John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
 ·CenturyLink
| reply to PersComp
Re: 15 Miles shot. How to do it?
said by PersComp  :So does a PtP (end user) have different rules than a PtP backhaul? Perhaps I completely mis-understand Part 15 myself.... I interpret a PtP as meaning 1 radio on each end. If I am wrong, someone please let me know. Clients can run under the PtP rules...APs MUST be evaluated under the PtMP rules.
--
A is A |
|
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON
| reply to PersComp
said by PersComp :So does a PtP (end user) have different rules than a PtP backhaul? No, same rule. Since the client only talks to the AP, it IS one radio at each end. The AP is the weak link because if it talks to more than one radio it is bound to a max EIRP of 36.
»www.telexwireless.com/wireless/f···art%2015 |
|
anoclon
join:2004-10-12
Guatemala
| reply to John Galt
How´re you doing John. I´m glad to hear from you. I´m trying to survive downhere. As you see, I´m thinking deliberant instead of d-link now. That´s a big step for me as you already know.
Ok guys, thank you all. Sorry for leaving you alone discussing this subject all this time.
said by John Galt :said by LLigetfa :I think you are interpreting part 15 different than I do. Part 15 does not apply to Anoclon... John is completely right. He knows my entire story and FCC and part 15 regulations does not apply to me. So please, in my case forget about any rules you have upthere in US. I could use any radio with any antenna I want, with the output power I want but I´d like to keep it the cheapest possible way. In this case, I´ve considered deliberant.
I want it to be a PtP link, from any of my bases, to the client. My question is: do you think deliberant would do the job? Would the throughput be enough? What model would be best?
What´s the difference between a connectorized and a NOT connectorized radio? |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
·CenturyLink
| said by anoclon :What´s the difference between a connectorized and a NOT connectorized radio? The connectorized radio needs a pigtail and an antenna whereas the integrated radio has an antenna built-in.
--
A is A |
|
anoclon
join:2004-10-12
Guatemala
| 1. I have read / learned on this forum that a 12 mile link would be the maximum distance or limit on a wireless connection without having to re-transmit the signal. Am I wrong or understood wrong?
2. Have you checked with google earth the surrounding area for client side? there´s a lot of water (canal / river) between the bases and the client. Could that affect the signal? |
|
lutful
Premium
join:2005-06-16
Ottawa, ON
| 1. The 12 mile limit comes from "deafult" timeout value for packet acknowledgement (ACK) - many firmware lets you increase the ACK timeout value for longer links.
2. Many of our links go over water at low height. Do not worry about that.
If you use connectorized DLB2300, please try 24dBi grid antenna since you could lose a few dB signal due to less-than-perfect tightening of cable and other strange issues. |
|
jober
join:2001-12-13
| reply to anoclon
I have a 13 mile link that does 7.5mbps.
The tower side has a 24dbi panel that I'm going to change to a 27 or 29bdi grid and the client side has a 29dbi grid.
Both sides are running SR5s in Router Board 532s.
I'm setting up a test link that's 35 miles. I have my side setup with a 24dbi grid and a SR2 in a RB532 and the other Wisp is setting up the same on his side.
At this point he has a 15dbi omni with a CM9 in a wrap or RB532 and I can connect to it with a -85db signal so I think the link will be good with the new hardware on his side. |
|
anoclon
join:2004-10-12
Guatemala | Guys, please. I´m a rookie. Please keep it easy. John, are you there??? please I could use your help. Please traslate it. |
|
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON
| You could try a pair of radios with integrated panels but if they don't have enough power to give you the fade margin, you will have to shelve them.
If integrated panels don't work out, go for connectorized and get as much antenna gain as you can afford to buy and that the weather there won't tear apart. Then, since you are not bound by part 15, you can adjust radio power to give you the fade margin you need.
Good antenna gain always trumps radio power since it works both ways. |
|
jober
join:2001-12-13
1 edit | reply to anoclon
If I were you and I could spend the extra money on this project, I would use the following equipment.
RB532-4A RB532 64MB RAM, Lvl 4 lic $185.00x2=$370.00
DCE-CaseKitPGME Die Cast Aluminum Case PGME $32.30x2=$64.60
SR2-80211bg SuperRange2 802.11b/g 400 mW mini-PCI $109.95 x2=$219.90
Ufl6-NFB-.5 Pigtail Ufl6 to NFB 5" $13.00x2=$26.00
POE-48 48v Input POE Injector $22.45x2=44.90
NM-NM-400-6 Pigtail NM to NM LMR400 Style, 6 ft $16.30x2= $32.60
DC24-HD-PF1PF 2.4GHz 24dBi Die Cast Antenna N-Female $58.45x2=$116.90
Total: $874.90
But I would also use 5.8Ghz not 2.4Ghz. The cost would be almost the same.
|
|
LLigetfa
join:2006-05-15
Fort Frances, ON
| Well... there are still too many unknowns to make an accurate assessment. We know nothing about the two bases or the seaside site, noise floor, spectrum use, tower heights, wind factor, etc. There has been little described of the seaside location as to the immediate terrain and what sort of tower can suitably and affordably be erected.
5.8GHz has more free space loss than 2.4GHz. That said, there is the osbridge 5GXi with integrated 23dB panels (10 watt EIRP) at $200.US that could be considered. Wind loading would be minimal on an integrated panel. They also have a connectorized version one could use grids with for more $$$ but wind loading would require more substantial mounting. |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
·CenturyLink
| reply to anoclon
said by anoclon :John, are you there??? I am on vacation for a week...so I will in and out of here for a few more days.
PersComp, can you do a calculation using the DLB-2700 and 24 dB grids?
»www.deliberant.com/estore/web/da···1043.pdf
Thanks...and back to vacationing.
--
A is A |
|
PersComp
Premium
join:2005-08-17
Cayce, SC
| reply to anoclon
Here are the results of the 2700 and 24dBi grids.
--
Are these instructions or corrections??? |
|
anoclon
join:2004-10-12
Guatemala | So, theres only a 3dB gain in Rx relative compared to 19dbi antenna right? |
|
PersComp
Premium
join:2005-08-17
Cayce, SC
| reply to anoclon
Sorry, I checked it closer. That was a new system that I set up with the 2700 and the grid. I accidentally set the receive to -75 instead of -85.
--
Are these instructions or corrections??? |
|
anoclon
join:2004-10-12
Guatemala
| reply to lutful
said by lutful :The lower cost DLB2300 model with 19dBi antenna will be better for 15 mile shot with clear line of sight.  On the following link
»www.deliberant.com/estore/web/c-···ios.aspx
I dont see any DLB2300 with 19dbi integrated antenna. Maybe youre talking about the model DLB2319. Or are you suggesting to use the connectorized model DLB2310 and buy two pairs of 19dbi antennas?
Which way? |
|
rawgerz
In Debt we trust
Premium
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA | He was referring to the 2319 |
|
Keithb
join:2003-09-16
US | reply to anoclon
I would think 2 of the higher gain DLB's with 24dbi grid should do 15 miles with LOS. We have a 10.5 mile with a 24dbi grid, to a 120 degree 16dbi sector. |
|
anoclon
join:2004-10-12
Guatemala
| reply to lutful
said by lutful :1. The 12 mile limit comes from "deafult" timeout value for packet acknowledgement (ACK) - many firmware lets you increase the ACK timeout value for longer links. Is this the case for deliberant 2319? |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
·CenturyLink
| said by anoclon :Is this the case for deliberant 2319? I believe that it is...
The 23XX means that the base radio is a DLB2300 module (with the same firmware) and the XX19 means that it has the 19 dB panel antenna.
--
A is A |
|
