[Advert] Simply Automate requires a Technical Author

["Darryl Mattocks" <Darryl.Mattocks@xxxxxxx>]

We are looking for a technical author to write a series of Home
Automation articles for us over the next 3 months (general, wiring, X10,
CCTV etc).  If you know anyone suitable, please let me know offlist.

Freelance Technical Author
* Freelance technical author to work on developing a series of=20
practical Home Automation project articles=20
* An interesting role with flexibility to work from home=20
* Around 20 days of project time required over the next 3 months=20
* Full training on each product set / project provided

More details at http://www.SimplyAutomate.com/Vacancy26.asp=20

Regards
Darryl.
=A0
Simply Automate - Bringing your home to life.
=A0
http://www.SimplyAutomate.com/
mailto:Darryl.Mattocks@xxxxxxx
Tel: 01865 784 080
Fax: 01865 784 081
=A0


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruno Prior [mailto:bruno@xxxxxxx]=20
Sent: 11 August 2003 08:20
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Loftbox users?

Paul,

I think you may have hit the nail on the head. I didn't realise it only=20
distributed the UHF2 feed - I thought it multiplexed the TV and radio=20
signals from the various inputs. So I had only connected the satellite=20
feed for the Sky+ Box, not the RF input as well. If what you are saying=20
is true, then all that would be distributed by the loftbox in that=20
circumstance would be the currently-tuned satellite channel. Strange=20
that I didn't seem to pick up even this channel in the bedroom, but that

may be a function of the cable lengths. If the TV signal has to go via=20
the Sky+ box, it will have run nearly 100 metres by the time it gets to=20
the bedroom. This can't be good.

As for the cables, I'm pretty sure I've got the same cable at both ends,

partly because the electrician labelled them all up, partly because I've

connected all four bedroom cables to the loftbox (so it should be=20
connected even if labelled wrongly), and partly because the signal is=20
better when I barrel-connect the bedroom cable to the aerial than it is=20
with it disconnected. I need to talk to the electrician about the=20
quality of the cables, but this did look like the less significant part=20
of the signal degradation.

Anyway, you've given me some good options to try, and I'm hopeful this=20
will solve the loftbox half of the equation. Thanks.

Cheers,

Bruno


Paul Robinson wrote:
> I've not had my loftbox very long, and I haven't connected my sky
through it
> yet either, but distribution of RF signals to two TVs is working in a
> reasonable quality. Your description sounds right, but the quality
you're
> getting sounds very wrong.
>=20
> When you tested with your TV physically next to the loftbox, you
really
> should have been able to get a decent picture. You don't describe the
> connections you made when you did this test. What you have to
understand is
> that whatever goes in to UHF2 is the thing that is distributed to each
of
> the "TV out".
>=20
> So, most basic loftbox test is to connect aerial to UHF2, then put a
TV on
> one of the TV out connectors and see if you get a picture.
>=20
> Then move the aerial to the "TV Ant" input, and loop back
the "Living
Room"
> output to the UHF2 input. You should now find you've got a picture on
each
> of the "TV out".
>=20
> Then you can try adding sky to the mix.
>=20
> As for the loss on the run to the bedroom...dumb question, but are you
> *sure* you're using the same cable at each end?
>=20
> HTH
> Paul
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> ----- Original Message -----=20
> From: "Bruno Prior" <bruno@xxxxxxx>
> To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2003 2:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Loftbox users?
>=20
>=20
>=20
>>A little extra info on distribution of terrestrial signal through
loftbox:
>>
>>I have now tried the following:
>>
>>TV attached direct to feed from aerial (i.e. TV positioned where
loftbox
>>is located but connected direct, rather than through loftbox): As
good
>>as it gets round here (a bit hazy on Ch.5).
>>
>>TV located by loftbox and fed by short cable run from loftbox: very
poor
>>signal on all channels - snow storm, some black & white and
some sound
>>interference, but a little better than if the TV is disconnected
from
>>the loftbox.
>>
>>TV located in bedroom and connected direct to aerial by connecting
cable
>>from aerial to cable to bedroom with barrel connector: Signal
seriously
>>degraded, but some image and sound available for each channel
>>(snow-storm effect). Better than the previous option.
>>
>>TV located in bedroom and connected to aerial via the loftbox: No
>>reception on all but one channel (Ch.4 I think), which is very
badly
>>degraded. If anything, the signal improves when I disconnect the
bedroom
>>cable from the loftbox, but this is marginal. Effectively, no
signal
is
>>coming from the loftbox, the minimal reception is presumably due to
the
>>long cable run acting minimally as an antenna.
>>
>>So I seem to have two problems: (a) signal deterioration on the
cable
>>run from loftbox to bedroom, (b) signal deterioration within the
>>loftbox. The combination of the two (sending a signal via the
loftbox
>>and a subsequent long cable run) seems to be deadly to the signal.
>>
>>Just in case I'm making an obvious mistake:
>>the TV aerial is attached to the TV Ant port;
>>the feed from satellite LNB1 is attached to Sat Ant;
>>the Living Room port is connected to the integrated outlet plate
>>(triplexer) in the living room;
>>the Sky+ box's LNB1 port is connected to the Satellite port on the
>>integrated outlet plate;
>>the Sky+ box's LNB2 port is connected direct to the LNB2 on the
dish
(or
>>actually via a barrel connector near the loftbox);
>>the Sky+ box's RF 2 port is attached to the return feed port on the
>>integrated outlet plate, which is connected to UHF2 on the loftbox;
>>the cables from the bedrooms are attached to ports 1 - 4 on the
loftbox.
>>
>>As I understand it, that should be right, so I don't know what's
>>happening, but the result is certainly not useable. As things
stand, I
>>would certainly recommend against using a loftbox, as,
incidentally,
>>would my Sky installer.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Bruno



** UKHA2004 BE THERE! ** - start planning now.

http://www.automatedhome.co.uk=20
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx=20
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx=20
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx=20
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx=20

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/=20