dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
843
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Send Wireless Signal 300ft.

Hi everyone. I'm hoping I understand what needs to be done but want to run it by you first. I know this topic has been done to death and I think I've read up on every one there is on the last 10 pages but here goes.....

I need to send my cable signal from one house to another. The distance between them is roughly 300ft with direct line of site with exception of a few newly planted 8ft trees.

The 2nd house is up on a hill pointing down to the other. (not sure that that matters, but there is definitely line of site)

Both houses have D-link DIR-655 routers but can upgrade if need be.

I want to send the cable connection (60mb down and 5mb up) to the other router to supply that house with a faster internet speed. Would my speeds be close down and up at the second router?

From reading other topics, is this what I need?
»www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti- ··· 049AVWAO

Is there something better? Ideally, I would like to run cat5e if possible but if I need to look at something other such as Hawking type stuff, I can, but that deals with special cables that can't be very long. Between the antennae on the outside of the houses and the routers, there may be about 100ft or so of distance through attics and what not.

So what say you wireless working gurus? What is your suggestions? I don't mind paying 400-500 to do this but as with anything, if I can get a bargain, even better.

If you need any more information, please let me know. Thanks.

billaustin
they call me Mr. Bill
MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV

billaustin

MVM

Those radios are more than adequate for what you need. You will probably have to dial the power down to a low setting for such a short distance. You do need clear line of sight. The radios will need to be able to physically see each other.

The best solution is to bury cable between the locations. If the cable length will be over 328 feet, then running fiber would be the way to go. You should be able to get pre-terminated fiber and some ethernet converters for less than $500.

If you can keep the actual run between devices under 328 feet, then Cat6 is probably cheaper. You may need a switch at each entry point to keep within the cable length limitations. I would also add a surge suppressor at each end.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Thank you for the reply billaustin. I would love to run some cat 6 or fiber but unfortunately, someone owns a small sliver of land in between the two houses. Sorry i should have been more clear in my original post.

So would your recommendation be those units? Is it easy to dial down the power? Is there a better wireless option? We just want the most reliable connection with the best speeds within the right budget. Are those wireless n type speeds? I assume ac isn't really worth it right now? Or maybe i am way off and it mostly relies on the router?

Thanks again for the help and recommendations. Looking forward to more ideas.
Expand your moderator at work
jimbopalmer
Tsar of all the Rushers
join:2008-06-02
Greenwood, MS

jimbopalmer to Peja

Member

to Peja

Re: Send Wireless Signal 300ft.

For that short a distance, the smaller Nanostation Loco M5 may be better. (or at least cheaper) 150 Mbits wireless, 100 Mbit ethernet.
»www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti- ··· _cp_pc_0

And yes, it is easy to adjust power, it is just a slider in the GUI
»forums.techguy.org/attac ··· etup.jpg

I use 2 pairs of these to extend networks across public roads.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Interesting jimbo. Is the thoroughput the same for both models? 150 mbits wireless? If the connection is 60 down and 5 up, what would you expect it to be at the receiving end of that link?

Does snow or wind mess with the signal quality much even with a direct line of site?

Thanks for the response
jimbopalmer
Tsar of all the Rushers
join:2008-06-02
Greenwood, MS

jimbopalmer to Peja

Member

to Peja
Snow and wind will depend on how securely you fasten them to your buildings.

My experience indicates your 60/5 will be intact, and that fog is an issue at both 900 Mhz and 2.4 Ghz.

»www.amazon.com/Winegard- ··· Q23KG4Y0
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Looks like I will go with the smaller Loco M5 if there is no difference in speed between that and the NSM5.

I was just worried about possible interference on the 2.4ghz spectrum but I assume that can be taken care of by using a different channel? Right now, both routers are on auto channel.

So before I order, besides the antennas and mounting situation, is there anything else I need? I already have plenty of cat5e and can upgrade routers if need be.

I will read up on how to install them but am I right that each one just plugs into an empty port on the router switch? Or does the second one plug into the Internet port so that remote router receives the net connection?

Seems pretty straight forward to me.

Thanks for the help again!!!
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON

LLigetfa

Member

said by Peja:

Looks like I will go with the smaller Loco M5...

I was just worried about possible interference on the 2.4ghz spectrum...

The 5 in M5 series stands for 5GHz so no possibility of interference. The M2 series on the other hand is 2.4 GHz.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Which is what I thought? I always go overkill so would the M5 be too much for my application?

I guess I am just looking on recommendations on which one to get. The extra few bucks doesn't really matter much to me. Is the only real difference the spectrum it is on? I assume the 5ghz will go further as well....which won't really have anything to do with my application.

Thanks.
jimbopalmer
Tsar of all the Rushers
join:2008-06-02
Greenwood, MS

jimbopalmer to Peja

Member

to Peja
5 Ghz is way less crowded, but does not go as far. If you were trying to go 10 km (6 miles) I would recommend 2.4 Ghz, but you aren't. For 300 feet, distance is not a concern, but interference may be, and 5 Ghz will have less.
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON

LLigetfa

Member

Jimbo is right. 2.4 has less free space loss than 5GHz but at 300 feet, FSL is not a concern but channel congestion is.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

To be honest, I don't think channel congestion will be much of a factor either. From each house, there will be no houses within the line of site obviously but neighbor houses there is about 2 total where wireless would reach them.

I guess I can't go wrong with either solution. Is there any benefit for my solution for one over the other? Speed wise or reliability during weather?

Thanks.
LittleBill
join:2013-05-24

LittleBill

Member

2.4 goes through trees better
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Think I will just go with the 2.4ghz.

Thanks everyone for the suggestions. As soon as I get it setup I will report back.
jimbopalmer
Tsar of all the Rushers
join:2008-06-02
Greenwood, MS

jimbopalmer to LittleBill

Member

to LittleBill
This happens NOT to be the case.

Microwave ovens operate at 2.4 Ghz because food absorbs energy best at that frequency, due to the water in it. 5 Ghz will (by comparison) be unaffected by tree leaves.

billaustin
they call me Mr. Bill
MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV

billaustin to Peja

MVM

to Peja
If you really think trees are going to be a major issue, then go with 900mhz. Otherwise, stick with 5ghz.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

I don't think they will be a huge issue this year, but possibly in the next few years they may grow. So I guess 5ghz it is.

Until the next person comes in here and says go with 2.4ghz. As you can tell, I can be swayed quite easily when it comes to this stuff hahaha.

Thanks guys
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON

LLigetfa

Member

Stick with 5GHz. It has the smallest fresnel zone. If tree growth is a concern mount the kit higher.
LittleBill
join:2013-05-24

LittleBill to jimbopalmer

Member

to jimbopalmer
said by jimbopalmer:

This happens NOT to be the case.

Microwave ovens operate at 2.4 Ghz because food absorbs energy best at that frequency, due to the water in it. 5 Ghz will (by comparison) be unaffected by tree leaves.

5ghz does not "bend" like 2.4, i can do alot better with NLOS with 2.4 then ever with 5.8

i stand by my comment
Ole Juul
join:2013-04-27
Princeton, BC

Ole Juul to jimbopalmer

Member

to jimbopalmer
said by jimbopalmer:

Microwave ovens operate at 2.4 Ghz because food absorbs energy best at that frequency, due to the water in it. 5 Ghz will (by comparison) be unaffected by tree leaves.

FYI: The absorption spectrum of water increases steadily up until about 10 micrometers. Microwave ovens operate around 122mm.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

And this is why I love reading these forums. The vast amount of knowledge is amazing and I learn so much from everyone.
Peja

Peja

Member

UPDATE:

I finally got around to installing the Nanostation M5 this weekend and have a connection. The connection at the modem/router is around 21mb down and 4mb up. The connection up at the remote site is 13mb down and 4mb up.

According to the M5 Main menu, my readings are:

signal strength: -60dBm
Chain 0/Chain 1: -61/-63dbm
Noise Floor: -96dBm
Transmit CCQ: 100%
TX/RX Rate: 300/300Mbps
Airmax: enabled
Airmax Priority: none
Airmax Quality: 99%
Airmax Capacity: 99%

Is there anything else I should be looking for? Are these decent numbers?

I have the each nanostation's output power all the way down to -4.

Thanks for any other information you can give me.

Peja
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON

LLigetfa

Member

-60 dBm is just a tad low. Strive for about -55.
2dB disparity in the chains suggest minor misalignment or fresnel incursion.
AMQ/AMC look good but is there is any interference, it may drop under load. Check the spectrum with airView for the best channel.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Ok, I can see how the misalignment may be off. There is roughly about 50-75 elevation difference over the 300ft and both receivers are pointing straight. I need to slightly point the lower one up and point the upper one down.

I figured I would need to do that anyways but wanted to check the numbers first.

What should I be looking for as far as numbers. I get the -55 but should the chains be the same? Or what numbers should they be?

Also, what part of the menu do I use to check airview?

Thanks LLigetfa
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON

LLigetfa

Member

Ideal would be no disparity in the chains. IOW, they should be both the same.
You can find airVIew under Tools.
You may want to try with airMAX off.
Make sure you are using WPA2-AES.
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja

Member

Well we tried and tried yesterday to get the chains to line up with the same numbers but couldn't get it. We are still off by 2-3 right now.

Also, the lowest we could get the signal strength was -59dbm.

The connection is now around 29mb down and 4.5 mb up.

I tried going to tools and air view, then the java box popped up but nothing ever launched. I may need to look into it a bit more.

Where do I turn AirMAX off? right now the priority is set to none on the first tab.

As for encryption we are on WPA2AES.

On a side note, I finally took down an old antennae that was on the roof. It is a Cal Amp Planar Transceiver. Is this thing worth anything or do I just throw it away?

Thanks again for all of the help.
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON

LLigetfa

Member

You can find the airMAX settings under the first (bird splat) tab. Java security may need to be lowered for airView to work.
said by Peja:

Also, the lowest we could get the signal strength was -59dbm...

It is a negative number so -60 is lower than -55.

Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium Member
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS

Anav

Premium Member

So thats why the sony ES hifi systems with -96 rating were more expensive than the I dont know RCA maybe at -72
Peja
join:2014-09-24

Peja to LLigetfa

Member

to LLigetfa
Yes Yes.....stupid me. I meant to say highest.

Thanks.