Signal Optimization Metrics Questions for the Experts

[AA5H]

Some Questions on Signal Optimization Metrics for the System Experts!

This is going to be a long and verbose post, so apologies in advance.

I realize there are dozens of posts on how to optimize; most take a "do this" and "do that" shotgun approach by eliminating common impairments. As a former military signals analyst, I prefer to take a systems approach based on baseline measurements of the circuit's known voltage and noise levels.
 My challenge is determining the correlation between the system's electrical metrics and the optimized signal received by the servers.
From my perspective, these factors impact system optimization:

Home Receiver Unit baseline metrics:

1. Noise floor: Drives the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).
   
2. Pre-amplifier gain: Typically provides a stronger received signal, but can also reduce the SNR depending on the receiver's ability to reject or filter out-of-band signals.
   
3. Filters: Dampen or suppress out-of-band signals.
   
4. OSI Wireline and Network settings: Duplex mode and packet size (to prevent packet fragmentation in routers with DF/DNF settings).
   
5. A/D serialization Settings: Left at Defaults
   
   

Server-side metrics:

1. Timestamp quality: The accuracy of timestamps on server-received packets compared to the server's PPS Stratum 1 source.
   
2. Packet latency: Measured in jitter.
   
3. Packet distortion: Noise resulting in random or out-of-sequence characters and CRC errors.
   
4. Surplus packets: Packets received by the server error-free, but rejected as surplus in areas with high receiver counts.
   
5. Factor "X": (More on that below).
   
   

Now, to the meat and potatoes: When it comes to system optimization, what server-reported metrics actually determine success?

1. Packet Count: Not accurate; it can include routed packets with broken UDP or higher-layer structures.
   
2. Packets Valid/Involved: Partially accurate, but valid/involved counts may only reflect the integrity of the UDP structure, not the quality of the payload.
   
3. Packets Used: What I consider true success—packets received at the server with an intact payload, timestamps within the system threshold, and a payload needed by the server to complete a calculation.
   
4. Packet "Efficiency": The ratio of "Valid" to "Used" packets (just my guess).
   

And now for "Factor X"...
I've systematically eliminated as many variables as possible from my setup. I use a field strength meter to identify RFI hotspots and mitigate them either by shutting off the source or using ferrite rings and clamps optimized to the source frequency. I've built three separate antenna types, tried various grounding scenarios, and added external RFI suppression to the antenna leads (1mF–2mF poly caps).

After a week of trial and error, my "Packets Used" count rose steadily into the 2,000–4,000 range—placing it in the top tier compared to similar receivers. 

Success! Or so I thought; read on

Unfortunately, my high "Packets Used" count isn't sustainable over time. It regularly declines to the 400–500 range for hours; it sometimes recovers to 1,000–1,500, and occasionally spikes back up to 2,000–4,000. My "Packets Used" count fluctuates wildly without any configuration changes, antenna changes,  environmental changes (including local weather), or additional RFI sources. I live 1 km from any neighbor, switching station, or other external RFI source. These fluctuations occur without any GPS errors, identified interference events, or filtering changes.

My only explanation is "Factor X" on the server side. Is it normal for "Packets Used" to vary wildly throughout the day as atmospheric or server conditions change, or is this shift caused by something on "my end"?

Again, apologies for such a detailed and long-winded post.

Current Setup:

• System Blue-Mini
  
• Three Coils of Times Microwave LMR-600 (2x each, with a 90-degree polarization shift)
  

Thanks

Brian (AA5H)