Comprehensive R1 (and R3) Scan Cycle Times for Various Settings

Elcid2015

Late for my own funeral
Intermediate User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
581
Reaction score
1,043
Location
North/South Carolina
R1 Scan Cycle Times From Heartbeat Updated.PNG
Okay, this should hopefully address the requests of 99% of people with R1 and R3's.
What I did:
1) Video the heartbeat icon of the R1 turning on and off at 240 fps
2) Calculate time from heartbeat on to heartbeat on again = Time of 1 "scan cycle" (according to Uniden R series user manuals, this was calculated for 4 cycles to obtain an average)
3) I added a chart showing how much bandwidth is scanned for each segment or setting

Note1- If I did not test the exact settings you run and you wish to get an approximate scan time (in ms) for your settings, add up the total bandwidth (in MHz) scanned under your settings, and plug in for 'x' in the slope-intercept formula to calculate 'y' which will be roughly the time to complete 1 cycle (since bandwidth scanned and scan cycle time are roughly linear).
Note2- The GHz per second "scan speed" (overall scan time/total bandwidth scanned) appears to increase as you increase the total bandwidth scanned. This most likely does not mean that the detector is scanning faster, but rather it is not being penalized for segmenting or "switching" between segments as much.
New Conclusions:
K or Ka Filtering does not seem affect scan times within a statistical difference.

@benzr @thesilverbullet @Salty @NPark
 
Last edited:

NPark

-NNJCTG- Rollin', windows down, music up
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Messages
6,643
Reaction score
6,632
Location
Northern NJ
Wow! MANY thanks for this Elcid! Me and pat saw differences in our testing with JUST one more segment. Glad to see you could actually find some proof to this. I'll call this conclusive. Thanks! @patscogs would explain some things!
 

fitz4321

Running With Scissors
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
2,173
Reaction score
3,896
Location
Bay Area, CA
Great info and graph. Was all of this in Highway mode?
Edit: just saw the small red print at bottom saying City.
 

NPark

-NNJCTG- Rollin', windows down, music up
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Messages
6,643
Reaction score
6,632
Location
Northern NJ

Elcid2015

Late for my own funeral
Intermediate User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
581
Reaction score
1,043
Location
North/South Carolina
Great info and graph. Was all of this in Highway mode?
If you read at the very bottom of the chart it tells you the default settings unless mentioned otherwise. But yes everything city except one test in HWY to confirm it doesn't change scan times. I did it in City to reduce the chances that interfering K Band pollution would alter the results.
 

patscogs

-NNJCTG-
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2017
Messages
1,106
Reaction score
1,069
Location
New York
Wow! MANY thanks for this Elcid! Me and pat saw differences in our testing with JUST one more segment. Glad to see you could actually find some proof to this. I'll call this conclusive. Thanks! @patscogs would explain some things!
great presentation @Elcid2015 - I know a lot of work went into this and the final product not only looks great but tells us a lot

this now begs the question, which I know has been asked many times before, Narrow vs. Segments - seems like there is reason to run 2/5/8 but for NY/NJ guys, is 2/5/6/8 better than just running Narrow? @NPark @InsipidMonkey
 

cihkal

Pure Energy
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,416
Reaction score
6,002
Awesome work man!!!

I did notice by eye when running segmented with Ka POP and Ka filter on the scan cycle-time increased. Maybe that's from POP being on because the R has to oversweep to reliably catch POP and it obviously can't interleave sweeps. So unless it's baseline scan is insanely fast that would likely add significant time to the cycle I think.

What's your thoughts?

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

hiddencam

Premium RDF Member
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
11,529
Reaction score
24,913
AWESOME contribution, many thank for this testing and sharing the results!
 

NPark

-NNJCTG- Rollin', windows down, music up
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Messages
6,643
Reaction score
6,632
Location
Northern NJ

benzr

Been there done that !! Original V1 user !!
Advanced User
Joined
Apr 23, 2012
Messages
4,855
Reaction score
5,521
Location
FLA
Wow! MANY thanks for this Elcid! Me and pat saw differences in our testing with JUST one more segment. Glad to see you could actually find some proof to this. I'll call this conclusive. Thanks! @patscogs would explain some things!

Thanks for the TESTING @NPark !!

We RDF 'rs MUCH APPRECIATE the additional confirmation !!

benzr


--- Post updated ---

View attachment 65356 Okay, this should hopefully address the requests of 99% of people with R1 and R3's.
What I did:
1) Video the heartbeat icon of the R1 turning on and off at 240 fps
2) Calculate time from heartbeat on to heartbeat on again = Time of 1 "scan cycle" (according to Uniden R series user manuals, this was calculated for 4 cycles to obtain an average)
3) I added a chart showing how much bandwidth is scanned for each segment or setting

Note1- If I did not test the exact settings you run and you wish to get an approximate scan time (in ms) for your settings, add up the total bandwidth (in MHz) scanned under your settings, and plug in for 'x' in the slope-intercept formula to calculate 'y' which will be roughly the time to complete 1 cycle (since bandwidth scanned and scan cycle time are roughly linear).
Note2- The GHz per second "scan speed" (overall scan time/total bandwidth scanned) appears to increase as you increase the total bandwidth scanned. This most likely does not mean that the detector is scanning faster, but rather it is not being penalized for segmenting or "switching" between segments as much.
New Conclusions:
K or Ka Filtering does not seem affect scan times within a statistical difference.

@benzr @thesilverbullet @Salty @NPark
@Elcid2015

HUGE THANKS ... for your TIME / EFFORT / EXPENSE of Testing our Toys !!!! :)

We all very much appreciate your analysis and contributions to our SPORT, ... our Hobby !!!!!

benzr
 

Z400Racer37

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Messages
201
Reaction score
111
View attachment 65356 Okay, this should hopefully address the requests of 99% of people with R1 and R3's.
What I did:
1) Video the heartbeat icon of the R1 turning on and off at 240 fps
2) Calculate time from heartbeat on to heartbeat on again = Time of 1 "scan cycle" (according to Uniden R series user manuals, this was calculated for 4 cycles to obtain an average)
3) I added a chart showing how much bandwidth is scanned for each segment or setting

Note1- If I did not test the exact settings you run and you wish to get an approximate scan time (in ms) for your settings, add up the total bandwidth (in MHz) scanned under your settings, and plug in for 'x' in the slope-intercept formula to calculate 'y' which will be roughly the time to complete 1 cycle (since bandwidth scanned and scan cycle time are roughly linear).
Note2- The GHz per second "scan speed" (overall scan time/total bandwidth scanned) appears to increase as you increase the total bandwidth scanned. This most likely does not mean that the detector is scanning faster, but rather it is not being penalized for segmenting or "switching" between segments as much.
New Conclusions:
K or Ka Filtering does not seem affect scan times within a statistical difference.

@benzr @thesilverbullet @Salty @NPark
Wow, thanks for all that work @Elcid2015. Question for you, sorry if it's obvious and I'm missing something, but I just want to make sure I'm clear...

If I segment my R1(3) to scan band 2 only, it will take .136 Seconds each time it scans that band.
If I scan band 5, and 8, it will take .156 Seconds to scan BOTH of them (not each), i.e. scan 2 AND 5, and then start back at 2 again.
If I leave it on Wide, it will take .313 seconds to scan ALL bands, and start back at the beginning again (effectively sweeping all bands about 3 times a second).

Is this an accurate understanding?

Thanks again!!!

--- DOUBLEPOST MERGED ---

Wow! MANY thanks for this Elcid! Me and pat saw differences in our testing with JUST one more segment. Glad to see you could actually find some proof to this. I'll call this conclusive. Thanks! @patscogs would explain some things!
... Maybe I'm misunderstanding the info here, but I'm having trouble understanding how adding one band (i.e. starting with 2, then sweeping 2 and 5, adding .020 seconds to the full scan time) can have a noticeable difference?
 

JustinP

PSL +PSL
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
5,099
... Maybe I'm misunderstanding the info here, but I'm having trouble understanding how adding one band (i.e. starting with 2, then sweeping 2 and 5, adding .020 seconds to the full scan time) can have a noticeable difference?
It's not just about the duration of the single sweep. At the fringe of a signal the detector has to find that weak signal that is not uniform. The more frequently a frequency is scanned, the odds of finding that weak signal are much better.
 

NPark

-NNJCTG- Rollin', windows down, music up
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Messages
6,643
Reaction score
6,632
Location
Northern NJ
He is correct. A common thing, and I’ve done as of late, is run segment 5 only.

For 34.7(in tune), the M3’s, and now R’s are INCREDIBLY reactive to one segment.

The M3 and @OpenRoad have history with segment 5 only.

I notice it even on my Stir-O. Segment 5 only. Redline 2/5/6/8. Given the correct situation, the O will out-alert the RL(mine which is quite Hot on 34.7) by a few seconds. And that’s a hard thing to do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Z400Racer37

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Messages
201
Reaction score
111
It's not just about the duration of the single sweep. At the fringe of a signal the detector has to find that weak signal that is not uniform. The more frequently a frequency is scanned, the odds of finding that weak signal are much better.
And doing it 6 or so times a second makes a big difference compared to 3? Maybe I'm still not understanding..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

cihkal

Pure Energy
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,416
Reaction score
6,002
And doing it 6 or so times a second makes a big difference compared to 3? Maybe I'm still not understanding..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In extreme cases anything will make a difference. The important thing to know though is the R isn't losing its "lab" sensitivity, but some minor apparent sensitivity could change if there are some really short-lived signals.

The R does really well in Ka wide too. Running 2/5/6/8 should probably be the new standard and 2/4/5/6/8 should probably be the safe bet.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

NPark

-NNJCTG- Rollin', windows down, music up
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Messages
6,643
Reaction score
6,632
Location
Northern NJ
It doesn’t happen “much” BUT BUT there is a very slight chance that a signal could be “missed” say a weak C/O or I/O from another segment. Biggest benefit is in the wide open desert, flat terrain.

Simply put, less segments, less scanning.

Usually doesn’t show up in RW scenarios. At least up here in the NE.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

OpenRoad

Must go faster
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
May 17, 2011
Messages
14,640
Reaction score
12,354
Location
Surf City ---------------> Santa Cruz <-------
Prior to segmentation on R1/R3, when setting Ka Narrow, my testing showed Original Redline beat the R1/R3 by a huge amount, due to the extra sweep times. More than that, RDR means the Escort Redline O will alert on first sweep. The combination of RDR and segmenting means much faster reaction. Once R1/R3 were segmented, the reaction was identical to Escort Redline Original. Increased sensitivity and reaction time, now Uniden R1/R3 beats RLO.

The tests were Ka 34.7 only, but I also tested with segments 2,5,8 enabled on both, and Uniden still matched Redline in reaction time.
Uniden is the bomb
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
77,536
Messages
1,181,574
Members
19,832
Latest member
radardetectorguy
Top