Community discussions

MUM Europe 2020
 
firebat
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:38 am

sr9 and client distance

Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:51 am

What are folks seeing with regard to distance and throughput with the SR9 900MHZ? Will these go 5-6 miles through a few trees (a few trees about mid way and a few more around the clients house)?
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:52 am

AP:SR9 in RB532 w/ 13 dbi 90 degree sector @ 110' EIRP 36 dbm
CPE: SR9 in RB112 w/ 13 dbi yagi @ 8' EIRP 36 dbm
Distance: 11.3 miles NLOS
Download to site on internet: 1.34 Mbps
Upload to site on internet: 800 Kbps

This is over a single T-1, so the SR9 link almost maxed out my T-1 @ 11.3 miles sitting right next to an operational Motorola Canopy 900 Mhz system. I was checking to see if the operational Canopy 900 Mhz system would cause interference on my 900 link.

At just about any location inside 8 miles, I could max out the T-1 on uploads and downloads. I was really impressed with the performance. :twisted:
 
firebat
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:38 am

Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:28 am

Thanks for the info. How many trees, obstructions, etc did you have between the AP and the client? That sounds pretty promising. :)
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:05 am

Northeast Texas. The pineywoods region. Lots of pine trees and live oaks.
 
0ldman
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1446
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:01 am

Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:15 am

Pretty flat elevations, right?
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:40 pm

We have alot of rolling hills and some 200' to 300' elevation changes. The direction that I did this test in was across a river bottom so the elevation was fairly flat, but still impressive.
 
ejansson
Member
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:09 pm
Location: Manitoba, Canada

Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:53 pm

What was your signal strength and what channel size where you using 5/10/20 ?

Erik
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Wed Jan 24, 2007 6:53 pm

Signal strength was -81 on 5 mhz channel spacing.
 
User avatar
dbostrom
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:45 pm

Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:18 pm

We're seeing results very similar to slipstream1's. However that news about coexisting w/Canopy is very good to hear; we don't have the problem in our area.
 
ejansson
Member
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:09 pm
Location: Manitoba, Canada

Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:29 pm

Can any of you guys tell me what through put you are getting at the different modulations, and have you tried the 10mhz channel at all? and if so what did you see for through put.

Erik
 
User avatar
dbostrom
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:45 pm

Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:03 pm

For right now the best information on the effect of rates, bandwidth are probably the following writeups by Ubiquiti.

Point-to-point:
http://www.ubnt.com/downloads/SR9_Mtik_PtP.pdf

and point to multipoint:
http://www.ubnt.com/downloads/SR9_Mtik_PMP.pdf

Our own experience closely matches the data therein.
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:35 pm

I am just going to use the 5 mhz channels for now. If I expand later on, I may include some 10 mhz channels. I noticed that with one card on 5 mhz channels and 1 card on 10 mhz channels, the cards don't see each other. I guess they will add a little more noise but maybe not add significant interference to wach other.
 
User avatar
jwcn
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 6:49 am
Location: Maryland, USA
Contact:

Thu Jan 25, 2007 3:29 am

They refer to antenna/cable mismatch keeping within 1.5:1

How does one calculate this?
 
ejansson
Member
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:09 pm
Location: Manitoba, Canada

Thu Jan 25, 2007 3:35 am

You need a meter. For 900mhz only M2 makes a great little unit that will test your antenna and cable system any where on the 900mhz band. They also make great 14 and 17dbi yagi antennas. http://www.m2inc.com/main%20html/900acctemp.html

Erik
 
User avatar
jwcn
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 6:49 am
Location: Maryland, USA
Contact:

Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:23 am

There isn't a way to calculate based on what specs the Antenna and cable have?
 
User avatar
jwcn
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 6:49 am
Location: Maryland, USA
Contact:

Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:00 pm

Slipstream,

What antennas were you using? Can you share your hardware configuration as I'm not saying anywhere near that kind of performance.

Thanks!
 
User avatar
dbostrom
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:45 pm

Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:14 pm

There isn't a way to calculate based on what specs the Antenna and cable have?
No, its a factor of the quality of the antenna design (decent design has low reflected power even over the relatively wide bandwidths required for this application), the quality of your connector workmanship (properly assembled connectors do not cause reflected power), and the assumption that the impedance of your antenna and cable are correct for the transceiver (a given if you're buying from Wifi vendors).
 
jober
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 692
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 12:16 pm
Location: Louisiana,USA

Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:21 am

AP:SR9 in RB532 w/ 13 dbi 90 degree sector @ 110' EIRP 36 dbm
CPE: SR9 in RB112 w/ 13 dbi yagi @ 8' EIRP 36 dbm
Distance: 11.3 miles NLOS
Download to site on internet: 1.34 Mbps
Upload to site on internet: 800 Kbps

This is over a single T-1, so the SR9 link almost maxed out my T-1 @ 11.3 miles sitting right next to an operational Motorola Canopy 900 Mhz system. I was checking to see if the operational Canopy 900 Mhz system would cause interference on my 900 link.

At just about any location inside 8 miles, I could max out the T-1 on uploads and downloads. I was really impressed with the performance. :twisted:
Humm, Is there something different about the way the Moto 900 APs work then the 2.4 Moto. I only ask because a friend of mine was trying to add Moto 2.4 equipment to his Mikrotik network and as soon as he powers up the Canopy AP his MT APs just stop working. Even if they are on ch1(MT) and ch11(Moto). The Moto AP seems to kill the whole 2.4Ghz band.
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:07 pm

jcwn:
I am using some DB Products 90 degree 13 dbi sector antennas that are hand-me-downs from a cellular carrier. They have a 40 db F/B ratio and just perform awesome. The CPE side is a 13 dbi Hyperlink yagi. This is a little larger antenna than I would like to use, almost 5' long, I am planning to use a 9 or 10 dbi yagi, less than 3' long, in future installations. The configuration on the RB's are plain jane most config set to default.

jober:
I was testing around a competitors Moto 900 mhz system to determine if there would be any interference on the Mikrotik/Ubiquiti setup that I plan on using, before i spent the moolah for a large scale deployment. I could see no substantial interference.
Last edited by slipstream1 on Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:15 pm

Let me also state that I turned the power down to stay within FCC EIRP guidelines for 900 mhz, 36 dbm AP and Client side.

I do not see why we cannot get the ranges that the cellular carriers are getting, maybe even more. Yes, they can use higher power at the base station, but those little phones can only muster 100 mW or so max.
 
MyThoughts
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 210
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:07 pm

Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:04 pm

Cell phones and cell phone carrier class equipment have RX sensitivities of around -114 to -120 dB.

Atheros extended range enables rx sensitivities of around -120 dB on supported cards however RouterOS does not support this feature YET :)
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:01 pm

I am aware of that, but we can generate more power at the client end. I think it will even out and improve the client end distance.
 
User avatar
ghmorris
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:34 pm

The issue is the noise floor. When the noise floor is at -75 you're going to have a problem.

Unlicensed spectrum and all that compared to a cell carrier.

Always design for a very high noise floor, you know its just a matter of time...

George
 
0ldman
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1446
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:01 am

Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:22 am

I am aware of that, but we can generate more power at the client end. I think it will even out and improve the client end distance.
A bud of mine used to work for a cell company. They have amps on the tower as well to take those dinky phone signals and amplify them before they get to the receiver.

I agree, we should be able to get similar results as a handheld phone is like 500mw max, I don't even know if they hit that anymore.

Another benefit we have is fixed point to multipoint. The phones don't have much room for an antenna. Quite a few of the aftermarket cell phone antennas are only 3dBi and show signifigant improvement over stock.
 
slipstream1
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:48 pm

I work in the cell phone industry also. Not all of the carriers use TTA's (tower top amps). Cingular is a big TTA user, but companies like Alltel do not.

I do not think that the modern cell phones reach 500 mW either. In hte search for more battery life, they are using smaller, less powerful transmitters. The digital technologies, CDMA, PCS, TDMA, and GSM use a lot less power than the old analog bay stations that Alltel and the like used. If I am not mistaken, in some areas, Alltel analog bay stations were cranking out close to 100 Watts, not mW but Watts. That would set the trees on fire.

Anyway, I am very optimistic about the SR9 and routerboard combos and how they will perform in the pineywoods region of Texas. I believe it will be another good tool to be used like alcohol, always best when used in moderation.
 
gregdhayes
newbie
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 5:35 am
Location: Osgood, IN
Contact:

Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:42 am

RB532/SR9 - Pac Wireless 120 deg Horiz Ant - 190' on tower.

Customer site: 20' off ground. RB112/SR9, pac wireless 15 Dbi Grid - 7 miles out, pretty heavy trees - Signal -70, noise -98.

Can do a Torch and get pretty consistant 11MB.

Another customer, Very heavy trees, rolling hills, 5.5 miles out, Ant 8' off the ground. Signal -80, same Torch speeds.

Using 2Ghz-10Mhz channel. Can't seem to connect anybody using 5Mhz channel???
 
User avatar
dbostrom
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:45 pm

Thu Feb 08, 2007 4:17 pm

We're fairly busy right now circling back and installing customers who did not want the expense or eyesore of a telescoping pole or truss for 2400mhz installations. Vegetation is a major problem for us but the 900 gear seems to be doing the trick so far.

If there's a challenge here, it's confining radiation from 900mhz APs, so as not to get too much overlap, a good problem to have on balance. That and Fresnel interference, which we've found can usually be overcome by tweaking CPE placement.

So far we're using RB112 CPE on 5mhz with good results. However we're already seeing hidden node issues crop up. MT, still waiting for that RTS control.... :wink: (and how about 802.11 MAC-level fragmentation too, while you're at it?)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: phendry, SiB and 40 guests