433 Mhz receiver: How to get a better reception?

---

Ok, I did a few tests:

I connected all the pins of the receiver (gnd’s and 5 v) but that didn’t change anything.
Then I replaced the antennas with my thick antenna wires for thinner ones: the reception was worse.
Then I cut of the antenna of the sender and now I have a much better reception!!!

Now I have a good reception but this is strange isn’t it?

Without a sender antenna I have reasonable good reich but I don’t like this “solution”…

Has anyone ideas for a better solution?

Here a image of my transmitter an receiver (now I cut off the senders antenna):

Hello all,
I was very frustated because I bought a weather station and sometimes the receiving was fine sometimes not but with the station it self everything was fine the hole time. So I started with testing of the best result antenna , receiver and so on. After 4 days hard work and not even my favorite result I opened the base station of the weather station, to have a look how they are doing it. So I saw a a RX60B receiver ( I guess that 's the 3400rf) and a antenna with little bit more than 35cm. I was surprised because everyone is writing you need 17.3cm. The next day I created a 35cm antenna with the RX60B (bought it from pilight) and …YEAH I’M HAPPY NOW…no disturbance or something else since then. 😃

@temp 17,2 is 1/4 wave length while 34,4 cm is 1/2 wave length. Generally, you can’t say longer is better, but some users have better range with a longer antenna. It should also be noted some receivers (and transmitters) already have an antenna coil on the PCB which in some cases cannot be bypassed. If it cannot be bypassed the antenna length should be a little-shorter. See also http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/132051/433mhz-quarter-wave-length-antenna-longer-is-better

@mwittig:Of course you are right with your explanation. I only wanted to show some other experienc because now where you can read about trying out a longer antenna. I’m pretty sure that a lot or people (even me) read it but doesn’t think about this possibility. So that was the reason that I wrote it down.

I have had it (thinking about giving up),

I build my receiver and transmitter again from scratch with new modules and still my receive range is poor.
Again when I cut off the senders antenna the receiver range is better (total distance 3-4 meters), Somehow they seem to interfere with eachother.

I use this receiver: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Geeetech-3400RF-433Mhz-Superheterodyne-Transmitter-and-Receiver-Module-Arduino-/221504167012?hash=item3392ad5c64.

I saw that there are also recevers with some shield: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Geeetech-433Mhz-Superheterodyne-3400RF-Transmitter-and-Receiver-link-kit-Arduino-/200974005470?hash=item2ecafbf4de

Is that the problem, that I don’t have that?

Has anyone pictures of your sender / receiver ?

Thanks in advance.

@lschip This is the one I have, it’s working fine with a small piece of wire as external antenna, but for niceness i’m thinking about buying this one:

http://www.tinytronics.nl/shop/433Mhz-Antenne?search=antenne

http://www.dx.com/p/geeetech-superheterodyne-3400-wirelesss-receiver-433mhz-rf-transmitter-kit-green-370793#.VfnGt_mqpBc

@lschip said:

I saw that there are also recevers with some shield

i am having several RXB6 / 3400RF receivers here but they all have shields.
i was always thinking that the picture without shield is only for demonstration purpose whats underneath the shield. yours is without shield?!

check the hardware tip again, there’s another receiver mentioned that should be ok too :
http://forum.pimatic.org/topic/487/hardware-tip-433-mhz-receiver-for-pimatic/3
maybe go for this one …

Ok, it will be my last try, I’ll go for a new receiver.
Now I saw this one: http://www.ebay.de/itm/Manchester-Super-heterodyne-ASK-OOK-RF-Wireless-Receiver-Module-433MHZ-112dBm-/280936648330?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4169210e8a&autorefresh=true

It claims to have a sensitivity of -112db in stead of-105db of the 3400RF Superheterodyne. Is this a good option too or do I risk a disappointment again?

Thanks in advance.

well, don’t know about these, but you could give it a try and report us about your experiences.

Hi guys,

I use the crap receiver mentioned above. I’ve putted a 10nF and a 100nF capacitor between GND and VCC. As Antenna i use a steel wire with 173mm length.The Receiver is powerd directly from the PI(my Nano delivers only 4.7V!). What shoud I say… Receivers Range is now about 10m!!!Much better then without the capacitors(1-2m).

Hi, I have received my receiver mentioned above.
The reception is better now but stil poor (8 meters without walls).
And again, with two antennas for reception and transmission I don’t receive anymore. I have to cut of the antenna of the transmitter to get any reception.

I give up, I don’t believe in a good receiver anymore… going for another solution…

My random input on trying to get better reception:

I’m hoping to build one of these when i get the parts, to help quantify signal strength.
http://www.zen22142.zen.co.uk/Circuits/rf/fsm.htm

I’ll start off by having a too long antenna, and cut it down to length as i log the RF output. When I pass the peak I’ll replace the antenna with the correct length, tailored to the installation.

I tried making antennas by following the two guides below, but i still experience a better signal with a straight wire. But the instructable does claim improved signal.
http://www.instructables.com/id/433-MHz-Coil-loaded-antenna/
http://www.elektor.nl/Uploads/Forum/Posts/How-to-make-a-Air-Cooled-433MHz-antenna.pdf
(used this site to compensate for Ø0.50mm copper with Ø0.98mm insulation and came up with 20 turns on a 3.0mm air core, but didn’t help much http://www.k7mem.com/Electronic_Notebook/inductors/coildsgn.html#Design_Cons )

Using these modules http://www.dx.com/p/mini-rf-transmitter-receiver-module-433mhz-wireless-link-kit-for-arduino-blue-black-412023 and they actually perform better than my original Tellstick.net. Have ordered the recommended 3400 kit as well, and will compare signal strength/receive sensitivity.