5G vs. C-band

here from me below 3600 ghz no signal, here is the wimax covering the C band

Sky and star watchers have gone far from urban areas due to light pollution, I guess the same is expected of C band fans due to the 5G network

The ADE antenna helped me against interference in the C band.

Spectrum interference on prime focus antenna

and ADE antenna, spectrum almost without interference.

What's an ADE antenna?

Zitat von newsy

What's an ADE antenna?

ADE = Axis-Displaced Dual-Reflector Antenna

It is an antenna with a secondary reflector, similar to a cassegrein or gregorian. The difference is in the picture. These are high efficiency antennas.

Hey Peon,

that sounds really intersting. Which manufacturer produced your antena?

It's a segment dish, so is ku-band reception also efficient?

I always wondered why there are no more Fibo/Gregorian antenas on the market any more.

Hi newsy,

This is an antenna from NWIEE, originally for X band Transmit and C band Receive.

After appropriate modification, I use it for all frequency bands, C, X, Ku and Ka. I'm still tweaking it. However, it may not be as accurate for the C band. But even so, its gain is slightly better by about 1 to 1.5-dB compared to a prime focus antenna of the same diameter. The immunity to LTE internet interference is very good.

Dear, Chucky!

Few months early ago i'm writed two post to sat.hu forum. The post showing, how its works the 5G system in the many countrys.

netboard.hu fórum

Your problem not 5G radio signal, but the your used system, and/or system connected pieces, the cable shield, DISEqC switch, and connector shileds, and the interferece, in the 950-2100 MHz band range

The example, to the your anomaly.

You need the receiving any C-band signal. This signal frequency higher than that 5G frequency, but!

Your LNB converter, converting C-band signal to the lowest 950-2100 MHz, this band maybe the anomaly.

If need you the C-band signal receiving, this frequency band or spektrum not yor problem cases, because not same the receiving as 5G frequency, because the broadcast reception frequency highes, not 3,4 GHz or 3,8 GHz.

Example:

netboard.hu fórum

The infterference, and harmonic maybe present, the 950-2100 MHz frequency range.

And more one importatn.

The LTE filter, not filter, only this "name".

This function, cuts it out the 3,4-3,8 GHz range, ergo the LNB oscillator not converting to this signal range, so there is no interference, therefore, the satellite receiver does not detect the interference.

(Sorry, i dont speak perfectly English.)

Bests, regard

SaTom

Greetings SaTom.
You are right about something, but if there is a strong transmitter on the relevant frequencies that is close to your receiving device - antenna, then you have a problem with reception. You are probably lucky that the mentioned frequencies are not used in your location. Unfortunately, with us, it is occupied from 3400MHz to 3800MHz. I am attaching tables of assigned frequencies.

Partial help is in the relevant antenna, but even that is not a 100% solution. The interference is suppressed, but the useful signal is still partially damaged. RE: 5G vs. C-band

Hi, Peon!

Yes, its true, my answer firstly prioritated say to Chucky, and secondary information to all, therefore im writed, "the many countrys", of course, not all.

With in many country, not "secondary", the QTH place, and the base station frequency range.

But!

Te question exactly, your which satellite, where are you want to receive?

If you country (Slovakia) using the 3,4 to 3,8 GHz range, what is the satellites, which in this band range broadcasting?

Second question (without DX), that this satellites footprint cover inside, or outside ont the your QTH palce?

Third question, the your system noise, harmonic frequency, with the near base stations, and the system shields in context.

Four, the received signal frequency, and oscillator to converted frequency and context in the "area" noise...

And, many more question, and parameter...

If you send to me spektrum, I will be happy to examine to you.

Momently also I now working this project. (My friend (zoro67) having, and use SDR, but too many problem have receiving....high noise, many harmonic frequency, etc)

One, or two week (or litle maybe later), if ending this my measuring project, showing to you, and all forum members the studies, and possibel solutions also.

Best, regards

SaTom

Thank you for your response SaTom.
I understand your questions, but it is useless to deal with system noise when the interfering signal is twice as strong as the signal from the satellite. I personally receive satellites from orbit from 53 west to 98 east. The band from 3.4 to 3.7GHz is mainly used by satellites located in the east. In the western positions, they are gradually turning off the transponders in the disturbed band. Reception outside the disturbed band is problem-free.

Hi, Peon!

Yes, as I already wrote to you, your case, and country dont perfect example the system noise, and any factores, but many countrys, QTH and base station, distance, system noise, bringing to equipotential, system grounds, many in context true, as I wroted before.

Its my country dont same problem, because different the 5G system parameter, different the factor level, and disturbing parameter, but same the broadcasting, or receiving frequency.

If i ending the 5G measuring, and evaluation, i showing the studies regarding my country, and problems (even like my Chucky's, zoro67 friends problem) Of course, this studies dont tru all country in the world, but it may be true, many country :-)

"In the western positions, they are gradually turning off the transponders in the disturbed band." Yes, this the relative long tima solutions. The broadcasting frequency uppering to the high range in the all country, or int the world is.

(Maybe, and for good, but until then time, finding need to the solution)

Sorry, i f i dont spekaing correctly in engllish. I was self-taught int the language. My country, it ago time was taught the Russian :-)

Ich weiss nicht wie lang bei mir dauern wird ,

z.Z. trotz einen TelekomMast 500 m von mir entfernt

habe ich noch keine Störung ( denke ich )

I don't know how long it will take for me,

at the moment despite a Telekom mast 500 metres away from me

I don't have any interference yet ( I think )

chucky

das Problem liegt nicht am Ausgang des C-Band LNBs, sondern an dessen Eingang.

Die Ausgänge liegen im gleichen L-band Bereich wie auch das Ku-Band.

The problem is not with the output of the C-band LNB, but with its input.

The outputs are in the same L-band range as the Ku-band.

A probléma nem a C-sávos LNB kimenetével van, hanem a bemenetével.

A kimenetek ugyanabban az L-sávban vannak, mint a Ku-sáv.

Im Idealfall ist der böse 5G Strahler hinter der Antenne, dass ist auch der LNB Bereich von dessen Einstrahlung einigermaßen abgeschirmt.

Je nach Region und Mobilfunkanbieter ist auch die verwendete 5G Frequenz unterschiedlich, wodurch es zu unterschiedlich starken Auswirkungen.

Ideally, the evil 5G radiator is behind the antenna, so that the LNB area is also somewhat shielded from its radiation.

Depending on the region and mobile phone provider, the 5G frequency used also varies, which can lead to varying degrees of impact.

Here's a scan using an EF Data 35K LNA with a vertical linear feed with scalar at 1.5m above ground, no dish. The location is surrounded by trees about 40km east of London, UK.

The analyser was set to max hold for about 10 minutes.

Marker 1 3.8GHz, 2 4.2GHz and 3 peak level

Radar altimeters are visible around 4.3GHz

Endlich habe ich mich aufgerafft, den Hohlleiter-Vorsatz zu testen.

Ich hatte mir den 3°W ausgesucht, weil dort linear gesendet wird.

Nachdem die Antenne justiert war, der erste Scan mit AVCOMM und Zinwell LNB.

Warum hier auf H und V das Gleiche ankommt, weiß ich nicht.

Dansch montierte ich ein Titanium, auch hier wurden die Transponder gefunden, auf der Ebene wo man sie erwartet.

Der Test mit dem Hohlleiter-Vorsatz war nicht von Erfolg.

Das hier schwach ankommende Signal des Satelliten mag zwar beteiligt sein. Die Hauptursache liegt vermutlich an der Länge des Vorsatzes.

Ich hatte sie so gewählt, dass sie >1 Lambda der kleinsten Frequenz beträgt.

Eigenartig sind für mich die Peaks in den Spektren, obwohl es hier, zumindest bisher, in 15 km keinen 5G Mast gibt.

I finally got myself together to test the waveguide attachment.

I chose 3°W because it broadcasts linearly there.

After the antenna was adjusted, the first scan with AVCOMM and Zinwell LNB.

I don't know why the same thing applies to H and V here.

I then mounted a titanium, and here too the transponders were found, at the level where you would expect them.

The test with the waveguide attachment was not successful.

The satellite signal, which arrives here weakly, may be involved. The main reason is probably the length of the resolution.

I had chosen it so that it was >1 lambda of the smallest frequency.

The peaks in the spectra are strange to me, although there is no 5G mast within 15 km, at least so far.

Hi femi,

My long-term tests with different depolarizers clearly speak in favor of an ordinary depolarizing plate of the right thickness, length and material. The best location is directly at the mouth of the waveguide. Then there is no inclination of the polarization plane depending on the frequency. Even the original depolarizer from the antenna manufacturer, located in the middle of the waveguide, did not reach the parameters - separation of polarization planes, tilt of the polarization plane. With the depolarizing plate in the mouth of the waveguide, I achieved suppression of the opposite polarity up to 22dB. The original depolarizer reached only 12-15dB.

If you used AVCOMM and Zinwell LNB, you changed the linear polarization to circular, therefore you have the same TP in both frequencies. But you surely know that.