Re: WiFi out to 800 feet

Have a question or want to start a discussion? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 03:25:16 -0400, Paul wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

To Paul's point, I recommend two companies, both out of San Jose,  
but both do mail order (one via distributors like Amazon).

More importantly, both give you specification sheets galore.
o And both, IMHO, are reliable dependable outfits.

o For equipment, I'd stick with Ubiquiti on both ends, if I could:
<https://www.ui.com/products/

o For ordering "stuff" (poles, bolts, etc.) I'd compare with Streakwave:
<https://www.streakwave.com/product-ubiquiti.asp

I'm sure other outfits are just as good, but you can't go wrong with them.
o Prices are ok, quality is good, service is good, sales is experienced

BTW, with LOS & radios at each end, 800 feet is child's play for WiFi.
o Curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your desktop computer  
<https://groups.google.com/forum /#!topic/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/PkD0jfa9GqM>
--  
On Usenet adults can pool their knowledge & experience to help others.

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:59:43 -0400, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You must live in my neighborhood! :)

You bring up two important issues:
a. Power at the remote site 800 feet away, and,  
b. The Fresnel zone of a pole only six feet tall

You can look up the Fresnel zone stuff separately, which, in my experience,
is more theoretical than practical since you just shove more directional
beam power to overcome the losses due to lack of height.

Power is an issue.  

I'll ping "alt.internet.wireless" & "sci.electronics.repair" with this
post, who may be able to assist you more so than I can in how to set up the
power (be advised to ignore the three infants on s.e.r if they respond).

What we do here in the Santa Cruz mountains, where the zoning is 40 acres
per household, is "bucket routers" which are simply routers plugged into
anything we can plug them into, between homes when we need to clear
obstructions to our Line of Sight (LOS) WiFi transceivers.

But your suggestion of solar seems far better than bucket routers.
--  
A "bucket router" is just a router under a bucket for weather protection.

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On 10/4/20 7:59 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
[ nothing of any importance, as usual ]

Piss the fuck off.



--  
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Oh, be nice.  300ft is about the limit for omnidirectional antennas on
both ends of a 2.4GHz link.  For 800ft, directional antennas with some
gain are going to be required.  To get some decent speeds, 5GHz
instead of 2.4GHz.

Small antennas, long range, high speed... pick any two.

Drivel:  For your amusement, a Model 15 TTY used as a terminal for a
Linux computah.  Handling upper/lower case was a kludge and handling
arithmetic and programming symbols was impossible.  No mention of
termcap or terminfo:

"Using a 1930 Teletype as a Linux Terminal"
<
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XLZ4Z8LpEE


Try it with your Model 15.  That should keep you out of trouble for at
least a little while.

--  
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558


Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On 10/6/20 6:35 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I tried linking the shop to the house on 2.4 using 24" antennas
at both ends. Distance was 1400 feet.
Never could get it to work.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I bought a pair of Ubiquiti LiteBeam M5 with 23 dB antennas.
Absolutely solid link.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I've seen that before. I don't have a Model 15. I have a Lorenz
Lo-15c (made in Germany under license from the Teletype Corp.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Actually, I use it on i-Telex.
<https://www.i-telex.net/


--  
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWI
http:foxsmercantile.com

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On Tue, 06 Oct 2020 16:35:44 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Hi Jeff,

We go way back, decades, regarding Fox's/Snit's childish rants on Usenet...  
o Nobody takes Snit/Fox seriously (just google for his name for reference).

Don't worry about Snit (Michael Glasser is who Fox's Mercantile really is).
o He admitted it himself, years ago, when we caught him with the same IP

What I want to say is that I THANK YOU for helping the OP out.
o I know there are adults on s.e.r who, like you, are knowledgeable.

The whole point of adding s.e.r and a.i.w was that the Windows group needed
your expert assistance, which I, as an adult, for one, greatly appreciate.

Let's hope the OP reads your advice and takes it to heart for his problem
o Adults like you can help him, and, in doing so, you help all of us.

It's what Usenet is supposed to be all about...  
o To that end, I include the OP's original post, verbatim, below:

o WiFi out to 800 feet
<https://groups.google.com/forum /#!topic/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/uEhm2dTCc2o>

 From: gfretwell@aol.com
 Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
 Subject: WiFi out to 800 feet
 Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 23:28:01 -0400

 I didn't want to hijack the other thread but Arlen got my interest
 with those antennas.  

 If I wanted to hit a LAN based camera 800' away, what would I need to
 to do (clear LOS).  

 The objective would be to attach it to an existing security DVR that
 has 2 unused WiFi portals.  

 I am trying to avoid the cloud/phone thing but that seems to be what
 most of these ones I see are doing these days. I assume once they are
 on the network I could coax my DVR to see them.  

 Do I need an enhanced antenna at both ends or would the dish at the
 host end give me enough signal strength to talk?

 Thanks
--  
There are only two kinds of people on Usenet - one of whom adds value.

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------D44914698F0A35571A09B2ED
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding

On 10/6/20 4:35 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Generally speaking, yes.  Practically speaking you can do several
hundred mbps over a 2.4 link. You just need to widen the channel.


--------------D44914698F0A35571A09B2ED
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys;
 name="pEpkey.asc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="pEpkey.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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3D
=3Dd5t3
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

--------------D44914698F0A35571A09B2ED--

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 00:25:08 -0700, Johann Beretta

Quoted text here. Click to load it


While there are 2.4GHz routers available that have a 40MHz channel
bandwidth setting, I prefer not to use it because it reduces the
available bandwidth to other users on 2.4GHz.  If one is sufficiently
clueless to use a 40 MHz channel set to CH6, it will effectively
trash most of the 2.4GHz band.  Since Wi-Fi pollution can be
symmetrical, it also makes the receiver susceptible to more
interference.  Stay with 20MHz channel bandwidth on 2.4GHz.

On the other foot, the minimum channel bandwidth on 5GHz is 40MHz
(depending on channel selected) with an option to use 80MHz or 160MHz
for 802.11AC and AX (Wi-Fi 6).  
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels#5_GHz_or_5.9_GHz_ (802.11a/h/j/n/ac/ax)>
With 1024-QAM, 802.11AX can theoretically do 1.2Gbits/sec in a 160MHz
channel.  Your mileage will certainly be less.  

The test below was to demonstrate something else.  However, it does
show what can be done with 5GHz.  
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/FLUG-talk-2015-02-28/802.1a%20direct.jpg
Unfortunately, the radios at both ends were only 802.11a, so the speed
never went above 75 Mbits/sec at a distance of about 5 meters.  It
also uses Jperf 2.0.2, which doesn't work very well above 100
Mbit/sec.  I should have used Iperf 3, which works well into the
gigabit range:
<https://iperf.fr/iperf-download.php
My home network is now mostly gigabit, so I could easily run some 5GHz
performance tests with a later version of Iperf 3.  However, no pretty
graphs as nobody has bothered to port the Java code to work with
Iperf3.  I'm a horrible programmist, so I won't attempt it.

Anyway, the performance limiting factor is usually interference from
co-channel users and noise sources.  You could have all the bandwidth
in the world, the most efficient modulation scheme, maximum legal RF
power, and still not be able to communicate very well or far if there
is an interference source nearby.  In other words, one needs to do
more than just "widen the channel".


--  
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------1D924DDEB68D5FFE65EEBF03
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding

On 10/14/20 7:21 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

In dense environments, I agree.  In rural areas, interference may not be
a factor.  In extremely rural areas, interference PROBABLY won't be a
factor.


Quoted text here. Click to load it
802.11a/h/j/n/ac/ax)>
Quoted text here. Click to load it

No.. The minimum 5GHz channel bandwidth is 5MHz. Not sure where you are
coming up with 40MHz as a minimum. Out of several dozen transmitters, I
only have two set to 40MHz (backhauls). The rest are set to 20MHz with a
couple at 10Mhz.

My gear (Ubiquiti) supports 5, 8, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 80 Mhz wide channel=
s.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Once again, sometimes. Sometimes ALL you need to do is widen the channel.=



--------------1D924DDEB68D5FFE65EEBF03
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys;
 name="pEpkey.asc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="pEpkey.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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3D
=3Dd5t3
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

--------------1D924DDEB68D5FFE65EEBF03--

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 12:05:43 -0700, Johann Beretta

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Those are fair assumptions.  However, I've been surprised a few times.
For example, I couldn't figure out why I was getting miserable 2.4GHz
performance in an isolated farm house that was 2 miles from the
nearest neighbor or potential source of RF interference.  I finally
got around to doing a site survey with a spectrum analyzer and
directional dish antenna.  I wound that there was a point to point
2.4GHz wireless link between an office building about 5 miles away,
and an isolated pump house about 3 miles away.  The farm house was
directly in the line of sight.  At first, I simply changed channels
(1, 6, or 11), but the pump house link changed channel every time the
link faded or was obstructed.  So much for adaptive channel selection.
So, I switched to 5GHz, and avoided the problem.  Yes, interference
can be a problem in the middle of nowhere.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Correct.  However, 5MHz is not the occupied bandwidth of the signal.
It varies by modulation mode and type.  For example, conventional
2.4GHz 802.11b/g is typically about 22MHz wide and occupies four 5MHz
channels.  The 2.4GHz band is 83.5MHz wide.  Therefore, if it is only
possible to fit 3 non-overlapping 22MHz wide signals in the band
before running out of bandwidth.  This is where the recommended CH1,
6, and 11 comes from.  Incidentally, picking a channel that lands in
between CH1, 6, or 11 will end up overlapping the two adjacent
channels and interfere with both.

On 5 GHz, it's the same story.  You divide the available bandwidth by
the occupied bandwidth of the signal to get the number of available
non-overlapping channels.   Diagrams such as these show how it works:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=802.11+channel+bandwidth&tbm=isch

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You can use 20, 40, 80, or 160 on *PARTS* of the 5GHz band.  10 MHz is
available but I don't know any situation where it might be useful. The
bandwidth situation is a mess on 5GHz.  I don't have the time to
explain where all the various protocols, power levels, bandwidth
restrictions, and standards, DFS radar protection, etc, fit together.
Also, things get really strange with 802.11ax.  See Fig 9:
<https://www.ni.com/en-us/innovations/white-papers/16/introduction-to-802-11ax-high-efficiency-wireless.html

Quoted text here. Click to load it

In what country?  See:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels#5_GHz_or_5.9_GHz_ (802.11a/h/j/n/ac/ax)>
Go to the column marked United States.  Notice that 20 MHz is the
minimum allocated occupied bandwidth.  10 MHz is on the chart, but it
look like no country is using it.  5, 8, 30, and 50 MHz are not on the
chart.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Yep.  However, if a wide bandwidth is such a great solution, why
doesn't everyone just setup their routers to use as much occupied
bandwidth as possible, or perhaps just use the entire band?  Sure,
there are benefits, but compromises must be made to use a larger part
of the band?  Hint:  Think about how long a radio needs to be
transmitting in order to deliver (for example) 1 MByte of payload
data.  If it can deliver the data twice as fast and therefore uses
half the air time, that's that much more air time for other users of
the bandwidth used.


--  
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------AE58F443C09AC6B417F6AC87
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding

On 10/18/20 1:25 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:


Quoted text here. Click to load it
nels.

The United States. I'm using official firmware on a US radio.  I had
heard that newer radios were limited to 10MHz as the smallest slice, but
older gear is grandfathered in.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


As for the usefulness of 10Mhz, well... Seriously?

I can think of all sorts of things.. Namely anything where you need
70mbps or less.

Or, in a really crowded area, you might be able to find 10Mhz of clean
spectrum..

My own link to my WISP is 10Mhz (I have my own dedicated AP). Delivers
me everything I need without having another 10Mhz just polluting the area=
=2E

I could probably get away with 5Mhz, but I've upgraded to the AC line
and that is no longer an option. It is, however, still an option in the
M series.




--------------AE58F443C09AC6B417F6AC87
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys;
 name="pEpkey.asc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="pEpkey.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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3D
=3Dd5t3
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

--------------AE58F443C09AC6B417F6AC87--

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:32:40 -0700, Johann Beretta

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I'll assume a Ubiquiti M5 radio.  I have some really old M5-Bullet
radios, with firmware that can't be upgraded to the latest greatest.
However, my house is a mess resulting from my office move, and I'm not
inclined to dig one out and check what it can do.  I did some Googling
and found that the Rocket-M5 does support 5 and 10 MHz channel
bandwidth, so I'll assume that your unspecified M5 version also does
the same.
<https://community.ui.com/questions/Channel-width-max-bandwidth-and-max-clients-per-AP/cdf020af-0d11-4982-8c0d-785e3e1c2030

The article conveniently explains part of the logic behind using wider
channels and mostly answers my question from my previous rant, which
you deleted and/or ignored.  Basically, the approximate math is
simple.  If your WISP configures their access point for a 40 MHz
bandwidth channel and the ISP has 10 full time connected users, the
system can deliver no more than 4 Mbits/sec to each user.  If the WISP
reduces the occupied bandwidth to 5 MHz, and still has 10 full time
users, each one will only get 0.5 MBits/sec, which is inadequate.  If
your WISP doesn't have much of a user load, or doesn't overload the
channel with too many wireless users, 5 MHz occupied bandwidth will
work just fine.  Note that this simplistic channel loading estimate
ignores various factors that will either increase or decrease the
channel loading.  For example, I'm assuming that the channel usage is
sustained at the maximum available rate, which is sometimes a bad
assumption.  This becomes really messy if the streaming media provider
adjusts their deliver rate based upon error rate levels returns from
the viewers computer or media player.

Also, there is a problem.  This assumes that the WISP has exclusive
use of the channel and that there are no other users on the same
channel.  Any co-channel users will appear as interference causing the
WISP access point to lower the data rate to a level where the BER (bit
error rate) is high enough to produce usable throughput.  In many
cases, this throughput reduction can be drastic, but for this
discussion, I'll assume it reduces throughput to half.  That means
that delivering a given amount of data will double the air time (how
long the transmitter occupies the channel) and delivery will therefore
take twice as long.  Actually, it's longer because the packet size is
also reduced, but to keep things simple, I'll ignore that.  The result
of slowing down due to interference is that every users connection
slows down, and data takes twice as long to deliver.  Instead of ten
happy Netflix viewers, the ISP support phone will have 10 irate
customers complaining of buffering.

So, what can an WISP do?  Well, it could not load the channel to the
maximum capacity for a given occupied bandwidth.  It could add another
radio on a different channel and move some of the customers there. Or,
it could just size the occupied bandwidth setting to match the actual
channel loading with some overhead left for interference and high
usage peaks.

So, why did your WISP use 5 MHz.  None of the advanced 5GHz mode
beyond 802.11a are going to work well crammed into a 5 MHz occupied
bandwidth channel.  I'm not sure if 802.11a will work in a 5 MHz
channel.  802.11ac requires an 80 MHz channel.  It would be
interesting to sniff the traffic between your Ubiquiti M5-something
radio and the WISP access point with a Wi-Fi Analyzer (Android) or
something similar.  My guess(tm) is you're running 802.11a.

So, what kind of performance can one expect in a 5 MHz wide channel
compared to a 20 MHz channel?  That would 1/4th the speed *OR* double
the range due to increase in power density (dBm/Hz).  That's why it
was attractive to your WISP.  Cut the data rate in half yields a range
increase of sqrt(2) or 1.414.

That's also why the FCC and other regulators seem to have purged 5 and
10 MHz occupied bandwidth from the rules-n-regs.  It's much too close
to narrow band modulation and carries some of the detrimental effects
of narrow band modulation.  It was fine when the typical 5 Ghz signal
used 20 MHz modulation.  However, with 40, 80, and 160 MHz now
available, the narrower occupied bandwidths had to go.  

Quoted text here. Click to load it
--  
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------F6F3B90E2071973FA7B3CB3D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding

On 10/18/20 9:32 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


I wasn't deliberately ignoring anything. I was just picking/choosing
what to reply to. (Limited time and all that jazz)

I disagree with the 4mb/s for each user though.  Clients with less than
ideal signals should be put into low priority on the AirMAX scheduling
priority.  This prevents them from hogging up transmission time. (for M
radios - AC radios apparently are able to handle that with whatever
programming logic UBNT has come up with as you no longer have to specify
priorities)

There area also various modulating schemes to help with bottlenecking
(TDMA, CDMA, and various new ones I'm sure).

My own tests flat out contradict that 4mb/s bs..  I can deliver a lot
more to customers than that.. And yes, these are netflixers so they're
using bandwidth constantly.  Maybe back in the day this was true, but
that post you referenced is 5 years old and it is no longer the case.


--------------F6F3B90E2071973FA7B3CB3D
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys;
 name="pEpkey.asc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="pEpkey.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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3D
=3Dd5t3
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

--------------F6F3B90E2071973FA7B3CB3D--

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------83A74E8460B01B99B558A255
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding

On 10/18/20 9:32 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Just out of curiosity, where are y'all getting this idea that a 40MHz
signal can only deliver 40mbps?  The 40MHz signals I use will deliver at
300MB/s (roughly)


--------------83A74E8460B01B99B558A255
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys;
 name="pEpkey.asc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="pEpkey.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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3D
=3Dd5t3
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

--------------83A74E8460B01B99B558A255--

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On 10/4/20 7:59 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
[ nothing of value as usual ]

Let me know when you get tired of proving how useless you are.

--  
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------397875103D60B01BD271B36A
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding

On 10/4/20 5:59 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
nce,
l


What the hell?  Clearly you don't do this for a living.



--------------397875103D60B01BD271B36A
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys;
 name="pEpkey.asc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="pEpkey.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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3D
=3Dd5t3
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

--------------397875103D60B01BD271B36A--

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 00:23:10 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That is an absolutely correct assessment.

You can advise the OP better than I on potential Fresnel Zone issues, as  
he's apparently asking how best to paint a LOS location 800 feet away with  
the transceiver on a pole I believe.

You can run the math to explain to him how high that pole may need to be.
(We do that stuff by trial and error - but you may know the math better.)

Please advise the OP on the math so he knows how high to mount the radio.

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 07:45:18 -0000 (UTC), Arlen   Holder

Quoted text here. Click to load it

By the way, I officially retired on Sept 30, 2020.  The office is
closed, the bank accounts emptied, and much of the equipment donated
or sold.  

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sigh.  I've lost count how many times I've done that in this
newsgroup.  Start here:
<https://www.proxim.com/en/products/knowledge-center/calculations/calculations-fresnel-clearance-zone
800 ft is not far enough apart to worry about the curvature of the
earth.  
  800ft / 5280ft/mile = 0.152 miles
At 2.4Ghz, the Fresnel Zone is 9 ft radius at the midpoint of the
link.  Therefore, the antenna at both ends of the link need to be at
least 9 ft off the ground, or 9 ft above any major obstructions
(fences, trees, buildings, cars, etc).  Actually, it's somewhat more
complicated if I throw in fade margin, frequency selective fading, and
system availability, but we won't need to go there for this example.

At 5 GHz, the Fresnel Zone radius is only 6.3 ft.  Therefore, the
antenna pole can be 2.7 feet shorter.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Methinks we've lost the OP long ago.

--  
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
On 10/14/20 9:42 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well done sir.


--  
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

Re: WiFi out to 800 feet
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Congratulations.  You'll now enjoyably find everything you knew
disappainting or being replaced by new kids on the block.  I don't see
any of those filling your shoes here and I usually only bother to lurk
to see what you are posting.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


I've run cantenna line-of-site over 400m reliably for years.  I didn't
measure the fresnel zone but a farmer's apple tree in his front must
have encroached the signal line every few years and he would kindly
lop a few branches, restoring normal service.  I have a note of the
speeds somewhere but the system gave me office access from home, home
broadband via the office and all I remember is that the Wi-Fi speed
was better than the rather poor broadband speed available at the end
of a  long exchange line.

After moving several years ago from the little hamlet (60 properties)
the pathetic broadband (I think I had one of the best connections at
2mbps) was replaced by FTTP.   I don't think I could have got mi Wi-Fi
signal to keep up with the resulting 80Mbps broadband.  Those we now
Zoom with in that hamlet are always very clear and no blurring motion
issues - I'm somewhat jealous.
  
(UK in case any folk are struggling to understand any terminology or
words).
--  
AnthonyL

Why ever wait to finish a job before starting the next?

Site Timeline