Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFI\]\s+RFI\s+U\-verse\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFI\]\s+RFI\s+U\-verse\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: ka4rur@gmail.com; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 00:29:37 +0000; HI, Here the situation was having problems with 160/80/40 getting into the U-verse when x-mitting: 1. Ran a new cat-5 cable, place toroid in the outside phone box, repaired a splice in the original c; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00101.html (6,407 bytes)
2. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Andy <ingraham.ma.ultranet@rcn.com>; Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 22:20:49 -0500; More toroids? Or a different ferrite material. At lower frequencies one toroid may not give enough impedance. Andy _______________________________________________ RFI mailing list RFI@contesting.com; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00102.html (7,015 bytes)
3. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Martin Ewing <martin.s.ewing@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 22:23:34 -0500; Fred, What power level are you running, what modes, what kind of antennas & feed lines? You might try filtering at the RG (residential gateway) in addition to the NID (outside box). Possibly also on; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00103.html (8,241 bytes)
4. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 22:16:15 -0800; You didn't say what ferrite core material you're using or how many turns. It takes more turns for 160 than for 80 and above, and #31 material works much better than #43 or #61. I'd try to get at leas; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00106.html (7,726 bytes)
5. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "J.Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT" <w2ttt@att.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 08:19:50 -0800; Jim, Putting a choke on the network feed reduces bandwidth to the service and creates instability. There are other measures that can be applied to eliminate the RF getting into the RG. I can point yo; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00111.html (9,480 bytes)
6. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "J.Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT" <w2ttt@att.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 08:22:16 -0800; Martin, Your point about filtering at the STB can be effective in certain cases, but never on the network feed. Thanks & 73, Gordon Beattie, W2TTT 201.314.6964 Fred, What power level are you running,; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00112.html (10,488 bytes)
7. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 09:47:15 -0800; Absolutely untrue! A common mode formed by winding multiple turns of the signal pair (or coax) around a ferrite core has ZERO effect on the differential signal, but can greatly reduce common mode cur; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00115.html (8,843 bytes)
8. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:48:24 -0800; One problem with DSL is that the signal on the hard wired phone line extends from low audio up to nearly 4 MHz. As I understand it, these systems will limit their bandwidth (which lowers the max data; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00116.html (9,620 bytes)
9. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "J.Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT" <w2ttt@att.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 14:11:57 -0800; Jim, A low frequency cutoff strategy can negatively impact overall service stability. The best strategy is to keep the transmitter RF from getting into the cabling and as you said, good cable, proper; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00117.html (11,316 bytes)
10. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: K8RI <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:17:56 -0500; I didn't think a choke should bother CAT5 or 6. Parallel wires yes, but not groups of twisted pair. 73 Roger (K8RI) _______________________________________________ RFI mailing list RFI@contesting.com; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00118.html (9,606 bytes)
11. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Andy <ingraham.ma.ultranet@rcn.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:31:01 -0500; Really?! If that is indeed the case, it is very telling, and it probably indicates why you are having a problem in the first place. In short, adding a common-mode choke to a differential signal shou; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00119.html (8,732 bytes)
12. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Andy <ingraham.ma.ultranet@rcn.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:33:22 -0500; Oops, I didn't realize you (W2TTT) weren't the one with the interference problem. Andy _______________________________________________ RFI mailing list RFI@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00120.html (7,909 bytes)
13. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Martin Ewing <martin.s.ewing@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:31:02 -0500; AT&T's U-Verse service is based on VDSL2, which uses frequencies from around 100 kHz up to 8.4 MHz in carrier channels of about 4.3 kHz bandwidth. Typical phone lines at typical distances limit the m; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00121.html (12,931 bytes)
14. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "Christopher E. Brown" <cbrown@woods.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:53:48 -0600 (CST); While I agree with most of this, I have to strongly disagree with you comments about a common mode filter on the DSL side of the line. When you are saying is the _exact opposite_ of what I have seen; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00122.html (13,244 bytes)
15. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "Dave Harmon" <k6xyz@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:46:53 -0600; I got rid of UVerse and got satellite. I got rid of DSL and got 3G. No filters. No chokes. No interference. No hassle. I gently suggest that all who are having these problems do the same. As usual, U; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00123.html (9,230 bytes)
16. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "J.Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT" <w2ttt@att.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 16:47:18 -0800; Chris, I think we have more of a terminology issue here. Common mode isolators/chokes, or as you have called them filters, are of value. I just don't think of them as filters as they do not have band; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00124.html (14,216 bytes)
17. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "Christopher E. Brown" <cbrown@woods.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 19:14:31 -0600 (CST); I think there is a terms issue here. I did refer to a common mode choke as a filter once, but the important part is _common mode_. And it does have band-stop, high-pass or low-pass behavior depending; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00125.html (19,053 bytes)
18. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "Christopher E. Brown" <cbrown@woods.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 19:34:57 -0600 (CST); Same here, fairly recently spent a good 4 hrs having a discussion with a "RF Engineer" at a broadcast/repeater location. Had constructed 4 common/diff mode filter blocks (4 pair eGSHDSL) that were...; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00126.html (10,557 bytes)
19. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: "J.Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT" <w2ttt@att.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:55:03 -0800; Andy, I'm just offering to help get AT&T U-Verse and DSL customers aligned with Customer Care folks who can help them resolve their issues. Thanks & 73, Gordon Beattie, W2TTT 201.314.6964 Oops, I did; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00127.html (8,725 bytes)
20. Re: [RFI] RFI U-verse (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 22:57:46 -0800; YES! More accurately, the chokes you are describing are actually parallel resonant circuits of very low Q (typically on the order of 0.4). A 32-turn choke on a 2.4-in o.d. #31 toroid is likely to be; /archives//html/RFI/2011-02/msg00128.html (12,454 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]