Ohhh nice and what about SR2 that stopped working after a month using the default value? You mentioned in other posts to use “default” for better perfomance. How do I know that all SR2 that stopped working are not affected by this? G-mode, default tx power.
When using default power it is putting too much power, that’s why it was getting better signal, but after a while it could overheat and start to work unstable.
To make this card work more stable you can adjust the power to use such table:
/interface wireless set wlan1 tx-power-mode=manual-table
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table set wlan1 manual-tx-powers=1Mbps:26,2Mbps:26,5.5Mbps:26,11Mbps:26,6Mbps:21,9Mbps:21,12Mbps:21,18Mbps:21,24Mbps:21,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:15,54Mbps:15
I have found out and posted on this forum before that best TX power values are between 21 and 23 everything else is making latency.
Cheers…
How about the SR5??? the same problem?
Also are there any tx-power settings for CM9? Or default it’s the best?
I have found CM9 working the best at 30 !!!
Try it and you’ll see signal strength improvement. I have 8 AP’s with cm9 and no problem for more than 1 month, latency is not afected, everything works fine and stable.
I wish somebody else try this and post results in here.
Cheers…
We have discovered that the SR2 card is putting too much TX-power and that’s why it could get hot and also work unstable.
You should adjust the TX-power value for G mode to 21 so it will work at 26db(400mW). For B mode you should set the tx-power to 26 which will work as 26db(400mW).
So what you are saying is not that the SR2 card is putting out to much power, but that MT is tweaking the power levels. The default for the card is 26dB for B - why would MT try to push more power out of the card?
no, MT is not pushing it. the card gets overheated because it tries to work at too much power (more than it can do) and we suggest that you force it to work at correct maximum (400mW) by using the settings as in the original post.
Will future releases correct this issue? It would be nice to have the settings in MT (26db) actually mean 26db out on the card. This would eliminate all sorts of issues as we can confidently set the power level to the factory spec. Right now if the power is set manually or to default even, we may be running to “hot” or just as bad be under powered!
If tx power works like that, why from 0 to 17 I the signal doesn’t change? Above 18-19-20-21… there is some difference. I have equipment to measure the signal. Setting it 1 it’s not 1 db but a lof more. Same problem with CM9
tip for the driver: maybe you should change tx power to set mW value instead of db?
I don’t know about too much power. I could see the card overheating and failing or signal loss if being overdriven. I feel the SR2 doesn’t put out enough. Using 26dbm on anntenna b and b/g with a 5dbi omni antenna my Linksys with Seavsoft has better range @ 200mw.
Also a 100mw 3com 8750 has about the same range.
Honestly, I’m disapointed.
What gives? I paid $30 for the Linksys and $400 for the RB / RouterOS Wisp 500.
And the linksys and Seavsoft devices were also using 5dBi Omni’s? When you’re comparing devices it’s best to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.
I’ve seen a definative increase in range after replacing my SOHO grade linksys with a RB530 w/ SR2 just in my home. For use in the WISP world these devices have made a noticeable difference over the previous CM9’s and Prism cards we used before..
ESPECIALLY when all client cards are Atheros based.
In addition your 30$ linksys doesn’t come close to offering you the features of RouterOS, sure you could mod out the firmware and run some flavor of linux on it, but when it comes down to it your still running your network on the same cheap piece of hardware that has an incredibly high failure rate.
I don’t know about you, but I’d take the quality of the RB500 over the Linksys WAP anyday.
anyway, my 2 cents…
And the linksys and Seavsoft devices were also using 5dBi Omni’s? When you’re comparing devices it’s best to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.[/quote]
Yes the linksys had 5dbi rubber duckies. The RB532 showed a major decrease in range in the same enviroment. I know the Linksys is a POS. And I doubt it could handle many users. But my point was “What’s wrong with this setup?” Like I said even the 3COM 8750AP @ 100mw was comparable in range in the same enviroment. Of course this is indoors. But we are only getting about 50-75ft range. Lot’s of walls and doors. The RB532 is for a commercial application. The RB already needs my attention do to some wierd bandwidth problem. It fails after about 6 hours and requires reboot, but the watchdog doesn’t reboot it. It’s not lockedup, just becomes extremely slow passing packets to ethernet1(WAN).
Well, I’m not an expert on these things. My wireless experience is from being a HAM and I’ve been programing since the TRS80. Maybe I’m overlooking something.
So I guess I’m going to spend my saturday in the Hotel bar trying to fix it.
The radio cards have a hardcoded minimum TX power level in many cases. In the case of the SR cards the minimul level is 13dB so if you set anything less then 13 then the radio will still output 13dB because it do not have not been tuned and adjusted for anything lower then 13dB. So this is not the radio card you want to use for low power output operation. The same goes with the CM9 it can not be abjusted lower then 11dB I want to recall.
/ Eje
Under Linux you can limit the output power to 1 db, this is not correct.
On a CM9 possibly because that card I’m not sure. But this is NOT the case on the SuperRange cards because the manufacture don’t have that supported in the hardware. They have a 10dB offset so lowest you possible could go is 11dB but the cards have not been calibrated lower then 13dB.
Is MT working on the problems with the SR cards, or just proposing the fix they have. I have to turn the power down to 21 to keep the pings stable. From some of the posts I have read, I am not the only one.
I was told by someone that the output power on the SR2 was not adjustable, it simply put out 400mW regardless of what was set in RouterOS. I gather this is not true?
It is not true!
Excellent, thank you! I am setting up an installation that needs to have the card’s output wound back slightly so that is very useful to know 