Thread: Stand alone DI for SI units

Originally Posted by rnvinc

I agree Bob...it doesn't seem HB could deny warranty when HB is the one that released the info on their own website newsfeed...we tried...thru several different HB contacts that we knew...

The contact I spoke with at HB put it this way...

[paraphrased:]...If a customer tried this experimental setup and it jacked the unit up...then that customer contacted HB CS with the basic warranty claim of ..."my unit is messed up"...and the customer never mentioned the experimental setup...how would HB CS know anything except the customer needs warranty help...?

But my contact also said this was brought up at a meeting ....and not 1 management personnel was willing to put their signature on a decision to accept warranty claims from "known" experimental setups that didn't go thru HB's own R&D department..

Rickie

(MAYBE SOMEONE FROM HUMMINBIRD WILL READ THIS) they might be missing out on another opportunity to offer something and promote it.i no from using both setups that theres times when the di from si works best and other times that the dedicated di works best. Humminbird by far has more options available for there users than any other brand if they would promote and utilize them.

Humminbird is aware of this kosmo.

Thx Greg, I have had great results with my HB after getting it tuned in when it comes to finding structure...more importantly, structure holding fish with SI.

Maybe HB can come out with a dedicated DI xducer setup for our units that is plug and play.

Originally Posted by slabbacks

Thx Greg, I have had great results with my HB after getting it tuned in when it comes to finding structure...more importantly, structure holding fish with SI.

Maybe HB can come out with a dedicated DI xducer setup for our units that is plug and play.

There is a little history that kinda explains how this technology unfolded like it did...

*HB came out with SI in 2005 (I think)...
*Lowrance came out with SS/DS in Nov 2009...
*HB saw the possible limitations of having the SI piezoes and the DI piezo in the same xducer housing and decided to instead come out with a software update to allow the SI units to show the "DI from SI"...in Jan 2011...
*HB came out with "Dedicated DI" units in late 2011...because they still saw the limitations of having the SI piezoes and the DI piezo in the same xducer housing...

Will HB ever come out with a xducer that has both the SI piezoes and the DI piezo in the same xducer housing....not until science figures out how to overcome the limitation of both technology's piezoes that close together....because they refuse to hinder the HB shallow water SI performance....with an added DI piezo...

Of course all of this is just my opinion...(except the dates are correct)..

Rickie

Originally Posted by rnvinc

There is a little history that kinda explains how this technology unfolded like it did...

*HB came out with SI in 2005 (I think)...
*Lowrance came out with SS/DS in Nov 2009...
*HB saw the possible limitations of having the SI piezoes and the DI piezo in the same xducer housing and decided to instead come out with a software update to allow the SI units to show the "DI from SI"...in Jan 2011...
*HB came out with "Dedicated DI" units in late 2011...because they still saw the limitations of having the SI piezoes and the DI piezo in the same xducer housing...

Will HB ever come out with a xducer that has both the SI piezoes and the DI piezo in the same xducer housing....not until science figures out how to overcome the limitation of both technology's piezoes that close together....because they refuse to hinder the HB shallow water SI performance....with an added DI piezo...

Of course all of this is just my opinion...(except the dates are correct)..

Rickie

Good analysis Rickie.....I always thought that the reductions in SI range was more becasuse of the filtering necessary due to crosstalk between the DI and SI components from the tranducers operating at the same frequency.
I saw a post one where an experiment was done on the structure scan transducer by covering the DI portion of the transducer and this resulted in the range on the transducer improving....I am thinking this experiment was done by the guy who developed Dr Depth.....but could be wrong about that. I will see if I can find that old link.

(I found the link, but it no longer works......maybe because DrDepth has been sold)

Originally Posted by BobB

Good analysis Rickie.....I always thought that the reductions in SI range was more becasuse of the filtering necessary due to crosstalk between the DI and SI components from the tranducers operating at the same frequency.
I saw a post one where an experiment was done on the structure scan transducer by covering the DI portion of the transducer and this resulted in the range on the transducer improving....I am thinking this experiment was done by the guy who developed Dr Depth.....but could be wrong about that. I will see if I can find that old link.

(I found the link, but it no longer works......maybe because DrDepth has been sold)

That's part of my thinking also Bob...

Although we may never know the true "proprietary" reason....

It seems to me there would be only 3 ways to have SI piezoes and a DI piezo this close together without crosstalk...

1. Filtering...like you mentioned Bob
2. Alternating ping sequence...
3. A combination of both ...

Any of the 3 possibilities above would probably degrade or hinder the performance of the whole...

Maybe this concept does, indeed have something to do with the discussion of Lowrance having less SI range....

And also, maybe the possibility of why HB refuses to put a DI piezo in their SI xducer...(limitations caused by the 3 points mentioned)...

Rickie

Rnvinc not so much make a new xducer but making a DI xducer package for users without the technical know how to do what you and kosmo have fixed up.

Something with the cables and switch. When I want to go over a target in di....flip the switch and view DI. When done, flip back over.

My question would be can 2D be used by whichever xducer is being used at that time?

Rickie will probably check in later, but I think you have to do a separate 2D transducer if you use the "rotated" version.