|
Fish finder question?
Hi
I replaced my Eagle Supra ID fishfinder head with a new Lowrance Elite 5 (came with new transducer). The present transducer is the round style glued to the bottom hull (through hull). Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. But I really don't want to replace that cable up to the flybridge through a lot of fishing and pulling. I am wondering if I can use the old transducer and cable (extension & old transducer with 10ft wire). I think the extension is 15 feet or so. Any ideas? I am hoping I can simply splice the plug of the old transducer wire to the new head. Thanks for any ideas Cheers 73s |
Fish finder question?
On 3/3/2015 5:10 PM, Tom wrote:
Hi I replaced my Eagle Supra ID fishfinder head with a new Lowrance Elite 5 (came with new transducer). The present transducer is the round style glued to the bottom hull (through hull). Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. But I really don't want to replace that cable up to the flybridge through a lot of fishing and pulling. I am wondering if I can use the old transducer and cable (extension & old transducer with 10ft wire). I think the extension is 15 feet or so. Any ideas? I am hoping I can simply splice the plug of the old transducer wire to the new head. Thanks for any ideas Cheers 73s Coax can NEVER be spliced without causing a huge impedance mismatch at the point of the splice. This is not 60hz or DC. But any ham with even a minor bit of technical knowledge should understand this. The only way you can effectively "splice" coax is with connectors, i.e. two males and a double female. That will provide a splice with minimum loss and impedance bump. You would have to look at the specs for your new transducer to see if its compatible or not. And I would recommend just replacing the coax; you may not want to, but it's the best way. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Fish finder question?
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 3/3/2015 5:10 PM, Tom wrote: Hi I replaced my Eagle Supra ID fishfinder head with a new Lowrance Elite 5 (came with new transducer). The present transducer is the round style glued to the bottom hull (through hull). Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. But I really don't want to replace that cable up to the flybridge through a lot of fishing and pulling. I am wondering if I can use the old transducer and cable (extension & old transducer with 10ft wire). I think the extension is 15 feet or so. Any ideas? I am hoping I can simply splice the plug of the old transducer wire to the new head. Thanks for any ideas Cheers 73s Coax can NEVER be spliced without causing a huge impedance mismatch at the point of the splice. This is not 60hz or DC. But any ham with even a minor bit of technical knowledge should understand this. The only way you can effectively "splice" coax is with connectors, i.e. two males and a double female. That will provide a splice with minimum loss and impedance bump. Or one male cable connector and one female cable connector. -- Jim Pennino |
Fish finder question?
On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:10:29 -0500, "Tom" wrote:
Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? It is quite a simple procedure actually that can be discovered in one of a few different means. 1st - Consult the product information for the required information. or 2nd - Call a local supplier/authorized service provider. Many Marinas and boating accessory sales locations will be happy to provide you with some examples. 3rd - Call the manufacturer. Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. Many people can splice coax. Very few will do it right or not at all when inadvisable. being able to pass a signal is no indication that the splice was done properly. Given your past posts covering a wide variety of subjects and technologies, hardly any having to do with the actual purpose of this group, my advice is to contact the manufacturer for advice and the proper parts for your ideal installation. |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 2:29 AM, Jeff wrote:
Coax can NEVER be spliced without causing a huge impedance mismatch at the point of the splice. This is not 60hz or DC. But any ham with even a minor bit of technical knowledge should understand this. We are talking about 200kHz here not 200MHz!! Use could join the coax with a bit of choc-block at that frequency and not see any significant performance degradation. Jeff It doesn't matter if it's 200kHz. The problem remains. And yes, there WOULD be s"significant performance degradation" if he used a bit of choc-block. But if you understood ANYTHING about transmission lines, you wouldn't make such a stupid statement. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 6:11 AM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Wed, 04 Mar 2015 05:50:02 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 3/4/2015 2:29 AM, Jeff wrote: Coax can NEVER be spliced without causing a huge impedance mismatch at the point of the splice. This is not 60hz or DC. But any ham with even a minor bit of technical knowledge should understand this. We are talking about 200kHz here not 200MHz!! Use could join the coax with a bit of choc-block at that frequency and not see any significant performance degradation. Jeff It doesn't matter if it's 200kHz. The problem remains. It depends what you mean by 'problem'. And yes, there WOULD be s"significant performance degradation" if he used a bit of choc-block. That is only true if the discontinuity is a significant fraction of a wavelength, 200kHz is about a 1.5km wavelength, in coax that would be about 1km with typical velocity factors. A choc block is about 10mm long, so it is 1/100,000th of a wavelength. I would not expect any major problem but it could be used to experiment and cleaned up later if necessary. Incorrect. It all depends on the amount of the impedance bump. The larger the bump (and there always will be one, even if connectors are used), the greater the effect on the signal. And while the change in impedance has a greater effect as you get a higher proportion of a wavelength, a bump that's even small percentages of a wavelength can create a significant loss. In extreme cases, a short or open (which is much less than 1/100,000 of a wavelength) would allow no signal through. But if you understood ANYTHING about transmission lines, you wouldn't make such a stupid statement. Actually it's because Jeff understands about transmission lines that he makes the statement, it isn't a stupid statement at all in the context of the OP's question and the technical details of the installation. It is a stupid statement, showing how little he understand transmission lines. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 5:11 AM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Wed, 04 Mar 2015 05:50:02 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 3/4/2015 2:29 AM, Jeff wrote: Coax can NEVER be spliced without causing a huge impedance mismatch at the point of the splice. This is not 60hz or DC. But any ham with even a minor bit of technical knowledge should understand this. We are talking about 200kHz here not 200MHz!! Use could join the coax with a bit of choc-block at that frequency and not see any significant performance degradation. Jeff It doesn't matter if it's 200kHz. The problem remains. It depends what you mean by 'problem'. And yes, there WOULD be s"significant performance degradation" if he used a bit of choc-block. That is only true if the discontinuity is a significant fraction of a wavelength, 200kHz is about a 1.5km wavelength, in coax that would be about 1km with typical velocity factors. A choc block is about 10mm long, so it is 1/100,000th of a wavelength. I would not expect any major problem but it could be used to experiment and cleaned up later if necessary. But if you understood ANYTHING about transmission lines, you wouldn't make such a stupid statement. Actually it's because Jeff understands about transmission lines that he makes the statement, it isn't a stupid statement at all in the context of the OP's question and the technical details of the installation. I agree with you and with Jeff. At 200kHz, I'm not even sure that the coax acts as a pure transmission line anyway. I don't remember the lower cutoff frequency. In any case, that was a good analysis, Brian. Thanks for that. |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 6:54 AM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Wed, 04 Mar 2015 06:39:20 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 3/4/2015 6:11 AM, Brian Morrison wrote: On Wed, 04 Mar 2015 05:50:02 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 3/4/2015 2:29 AM, Jeff wrote: Coax can NEVER be spliced without causing a huge impedance mismatch at the point of the splice. This is not 60hz or DC. But any ham with even a minor bit of technical knowledge should understand this. We are talking about 200kHz here not 200MHz!! Use could join the coax with a bit of choc-block at that frequency and not see any significant performance degradation. Jeff It doesn't matter if it's 200kHz. The problem remains. It depends what you mean by 'problem'. And yes, there WOULD be s"significant performance degradation" if he used a bit of choc-block. That is only true if the discontinuity is a significant fraction of a wavelength, 200kHz is about a 1.5km wavelength, in coax that would be about 1km with typical velocity factors. A choc block is about 10mm long, so it is 1/100,000th of a wavelength. I would not expect any major problem but it could be used to experiment and cleaned up later if necessary. Incorrect. It all depends on the amount of the impedance bump. The larger the bump (and there always will be one, even if connectors are used), the greater the effect on the signal. You are correct, but in my opinion you would need a very large change in impedance over 10mm for it to make any difference at 200kHz. And just how big is the change being proposed? And while the change in impedance has a greater effect as you get a higher proportion of a wavelength, a bump that's even small percentages of a wavelength can create a significant loss. Shouldn't be too difficult to calculate the impedance of the choc block, it's pretty much a balanced line. And a coax is an unbalanced line - which complicates the calculations. In extreme cases, a short or open (which is much less than 1/100,000 of a wavelength) would allow no signal through. We were not discussing either a short or an open. As I said it is an extreme - but it shows that even a small percentage of a wavelength can have an effect, contrary to your previous statement. But if you understood ANYTHING about transmission lines, you wouldn't make such a stupid statement. Actually it's because Jeff understands about transmission lines that he makes the statement, it isn't a stupid statement at all in the context of the OP's question and the technical details of the installation. It is a stupid statement, showing how little he understand transmission lines. I don't agree, there is plenty of latitude using imperfect connectors at low frequencies. People have been using PL259/SO239 connectors for frequencies as high as 500MHz for decades and yet on the VNA they most certainly are not 50 ohm connectors above 10MHz or so. A VSWR of 2:1 creates a mismatch loss of 0.5dB, at 3:1 it's still only 1.2dB. Connector impedance doesn't change with frequency, just as coax impedance doesn't change with frequency. Loss will increase as frequency increases, however. And yes, PL259/SO239 was never meant to be an "all purpose connector" and has greater loss than many other connectors - at any frequency. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Fish finder question?
Hi Gents,
Thanks for all the info. Yes, I placed a post in the boating newsgroup but they haven't the radio tech knowledge as here. I figured that splicing the connector would affect its abilitly to perform 100%. I do not want to damage the fishfinder head. It is 500 dollars. Transducer and cable only about 100 dollars but the time to install it is the kicker. It will take more than a day and I worry I would be installing a less quality one right beside what looks to be a good quality one.For no reason. I was hoping someone here had done a similiar upgrade and knew how to measure that existing tranducer with about 30 feet of cable. Thank you all for the information, but obviously the best solution would be to replace it. I was hoping to use existing one that may work just as equally. Thanks again for all the info. Cheers 73s "Flash" wrote in message ... On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:10:29 -0500, "Tom" wrote: Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? It is quite a simple procedure actually that can be discovered in one of a few different means. 1st - Consult the product information for the required information. or 2nd - Call a local supplier/authorized service provider. Many Marinas and boating accessory sales locations will be happy to provide you with some examples. 3rd - Call the manufacturer. Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. Many people can splice coax. Very few will do it right or not at all when inadvisable. being able to pass a signal is no indication that the splice was done properly. Given your past posts covering a wide variety of subjects and technologies, hardly any having to do with the actual purpose of this group, my advice is to contact the manufacturer for advice and the proper parts for your ideal installation. |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 7:31 AM, Tom wrote:
Hi Gents, Thanks for all the info. Yes, I placed a post in the boating newsgroup but they haven't the radio tech knowledge as here. I figured that splicing the connector would affect its abilitly to perform 100%. I do not want to damage the fishfinder head. It is 500 dollars. Transducer and cable only about 100 dollars but the time to install it is the kicker. It will take more than a day and I worry I would be installing a less quality one right beside what looks to be a good quality one.For no reason. I was hoping someone here had done a similiar upgrade and knew how to measure that existing tranducer with about 30 feet of cable. Thank you all for the information, but obviously the best solution would be to replace it. I was hoping to use existing one that may work just as equally. Thanks again for all the info. Cheers 73s "Flash" wrote in message ... On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:10:29 -0500, "Tom" wrote: Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? It is quite a simple procedure actually that can be discovered in one of a few different means. 1st - Consult the product information for the required information. or 2nd - Call a local supplier/authorized service provider. Many Marinas and boating accessory sales locations will be happy to provide you with some examples. 3rd - Call the manufacturer. Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. Many people can splice coax. Very few will do it right or not at all when inadvisable. being able to pass a signal is no indication that the splice was done properly. Given your past posts covering a wide variety of subjects and technologies, hardly any having to do with the actual purpose of this group, my advice is to contact the manufacturer for advice and the proper parts for your ideal installation. Tom, It may work just fine. That's why Flash made his suggestions. You will note none of the suggestions including posting in a boating group. I wouldn't expect them to have the knowledge - but the ones Flash suggested should either have the info or be able to get it. And people in this group have a lot of radio knowledge - but you're asking about a specific item which isn't related to amateur radio. There *might* be another fisherman here who's familiar with your transducer, but the changes are pretty slim. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Fish finder question?
On Wed, 4 Mar 2015 07:31:14 -0500, "Tom" wrote:
Hi Gents, Thanks for all the info. Yes, I placed a post in the boating newsgroup but they haven't the radio tech knowledge as here. I figured that splicing the connector would affect its abilitly to perform 100%. I do not want to damage the fishfinder head. It is 500 dollars. Transducer and cable only about 100 dollars but the time to install it is the kicker. It will take more than a day and I worry I would be installing a less quality one right beside what looks to be a good quality one.For no reason. I was hoping someone here had done a similiar upgrade and knew how to measure that existing tranducer with about 30 feet of cable. Thank you all for the information, but obviously the best solution would be to replace it. I was hoping to use existing one that may work just as equally. Thanks again for all the info. Cheers 73s Tom, again, if you are worried about performance, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to consider, I would recommend contacting the manufacturers of the devices, (transducer you wish to try) and the finder for performance specifications and potential recommendations for items that would satisfy your needs. Having been in electronics manufacturing, (but not boating accessories) I can tell you they should know how different transducers perform with their finder, and vise-versa. I think this would be you best avenue to pursue. At least it can't hurt to ask. |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 7:49 AM, Jeff wrote:
Connector impedance doesn't change with frequency, just as coax impedance doesn't change with frequency. Loss will increase as frequency increases, however. Coax impedance certainly does change with frequency. Below about 500kHz there is a significant slope with frequency. At 200kHz a 50ohm cable may well look more like 100ohms and by the time that you get to 1kHz it could be as high as 1kohm. 200kHz is in what is called the transition region and the impedance is given by: SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(C+j2pifC)) as opposed to the high frequency region where it is merely: sqrt(L/C) Below about 20kHz it changes again to SQRT(R/(j2pifC) There are also other variables due to changes in the dielectric with frequency and other losses. Can you explain the above equations? In general it doesn't make sense that the same effect would have different equations for different frequencies. It does make sense though that the equations involved are all simplifications of a single, more complex equation, optimized to discount small effects over a given frequency range. That said, I'm not sure I can see how these three equations can morph into each other as f changes. The equation for the middle frequency range seems to be the more encompassing so starting with that - if frequency goes up enough the terms j2pifL and j2pifC dominate the R and C terms and the equation simplifies to sqrt(L/C) appropriately. But when f goes down enough, both terms shrink compared to R and C and the equation would seem to simplify to sqrt(R/C) rather than sqrt(R/j2pifC). Is there possibly a typo in there somewhere? -- Rick |
Fish finder question?
On 3/3/2015 5:10 PM, Tom wrote:
Hi I replaced my Eagle Supra ID fishfinder head with a new Lowrance Elite 5 (came with new transducer). The present transducer is the round style glued to the bottom hull (through hull). Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. But I really don't want to replace that cable up to the flybridge through a lot of fishing and pulling. I am wondering if I can use the old transducer and cable (extension & old transducer with 10ft wire). I think the extension is 15 feet or so. Any ideas? I am hoping I can simply splice the plug of the old transducer wire to the new head. Maybe the problem people are having is with your use of the word "splice". That implies that you are cutting the cable. But on rereading your post I think you are just asking if the existing transducer is compatible with the new head. I assume they have connectors at the head unit and at the transducer, right? Do they use the same connectors on both the new and the old systems? I certainly don't know anything about these transducers, but I am sure there is more to it than just the frequency of the fish finder. There is also impedance and power level. What do you know about the two systems? Does the manual tell you much about it? As others have suggested, you might want to contact Lowrance to find out what they say about compatibility. It is unlikely they will tell you much that you can bank on since they won't want to assume any liability. But asking won't hurt. It may turn out that the transducers are a common denominator in the industry and there is little incompatibility like other electronics. -- Rick |
Fish finder question?
"Jeff" wrote in message ... Connector impedance doesn't change with frequency, just as coax impedance doesn't change with frequency. Loss will increase as frequency increases, however. Coax impedance certainly does change with frequency. Below about 500kHz there is a significant slope with frequency. At 200kHz a 50ohm cable may well look more like 100ohms and by the time that you get to 1kHz it could be as high as 1kohm. 200kHz is in what is called the transition region and the impedance is given by: SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(C+j2pifC)) as opposed to the high frequency region where it is merely: sqrt(L/C) Below about 20kHz it changes again to SQRT(R/(j2pifC) There are also other variables due to changes in the dielectric with frequency and other losses. Thanks for this Jeff. That is the first time I have seen anything about the impedance other than formulars that just compair the diameters of the conductors and modified by the dielectric. There was never a mention of frequency affecting the impedance. I guess that it is like many other electrical/electronic formulars. They leave out some of the 'small change' . Sort of like what I always referr to as putting one extra brick on a truck load . Just too small to worry about in most cases, but it is still there. |
Fish finder question?
On 3/5/2015 4:35 AM, Jeff wrote:
On 05/03/2015 01:50, rickman wrote: On 3/4/2015 7:49 AM, Jeff wrote: Connector impedance doesn't change with frequency, just as coax impedance doesn't change with frequency. Loss will increase as frequency increases, however. Coax impedance certainly does change with frequency. Below about 500kHz there is a significant slope with frequency. At 200kHz a 50ohm cable may well look more like 100ohms and by the time that you get to 1kHz it could be as high as 1kohm. 200kHz is in what is called the transition region and the impedance is given by: SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(C+j2pifC)) as opposed to the high frequency region where it is merely: sqrt(L/C) Below about 20kHz it changes again to SQRT(R/(j2pifC) There are also other variables due to changes in the dielectric with frequency and other losses. Can you explain the above equations? In general it doesn't make sense that the same effect would have different equations for different frequencies. It does make sense though that the equations involved are all simplifications of a single, more complex equation, optimized to discount small effects over a given frequency range. That said, I'm not sure I can see how these three equations can morph into each other as f changes. The equation for the middle frequency range seems to be the more encompassing so starting with that - if frequency goes up enough the terms j2pifL and j2pifC dominate the R and C terms and the equation simplifies to sqrt(L/C) appropriately. But when f goes down enough, both terms shrink compared to R and C and the equation would seem to simplify to sqrt(R/C) rather than sqrt(R/j2pifC). Is there possibly a typo in there somewhere? Sorry there is indeed a typo: the general equation should read: SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(G+j2pifC)) G being conductance. The reasons that the equations are presented differently in different frequency ranges are because; at higher frequencies when f becomes large enough, the terms containing f become so large that R and G can be neglected; and at low frequencies (2 pi f L) is so small compared with R that it can be neglected. Hi - SQRT(L/C) Mid - SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(G+j2pifC)) Lo - SQRT((R)/(G)) = R vs SQRT(R/(j2pifC)? You seem to be making some distinction between fL and fC at low frequencies. Why would fL shrink relative to R while fC does not shrink relative to G? Are you saying that the L term goes away faster than the C term in most cases? What is the recondition for that assumption, just most transmission lines? Actually, it would be SQRT(R/(G+j2pifC), no? -- Rick |
Fish finder question?
On 3/5/2015 4:35 AM, Jeff wrote:
On 05/03/2015 01:50, rickman wrote: On 3/4/2015 7:49 AM, Jeff wrote: Connector impedance doesn't change with frequency, just as coax impedance doesn't change with frequency. Loss will increase as frequency increases, however. Coax impedance certainly does change with frequency. Below about 500kHz there is a significant slope with frequency. At 200kHz a 50ohm cable may well look more like 100ohms and by the time that you get to 1kHz it could be as high as 1kohm. 200kHz is in what is called the transition region and the impedance is given by: SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(C+j2pifC)) as opposed to the high frequency region where it is merely: sqrt(L/C) Below about 20kHz it changes again to SQRT(R/(j2pifC) There are also other variables due to changes in the dielectric with frequency and other losses. Can you explain the above equations? In general it doesn't make sense that the same effect would have different equations for different frequencies. It does make sense though that the equations involved are all simplifications of a single, more complex equation, optimized to discount small effects over a given frequency range. That said, I'm not sure I can see how these three equations can morph into each other as f changes. The equation for the middle frequency range seems to be the more encompassing so starting with that - if frequency goes up enough the terms j2pifL and j2pifC dominate the R and C terms and the equation simplifies to sqrt(L/C) appropriately. But when f goes down enough, both terms shrink compared to R and C and the equation would seem to simplify to sqrt(R/C) rather than sqrt(R/j2pifC). Is there possibly a typo in there somewhere? Sorry there is indeed a typo: the general equation should read: SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(G+j2pifC)) G being conductance. The reasons that the equations are presented differently in different frequency ranges are because; at higher frequencies when f becomes large enough, the terms containing f become so large that R and G can be neglected; and at low frequencies (2 pi f L) is so small compared with R that it can be neglected. I just had a brain cramp about the modified formula, SQRT((R+j2pifL)/(G+j2pifC)) G being conductance. As resistance goes to zero, G will go to infinity! This makes the result of the equation go to zero no matter what values of L, C or f are used. This would imply that wires made with superconductors have zero impedance? I read the wikipedia page and they say, "For a lossless line, R and G are both zero". How dem do dat? Isn't R = 1/G? I would also point out that these equations assume a non-ideal conductor by accounting for R, but they assume the dielectric *is* ideal and ignore dielectric losses which become dominant at high enough frequencies. -- Rick |
Fish finder question?
In article , rickman wrote:
I read the wikipedia page and they say, "For a lossless line, R and G are both zero". How dem do dat? Isn't R = 1/G? I think they're referring to series R (that is, resistive loss in the conductors) and shunt G (perfect dielectric, infinitely high shunt resistance between the conductors). With those being posited, all of the current flow is into or through reactances (non-dissipative impedances) , and there's no current flow through anything with resistive loss (dissipative impedance). |
Fish finder question?
On 3/5/2015 6:18 PM, Dave Platt wrote:
In article , rickman wrote: I read the wikipedia page and they say, "For a lossless line, R and G are both zero". How dem do dat? Isn't R = 1/G? I think they're referring to series R (that is, resistive loss in the conductors) and shunt G (perfect dielectric, infinitely high shunt resistance between the conductors). With those being posited, all of the current flow is into or through reactances (non-dissipative impedances) , and there's no current flow through anything with resistive loss (dissipative impedance). Ah, that makes perfect sense now. :) I skipped over the diagram on the wiki page. They actually make this very clear. -- Rick |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 6:31 AM, Tom wrote:
Hi Gents, Thanks for all the info. Yes, I placed a post in the boating newsgroup but they haven't the radio tech knowledge as here. I figured that splicing the connector would affect its abilitly to perform 100%. I do not want to damage the fishfinder head. It is 500 dollars. Transducer and cable only about 100 dollars but the time to install it is the kicker. It will take more than a day and I worry I would be installing a less quality one right beside what looks to be a good quality one.For no reason. I was hoping someone here had done a similiar upgrade and knew how to measure that existing tranducer with about 30 feet of cable. Thank you all for the information, but obviously the best solution would be to replace it. I was hoping to use existing one that may work just as equally. Thanks again for all the info. Cheers 73s I have a lot of experience with this from a long time ago. Just use the transducer you have. Almost all are 200khz. If you really want to test it, just put a signal generator on it and a scope. When you swish past the frequency the amplitude will jump up. Very simple. There were some 125 khz transducers made and some 50 khz transducers, but they were far more expensive and of course more rare. "Flash" wrote in message ... On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:10:29 -0500, "Tom" wrote: Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? It is quite a simple procedure actually that can be discovered in one of a few different means. 1st - Consult the product information for the required information. or 2nd - Call a local supplier/authorized service provider. Many Marinas and boating accessory sales locations will be happy to provide you with some examples. 3rd - Call the manufacturer. Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. Many people can splice coax. Very few will do it right or not at all when inadvisable. being able to pass a signal is no indication that the splice was done properly. Given your past posts covering a wide variety of subjects and technologies, hardly any having to do with the actual purpose of this group, my advice is to contact the manufacturer for advice and the proper parts for your ideal installation. |
Fish finder question?
On 3/4/2015 6:31 AM, Tom wrote:
Hi Gents, Thanks for all the info. Yes, I placed a post in the boating newsgroup but they haven't the radio tech knowledge as here. I figured that splicing the connector would affect its abilitly to perform 100%. I do not want to damage the fishfinder head. It is 500 dollars. Transducer and cable only about 100 dollars but the time to install it is the kicker. It will take more than a day and I worry I would be installing a less quality one right beside what looks to be a good quality one.For no reason. I was hoping someone here had done a similiar upgrade and knew how to measure that existing tranducer with about 30 feet of cable. Thank you all for the information, but obviously the best solution would be to replace it. I was hoping to use existing one that may work just as equally. Thanks again for all the info. Cheers 73s BTW, you can splice that cable all you want. It's 200Khz for God's sake. "Flash" wrote in message ... On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:10:29 -0500, "Tom" wrote: Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? It is quite a simple procedure actually that can be discovered in one of a few different means. 1st - Consult the product information for the required information. or 2nd - Call a local supplier/authorized service provider. Many Marinas and boating accessory sales locations will be happy to provide you with some examples. 3rd - Call the manufacturer. Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. Many people can splice coax. Very few will do it right or not at all when inadvisable. being able to pass a signal is no indication that the splice was done properly. Given your past posts covering a wide variety of subjects and technologies, hardly any having to do with the actual purpose of this group, my advice is to contact the manufacturer for advice and the proper parts for your ideal installation. |
Fish finder question?
On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 17:10:29 -0500, Tom wrote:
Hi I replaced my Eagle Supra ID fishfinder head with a new Lowrance Elite 5 (came with new transducer). The present transducer is the round style glued to the bottom hull (through hull). Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. But I really don't want to replace that cable up to the flybridge through a lot of fishing and pulling. I am wondering if I can use the old transducer and cable (extension & old transducer with 10ft wire). I think the extension is 15 feet or so. Any ideas? I am hoping I can simply splice the plug of the old transducer wire to the new head. Thanks for any ideas Cheers 73s A web search shows your Eagle spec'd 192KHz. Ihe Lowrance seems to be a dual freq. 83/200KHz. Briefly, to get optimum performance use the new transducer. |
Fish finder question?
Thank you gents for the discussion.
Yes, I talked to Lowrance and of course they have a $200.00 (new tranducer with longer coax) and my installation time is about a day's work. Of course when you start pulling off panels of a 40 year old boat with flybridge you will find another day's work. I don't have a scope but I have a digital volt/ohm meter. I was hoping there was a method of testing the existing transducer for compatibility. The plug's ends do not match (male -- female) so I would have to splice to use the exisiting. Sounds to me that the most guaranteed way to buy the new product and install it. But I am a Ham, and more of an Appliance Operator. The formulas you shown above were most interesting but I didn't understand the theory and the conclusion. If I take it to the Marina, wow, that would be another $250.00 costs for them to install a new tranducer, plus the costs of labor for their chap to install it. There is nobody at any Marina around here (Southern Ontario Canada) that would understand what you folks have talked about above and they would instantly and simply order the new parts and install them. Maybe installing less quality cables as the ones that are there are gutsy ones and it is a through hull fitting already in place. In fact all Marina's around here have very negative reputations for stuff like this. So if you folks were in the same boat as I am, would you splice it? Would you be worried about it working incorrectly or the possibility of it damaging the head? I am not worried about deep water operations, never in water over 100 feet deep and I believe these are good to 800 feet. Would you guys simply slice it properly? Job done in an hour. Or take Lowrance's suggestion and spend the money and time? Thansk again for very informative and interesting discussion, Cheers and Best Regards 73s Tom "Wond" wrote in message ... On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 17:10:29 -0500, Tom wrote: Hi I replaced my Eagle Supra ID fishfinder head with a new Lowrance Elite 5 (came with new transducer). The present transducer is the round style glued to the bottom hull (through hull). Is there a way to test the transducer to see if it is 200khz compatible for the new Elite 5? Can I simply splice it myself or is there a reason why I shouldn't. I have spliced coax many times. But I really don't want to replace that cable up to the flybridge through a lot of fishing and pulling. I am wondering if I can use the old transducer and cable (extension & old transducer with 10ft wire). I think the extension is 15 feet or so. Any ideas? I am hoping I can simply splice the plug of the old transducer wire to the new head. Thanks for any ideas Cheers 73s A web search shows your Eagle spec'd 192KHz. Ihe Lowrance seems to be a dual freq. 83/200KHz. Briefly, to get optimum performance use the new transducer. |
Fish finder question?
Tom wrote:
Thank you gents for the discussion. Yes, I talked to Lowrance and of course they have a $200.00 (new tranducer with longer coax) and my installation time is about a day's work. Of course when you start pulling off panels of a 40 year old boat with flybridge you will find another day's work. I don't have a scope but I have a digital volt/ohm meter. I was hoping there was a method of testing the existing transducer for compatibility. The plug's ends do not match (male -- female) so I would have to splice to use the exisiting. Sounds to me that the most guaranteed way to buy the new product and install it. But I am a Ham, and more of an Appliance Operator. The formulas you shown above were most interesting but I didn't understand the theory and the conclusion. If I take it to the Marina, wow, that would be another $250.00 costs for them to install a new tranducer, plus the costs of labor for their chap to install it. There is nobody at any Marina around here (Southern Ontario Canada) that would understand what you folks have talked about above and they would instantly and simply order the new parts and install them. Maybe installing less quality cables as the ones that are there are gutsy ones and it is a through hull fitting already in place. In fact all Marina's around here have very negative reputations for stuff like this. So if you folks were in the same boat as I am, would you splice it? Would you be worried about it working incorrectly or the possibility of it damaging the head? I am not worried about deep water operations, never in water over 100 feet deep and I believe these are good to 800 feet. Would you guys simply slice it properly? Job done in an hour. Or take Lowrance's suggestion and spend the money and time? Thansk again for very informative and interesting discussion, Cheers and Best Regards 73s I certainly would not worry about the old transducer damaging the equipment. What I would worry about is it working a bit but much less effectively than the new transducer. Someone produced some data suggesting the new head needs a 192kHz transducer and your old one being 200kHz (or possibly vice versa). Whether that matters depends how sharply tuned the transducers are. I would guess that they would *not* be very compatible but might work a bit. You could actually estimate how sharply tuned the transducer is by using an impedance bridge with variable frequency, but if you can't borrow one it would probably be possible to do measurements with simpler equipment. This would not be conclusive though. If you can find some published figures for the sound output bandwidth of this sort of transducer it mght tell you whether to expect useful results with about 4% mistuning. I suspect they are actually quite sharply tuned if they are electromechanical, but I don't even know if this is the case. The alternative being piezoelectric. Can you temporarily rig the new transducer in a small dinghy and do A to B comparisons alongside each other, and see whether one is much more effective? -- Roger Hayter |
Fish finder question?
Hi Folks
Thanks gents for the great information. Yes Roger I can do a comparison but not for a few months, here both Great Lakes near me are frozen over and that process will not be that easy. Doable but not easy. I was hoping to read a response like " yes, cut away and your existing tranducer and new head are compatible so splicing wont matter much at 200khz." I didn't read that statement through all the technical and obvious and accurate and helpful information. I didn't read that at all. So for piece of mind I might have to simply install the new tranducer with extension cable where all plug ends meet female to male properly and according to manufacture's (and salesmen) recommendations. Which is 100% guarantee It will work correctly. Our lakes are no where near the 800 feet depths that these transducers are good to. If you want better tranducers for a ocean use or sea use then you can buy the better tranducers, but Lake Erie might be 80 or 90 feet at max and Lake Ontario might be approx 150 feet. I was in Deep River before, that was about 700 feet. I will re-read all this wealth of information again and study it much closer and both learn and decide. Thank you all for the wealth of information to make my decision. I am most greatful for that. But I didn't see a statement like mentioned above so it is obviously something more technical and critical that it is done right. And any Marina around here would simply install new. So if I cannot simply splice and go (about 1 or 2 hours costs) then I will buy new (about $300.00 plus day's work). But I know that existing transducer is good quality because it replaced a less quality one a few years back, but I was hoping there was a way I could identify if it were 200khz to be compatible with the new head. Then I could splice. Or find an adapter plug to fit, maybe Lowrance sells that. O well, I still have a couple months before the pickerel are in this end of the lake so I or WE will resolve this. And we will do it right. Hopefully not duplicating any work unecessary by installing a lower quality new part where there is already an exisiting good quality part. Because that is exactly what a local Marina would do. Not one, not a single one Marina around here would understand a word of your technical postings here. Just list price and retail price of the new Lowrance Product and delivery times and install times multiplied by hourly rate. While I am a Ham, licenced and active, I am an appliance operator and I understand basic theory I don't understand the quantum mechanics of it. Although I can send and receive code at 20 WPM without the help of a computer or decoder. 73s again and thanks again gents, Cheers "Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Tom wrote: Thank you gents for the discussion. Yes, I talked to Lowrance and of course they have a $200.00 (new tranducer with longer coax) and my installation time is about a day's work. Of course when you start pulling off panels of a 40 year old boat with flybridge you will find another day's work. I don't have a scope but I have a digital volt/ohm meter. I was hoping there was a method of testing the existing transducer for compatibility. The plug's ends do not match (male -- female) so I would have to splice to use the exisiting. Sounds to me that the most guaranteed way to buy the new product and install it. But I am a Ham, and more of an Appliance Operator. The formulas you shown above were most interesting but I didn't understand the theory and the conclusion. If I take it to the Marina, wow, that would be another $250.00 costs for them to install a new tranducer, plus the costs of labor for their chap to install it. There is nobody at any Marina around here (Southern Ontario Canada) that would understand what you folks have talked about above and they would instantly and simply order the new parts and install them. Maybe installing less quality cables as the ones that are there are gutsy ones and it is a through hull fitting already in place. In fact all Marina's around here have very negative reputations for stuff like this. So if you folks were in the same boat as I am, would you splice it? Would you be worried about it working incorrectly or the possibility of it damaging the head? I am not worried about deep water operations, never in water over 100 feet deep and I believe these are good to 800 feet. Would you guys simply slice it properly? Job done in an hour. Or take Lowrance's suggestion and spend the money and time? Thansk again for very informative and interesting discussion, Cheers and Best Regards 73s I certainly would not worry about the old transducer damaging the equipment. What I would worry about is it working a bit but much less effectively than the new transducer. Someone produced some data suggesting the new head needs a 192kHz transducer and your old one being 200kHz (or possibly vice versa). Whether that matters depends how sharply tuned the transducers are. I would guess that they would *not* be very compatible but might work a bit. You could actually estimate how sharply tuned the transducer is by using an impedance bridge with variable frequency, but if you can't borrow one it would probably be possible to do measurements with simpler equipment. This would not be conclusive though. If you can find some published figures for the sound output bandwidth of this sort of transducer it mght tell you whether to expect useful results with about 4% mistuning. I suspect they are actually quite sharply tuned if they are electromechanical, but I don't even know if this is the case. The alternative being piezoelectric. Can you temporarily rig the new transducer in a small dinghy and do A to B comparisons alongside each other, and see whether one is much more effective? -- Roger Hayter |
Fish finder question?
"Tom" wrote in message ... Hi Folks Thanks gents for the great information. Yes Roger I can do a comparison but not for a few months, here both Great Lakes near me are frozen over and that process will not be that easy. Doable but not easy. I was hoping to read a response like " yes, cut away and your existing tranducer and new head are compatible so splicing wont matter much at 200khz." I didn't read that statement through all the technical and obvious and accurate and helpful information. I didn't read that at all. So for piece of mind I might have to simply install the new tranducer with extension cable where all plug ends meet female to male properly and according to manufacture's (and salesmen) recommendations. Which is 100% guarantee It will work correctly. Our lakes are no where near the 800 feet depths that these transducers are good to. If you want better tranducers for a ocean use or sea use then you can buy the better tranducers, but Lake Erie might be 80 or 90 feet at max and Lake Ontario might be approx 150 feet. I was in Deep River before, that was about 700 feet. I will re-read all this wealth of information again and study it much closer and both learn and decide. Thank you all for the wealth of information to make my decision. I am most greatful for that. But I didn't see a statement like mentioned above so it is obviously something more technical and critical that it is done right. And any Marina around here would simply install new. So if I cannot simply splice and go (about 1 or 2 hours costs) then I will buy new (about $300.00 plus day's work). But I know that existing transducer is good quality because it replaced a less quality one a few years back, but I was hoping there was a way I could identify if it were 200khz to be compatible with the new head. Then I could splice. Or find an adapter plug to fit, maybe Lowrance sells that. The way I am seeing it, the old transducer and wiring will not be any good if it will not work with the new fish finder . I think I would look or make an adaper for the wiring, but if that is too difficult, I would splice the wires. If it works, fine, if not, then put in the new transducer. I don't know how the wiring is attached to the transducer, but is it not possiable to use the old wiring ? As for the splicing, I bet you could just use wire nuts and not tell any electrical differance, but mechanically it would not be a good idea. |
Fish finder question?
On 3/10/2015 10:02 AM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
"Tom" wrote in message ... Hi Folks Thanks gents for the great information. Yes Roger I can do a comparison but not for a few months, here both Great Lakes near me are frozen over and that process will not be that easy. Doable but not easy. I was hoping to read a response like " yes, cut away and your existing tranducer and new head are compatible so splicing wont matter much at 200khz." I didn't read that statement through all the technical and obvious and accurate and helpful information. I didn't read that at all. So for piece of mind I might have to simply install the new tranducer with extension cable where all plug ends meet female to male properly and according to manufacture's (and salesmen) recommendations. Which is 100% guarantee It will work correctly. Our lakes are no where near the 800 feet depths that these transducers are good to. If you want better tranducers for a ocean use or sea use then you can buy the better tranducers, but Lake Erie might be 80 or 90 feet at max and Lake Ontario might be approx 150 feet. I was in Deep River before, that was about 700 feet. I will re-read all this wealth of information again and study it much closer and both learn and decide. Thank you all for the wealth of information to make my decision. I am most greatful for that. But I didn't see a statement like mentioned above so it is obviously something more technical and critical that it is done right. And any Marina around here would simply install new. So if I cannot simply splice and go (about 1 or 2 hours costs) then I will buy new (about $300.00 plus day's work). But I know that existing transducer is good quality because it replaced a less quality one a few years back, but I was hoping there was a way I could identify if it were 200khz to be compatible with the new head. Then I could splice. Or find an adapter plug to fit, maybe Lowrance sells that. The way I am seeing it, the old transducer and wiring will not be any good if it will not work with the new fish finder . I think I would look or make an adaper for the wiring, but if that is too difficult, I would splice the wires. If it works, fine, if not, then put in the new transducer. I don't know how the wiring is attached to the transducer, but is it not possiable to use the old wiring ? As for the splicing, I bet you could just use wire nuts and not tell any electrical differance, but mechanically it would not be a good idea. Some of these fish finders are quite sensitive to ignition noise from the engine. It would be best to keep the splice so that the inner conductor or conductors are shielded. A few high end fish finders have a balanced feed from the transducer to reduce ignition noise. Of course there is also the issue of alternator noise but that generally not radiated throughout the boat. It is inserted through the power connector. There are good filters to prevent this problem. |
Fish finder question?
Thanks again
Yes, my worries were damaging the head by trying the old existing tranducer and approx 30foot wiring (regular wire attached to transducer and extension). But the head works without cable attached to it anyway, now it registering zero feet depth because nothing plugged in. I will give it a go and feel a lot more comfortable that I wont damage the head. Thanks again folks. 73s Tom "FBMBoomer" wrote in message ... On 3/10/2015 10:02 AM, Ralph Mowery wrote: "Tom" wrote in message ... Hi Folks Thanks gents for the great information. Yes Roger I can do a comparison but not for a few months, here both Great Lakes near me are frozen over and that process will not be that easy. Doable but not easy. I was hoping to read a response like " yes, cut away and your existing tranducer and new head are compatible so splicing wont matter much at 200khz." I didn't read that statement through all the technical and obvious and accurate and helpful information. I didn't read that at all. So for piece of mind I might have to simply install the new tranducer with extension cable where all plug ends meet female to male properly and according to manufacture's (and salesmen) recommendations. Which is 100% guarantee It will work correctly. Our lakes are no where near the 800 feet depths that these transducers are good to. If you want better tranducers for a ocean use or sea use then you can buy the better tranducers, but Lake Erie might be 80 or 90 feet at max and Lake Ontario might be approx 150 feet. I was in Deep River before, that was about 700 feet. I will re-read all this wealth of information again and study it much closer and both learn and decide. Thank you all for the wealth of information to make my decision. I am most greatful for that. But I didn't see a statement like mentioned above so it is obviously something more technical and critical that it is done right. And any Marina around here would simply install new. So if I cannot simply splice and go (about 1 or 2 hours costs) then I will buy new (about $300.00 plus day's work). But I know that existing transducer is good quality because it replaced a less quality one a few years back, but I was hoping there was a way I could identify if it were 200khz to be compatible with the new head. Then I could splice. Or find an adapter plug to fit, maybe Lowrance sells that. The way I am seeing it, the old transducer and wiring will not be any good if it will not work with the new fish finder . I think I would look or make an adaper for the wiring, but if that is too difficult, I would splice the wires. If it works, fine, if not, then put in the new transducer. I don't know how the wiring is attached to the transducer, but is it not possiable to use the old wiring ? As for the splicing, I bet you could just use wire nuts and not tell any electrical differance, but mechanically it would not be a good idea. Some of these fish finders are quite sensitive to ignition noise from the engine. It would be best to keep the splice so that the inner conductor or conductors are shielded. A few high end fish finders have a balanced feed from the transducer to reduce ignition noise. Of course there is also the issue of alternator noise but that generally not radiated throughout the boat. It is inserted through the power connector. There are good filters to prevent this problem. |
Fish finder question?
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ... It is a stupid statement, showing how little he understand transmission lines. It's a good thing this man is not a teacher. The stench of death would pervade his classroom. I don't usually see his disagreeable posts, since I blocked him on my home computer over a year ago. I shall now do the same here on my travel laptop. Enjoy his retort, if any; I will not see it. |
Fish finder question?
On 4/1/2015 1:26 AM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ... It is a stupid statement, showing how little he understand transmission lines. It's a good thing this man is not a teacher. The stench of death would pervade his classroom. I don't usually see his disagreeable posts, since I blocked him on my home computer over a year ago. I shall now do the same here on my travel laptop. Enjoy his retort, if any; I will not see it. Ah, another comment from the ignorant. Change that. Another comment from the stoopid. The ignorant WANT to learn. And FYI - I taught for corporations for a dozen years. Most were Fortune 500 - and you would recognize virtually every one's name. They were very happy with my results. I got out only because I grew tired of all the traveling. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:12 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com