Post 44 made on Saturday December 21, 2013 at 03:57
loscabosav
Lurking Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2011
4
Great info john! I am running into an issue on an install. I have an MSC-400 going into 4 RFX-250 Antennas. Cat 5 Extensions to 3 of them, 20-80 meters each. Two I am powering with 5V 300mA power supplies. Just to confirm the 5V is removed on both ends when a Power supply is present, but what about the ground? Should that be sent back to the MSC-400 as well as input from the local power supply? Having lots of issues with locking up, lost commands, etc. Any ideas are helpful.

Also in two of the rooms in this install, we also have a MRX-1 in each, with an external RFX-250. In both those rooms, I have another RFX-250 coming from the MSC-400. In a case like this is it possible or recommended to use one antenna for both the MRX-1 and the MSC-400? I am still working on an all nighter as I have to deliver this site Monday AM... Any help is appreciated.
Post 45 made on Saturday December 21, 2013 at 14:00
cb1
Select Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2002
1,663
7 years old!
why have a nice system if you cant operate it, program the remote the right way the FIRST time!
Page 3 of 3


Jump to


Protected Feature Before you can reply to a message...
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now.

Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.

Hosting Services by ipHouse