Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
I bought a groove 52 + omni 15dbi (txpro 2415) to change a crazy nanostation M2. The signal barely reaches 50mts, while with the NS it reached little more than 100mts. Will I have something wrong with the wireless configuration?
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
Hard to guess how the device is set, but you swapped the dual channel device by single channel one. Half the chains means under all other conditions unchanged the half of throughput. Generally.
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
It is really the first time that I purchase mikrotik equipment, even so, it is strange that it has less scope than a ubiquiti (NSLM2 with 8dbi antenna).
I configured the equipment in the following way:
Frequency 2ghz / bgn, Protocol: 802.11, antenna gain: 15dbi, txpower: all fixes rated 23dbm.
The use is to distribute to wireless equipment: cell phones, laptops, tablets.
Could it be that the groove is working alone with the internal antenna? Is there any way to tell you to just work with the external antenna?
I configured the equipment in the following way:
Frequency 2ghz / bgn, Protocol: 802.11, antenna gain: 15dbi, txpower: all fixes rated 23dbm.
The use is to distribute to wireless equipment: cell phones, laptops, tablets.
Could it be that the groove is working alone with the internal antenna? Is there any way to tell you to just work with the external antenna?
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
You maybe selected wrong model. Maybe the configuration could be improved, but you cannot use the chain that is not there. You cannot compare single chain radio with the dual chain radio.
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
If you don't fear the "radio police", then set antenna gain to low value, such as 0 or 3 dBi.Frequency 2ghz / bgn, Protocol: 802.11, antenna gain: 15dbi, txpower: all fixes rated 23dbm.
The use is to distribute to wireless equipment: cell phones, laptops, tablets.
Try to set txpower=card-rates ... according to official specifications, all groove models are able to transmit at power higher than 23 dBm at low datarates, so by setting txpower to 23dBm you're giving up some coverage. OTOH you're instructing to transmit at higher power than the device is capable at high data rates. If you "unleash" tx power by setting antenna-gain lower, the card might try to transmit higher data rates with power higher than output PA is capable of thus transmitted signal will get distorted and you'll never be able to achieve highest data rates. This problem is not (yet) present due to lower TX power used currently (see next paragraph).
Rationale for change of antenna-gain: there are country specific rules about maximum allowed EIRP. EIRP includes antenna gain and if antenna gain is high, actual EIRP might be higher than allowed. To avoid violation of rules, device needs to know antenna gain (antenna being passive element can not tell that to transmitter so you have to enter it by hand) to lower maximum used TX power so that EIRP remains under legal limit. And that lowered power will probably not be visible in any of diagnostic print-outs as it falls into category of dynamic power control.
Hence if you don't fear somebody from some law-enforcement agency might come by, you can set antenna-gain to some lower value and you'll actually start to enjoy benefits of your high-gain antenna. I advise you to set antenna gain to a value which will give your just the coverage you want, not any lower. This way you will both receive less radiated energy into your head/feet when you pass near by to the antenna and you will cause less interference to your neighbours (in case you drink a beer or two with them from time to time).
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
Thanks for your answer. He simply believed that it was only a matter of increasing power without taking other factors into account. I have placed 15 dbi in antenna gain,If you don't fear the "radio police", then set antenna gain to low value, such as 0 or 3 dBi.Frequency 2ghz / bgn, Protocol: 802.11, antenna gain: 15dbi, txpower: all fixes rated 23dbm.
The use is to distribute to wireless equipment: cell phones, laptops, tablets.
Try to set txpower=card-rates ... according to official specifications, all groove models are able to transmit at power higher than 23 dBm at low datarates, so by setting txpower to 23dBm you're giving up some coverage. OTOH you're instructing to transmit at higher power than the device is capable at high data rates. If you "unleash" tx power by setting antenna-gain lower, the card might try to transmit higher data rates with power higher than output PA is capable of thus transmitted signal will get distorted and you'll never be able to achieve highest data rates. This problem is not (yet) present due to lower TX power used currently (see next paragraph).
Rationale for change of antenna-gain: there are country specific rules about maximum allowed EIRP. EIRP includes antenna gain and if antenna gain is high, actual EIRP might be higher than allowed. To avoid violation of rules, device needs to know antenna gain (antenna being passive element can not tell that to transmitter so you have to enter it by hand) to lower maximum used TX power so that EIRP remains under legal limit. And that lowered power will probably not be visible in any of diagnostic print-outs as it falls into category of dynamic power control.
Hence if you don't fear somebody from some law-enforcement agency might come by, you can set antenna-gain to some lower value and you'll actually start to enjoy benefits of your high-gain antenna. I advise you to set antenna gain to a value which will give your just the coverage you want, not any lower. This way you will both receive less radiated energy into your head/feet when you pass near by to the antenna and you will cause less interference to your neighbours (in case you drink a beer or two with them from time to time).
txpower: default, frequency: card rates, I want to stay within the law. Definitely I should have bought a double polarity equipment even if it was more expensive. Finally, at what height do you recommend placing the antenna of one polarity? As low as possible or as high as possible? As I mentioned before, my intention is to provide service to cell phones, tablets, laptops, in an area of approximately 100-200mts.
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
Ideally place antenna so that majority of client devices will stay inside main beam most of time. As we don't know type of your antenna nor we know distribution of client devices so it's hard to give any serious recommendation.
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
Don't put it too high and use panel antenna to serve only the required area. If you need to cover more, use more antennas and more accesspoints.
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
Ideally place antenna so that majority of client devices will stay inside main beam most of time. As we don't know type of your antenna nor we know distribution of client devices so it's hard to give any serious recommendation.
Frequency range: 2400-2483 MHz.
Gain: 15 dBi
Polarization: vertical.
Connector: N Female.
Dimensions: 3.8 x 143 cm.
Wind resistance: 210 Km / h.
Opening: 360 ° x 4.5 °
Re: Groove 52 little reach vs Nanostation Loco M2
4.5 ° vertical beam width is very narrow. It translates to around 16m of height at 200m distance. So it's really important to mount it precisely vertical if surrounding area is flat. If it's not, mount it tilted so that antenna is perpendicular to the surrounding in general.
Signal strength drops quickly outside of main beam. If you mount it much higher than clients are it is quite probable that clients will experience low throughput.
Signal strength drops quickly outside of main beam. If you mount it much higher than clients are it is quite probable that clients will experience low throughput.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests