WiFi between 2 houses 250m with trees in way

mikeecho

Quick Q

I'm awaiting the arrival of a ubiquity nano 5ac

Is there any reason I should limit the power output, given that it's being used in a very rural location, and that the other point will be ever so slightly obstructived by a tree.

The total distance between the two points will be 70m.


I'm thinking of using a ch higher than 64 but lower than 100, with 80mhz

*Noob

Gooey Looey

mikeecho wrote: »

Quick Q

I'm awaiting the arrival of a ubiquity nano 5ac

Is there any reason I should limit the power output, given that it's being used in a very rural location, and that the other point will be ever so slightly obstructived by a tree.

The total distance between the two points will be 70m.


I'm thinking of using a ch higher than 64 but lower than 100, with 80mhz

*Noob

Aim for -45db, if your signal is stronger reduce power

orm0nd

mikeecho wrote: »

Quick Q

I'm awaiting the arrival of a ubiquity nano 5ac

Is there any reason I should limit the power output, given that it's being used in a very rural location, and that the other point will be ever so slightly obstructived by a tree.

The total distance between the two points will be 70m.


I'm thinking of using a ch higher than 64 but lower than 100, with 80mhz

*Noob

why 80Mhz. ?

( i presume you mean B/W)

cojo78

Hi,

The Ubiquiti Loco M2s arrived last week from Free TV, with a free upgrade to 20m of Cat5e for one of the units, and a phone call from technician to chat about aligning through trees.

I'm delighted to report that the system worked straight away, with an average of 20Mbps in the first location I tried.

I've spent a few hrs this week trying different locations for the AP and the client. The trees and leaves are definitely a problem, and reduce the signal significantly. However the way I have it set up now, the sender is pointed at the least dense section of trees. It's about 20 or 30 ft above the client station location. I found the signal is best when the receiver is lower than the roof of the house (bungalow), just 4 or 5 ft off the ground. I think the signal is coming under the main tree growth.

I haven't changed anything in the AirOS settings which FreeTV had already configured, or started to clear branches and growth in the way. I have some extra cat 5 ordered to reposition both units now I know that it works.

Before I set them up, I tested them close together, about 6 ft apart. The max I could see in terms of throughput was 50Mbps...a considerable drop from 150Mbps at the router.

Thanks for all the suggestions. This is what I was looking for. I could have attempted a direct fibre connection between the two houses, but the job would have been difficult, and involved crossing the main road.

Regarding suggestions I buy a 3g modem and SIM from 3 or Gomo, this will save me a fortune in the long run. The kit was €165. I'll get a few more yards of Cat 5, but still it'll be cheaper than a new modem and a year on Gomo. I had a 3 SIM only account before and got reasonable speeds there, but switched to Gomo recently and the coverage is weaker in that location.

I have to look at the settings and see if I can improve beyond 79dbm, which is the best I've got so far, and stable.

Thanks for all the advice so far.

cojo78

Hi,

The Ubiquiti Loco M2s arrived last week from Free TV, with a free upgrade to 20m of Cat5e for one of the units, and a phone call from technician to chat about aligning through trees.

I'm delighted to report that the system worked straight away, with an average of 20Mbps in the first location I tried.

I've spent a few hrs this week trying different locations for the AP and the client. The trees and leaves are definitely a problem, and reduce the signal significantly. However the way I have it set up now, the sender is pointed at the least dense section of trees. It's about 20 or 30 ft above the client station location. I found the signal is best when the receiver is lower than the roof of the house (bungalow), just 4 or 5 ft off the ground. I think the signal is coming under the main tree growth.

I haven't changed anything in the AirOS settings which FreeTV had already configured, or started to clear branches and growth in the way. I have some extra cat 5 ordered to reposition both units now I know that it works.

Before I set them up, I tested them close together, about 6 ft apart. The max I could see in terms of throughput was 50Mbps...a considerable drop from 150Mbps at the router.

Thanks for all the suggestions. This is what I was looking for. I could have attempted a direct fibre connection between the two houses, but the job would have been difficult, and involved crossing the main road.

Regarding suggestions I buy a 3g modem and SIM from 3 or Gomo, this will save me a fortune in the long run. The kit was €165. I'll get a few more yards of Cat 5, but still it'll be cheaper than a new modem and a year on Gomo. I had a 3 SIM only account before and got reasonable speeds there, but switched to Gomo recently and the coverage is weaker in that location.

I have to look at the settings and see if I can improve beyond 79dbm, which is the best I've got so far, and stable.

Thanks for all the advice so far.

oscarBravo

cojo78 wrote: »

I have to look at the settings and see if I can improve beyond 79dbm, which is the best I've got so far, and stable.

Assuming that's -79dBm, that's actually a pretty poor signal. The tree cover must be quite dense.

mikeecho

Great to hear that it's working for you cojo78 , but -79db seems like a weak signal, maybe some tinkering might improve on that.

My Ubiquiti Loco5ac 's are due to arrive on Tuesday, (according to UPS) so hopefully I'll have them set up next weekend.

I'll be using ch 64 , as that seems to the best Freq for that particular antenna when mounted vertically.

At the recieving end I'll be connecting it to a BT Mini Whole Home Dual-Band Wi-Fi AC1200 Quad Pack.
I'd have preferred to have gotten one of the ac1600 or the ax3700 models, but £99 for a 4 disc pack was a bargain, anyway its for two elderly parents who don't use the internet that much. .. basically (rip.ie and the occasional Skype or WhatsApp call)

Fingers crossed.

I'll post some speeds here when I have it all set up.

cojo78

oscarBravo wrote: »

Assuming that's -79dBm, that's actually a pretty poor signal. The tree cover must be quite dense.

Hi,

Yes, -79dbm is the best I've got so far. The AP is about 30ft higher than the client, and there's a lot of growth. The best I got at the house with both devices in front of each other was 50mbps (didn't note the dBm) and I'm getting an average of 20 now so I can accept that as a baseline.

I'm not familiar with AirOS so will have to explore what can be done to improve the signal, but this will also involve more cable, realignment and a bit of landscaping.

The Cush

cojo78 wrote: »

I'm not familiar with AirOS so will have to explore what can be done to improve the signal, but this will also involve more cable, realignment and a bit of landscaping.

On one of the you tube videos they said you should be looking for a min. of -60dbm.

GinSoaked

Have you tried with AirMax on and off on both devices? With it on you can't connect anything other than another Ubiquiti device and on good links it can speed things up. However I have found on poor connections you can get slightly better speeds and a more reliable connection with it turned off. The option is on the first tab of the web interface you need to change it on both devices. Assuming you have 2.4Ghz devices do try some different channels. Ubiquiti are a bit crap over somethings and you'll probably have to look up the channel frequencies as they list the frequencies in the web interface not the channel numbers you only need do that on the device set up as the Access Point (the other will be set up as a station - doesn't matter which one is at which end. The other tweak is to lower the Channel width from 40Mhz to 20Mhz which reduces the maximum throughput but can increase reliability in poor conditions.

oscarBravo

GinSoaked wrote: »

...you'll probably have to look up the channel frequencies as they list the frequencies in the web interface not the channel numbers...

2412 is channel 1. Add 5MHz per channel up to 2472 for channel 13.

GinSoaked

oscarBravo wrote: »

2412 is channel 1. Add 5MHz per channel up to 2472 for channel 13.

Correct but you also get "half" channels on those devices so to anyone that has never seen the list before its a bit confusing, who uses them I don't know but I'd stick with trying just 1, 7 and 13 - 2412, 2442 and 2472Mhz in most cases with a channel width of 20Mhz or even 10Mhz. You've also got the AirView tool which is handy for seeing if there is interference or a lot of use on specific channels.

orm0nd

GinSoaked wrote: »

Have you tried with AirMax on and off on both devices? With it on you can't connect anything other than another Ubiquiti device and on good links it can speed things up. However I have found on poor connections you can get slightly better speeds and a more reliable connection with it turned off. The option is on the first tab of the web interface you need to change it on both devices. Assuming you have 2.4Ghz devices do try some different channels. Ubiquiti are a bit crap over somethings and you'll probably have to look up the channel frequencies as they list the frequencies in the web interface not the channel numbers you only need do that on the device set up as the Access Point (the other will be set up as a station - doesn't matter which one is at which end. The other tweak is to lower the Channel width from 40Mhz to 20Mhz which reduces the maximum throughput but can increase reliability in poor conditions.

I think Op is using 80 Mhz. b/w . I queried a few posts back but didn't get a reply.

Certainly has serious loss somewhere , I have set up a few of these systems and trees and that distance shouldn't be a problem even in full foliage.

maybe he's using 5Ghz, where losses would be more but still should be getting better transfer

GinSoaked

orm0nd wrote: »

I think Op is using 80 Mhz. b/w . I queried a few posts back but didn't get a reply.

Certainly has serious loss somewhere , I have set up a few of these systems and trees and that distance shouldn't be a problem even in full foliage.

maybe he's using 5Ghz, where losses would be more but still should be getting better transfer

I was just connected to some of mine and the max is only 40Mhz, wouldn't 80Mhz be greater than the whole available 2.4Mhz bandwidth?

Assumed OP didn't have 5GHz gear as that really gets killed by trees mine won't work with a single small bush in the way at 400meters.

This is what I'm assuming the OP has a PAIR of UBIQUITI Networks LOCOM2 2.4 Ghz 8 dBi M2 NanoStation airMAX Outdoor Wi-Fi Access Point Router

cojo78

GinSoaked wrote: »

Have you tried with AirMax on and off on both devices? With it on you can't connect anything other than another Ubiquiti device and on good links it can speed things up. However I have found on poor connections you can get slightly better speeds and a more reliable connection with it turned off. The option is on the first tab of the web interface you need to change it on both devices. Assuming you have 2.4Ghz devices do try some different channels. Ubiquiti are a bit crap over somethings and you'll probably have to look up the channel frequencies as they list the frequencies in the web interface not the channel numbers you only need do that on the device set up as the Access Point (the other will be set up as a station - doesn't matter which one is at which end. The other tweak is to lower the Channel width from 40Mhz to 20Mhz which reduces the maximum throughput but can increase reliability in poor conditions.

Here's what I'm starting with...

cojo78

cojo78 wrote: »

Here's what I'm starting with...

The connection is already set at 20MHz and is reliable, having spent a few hrs working on a website in different weather conditions.


I'll look into changing the settings when I get the extra cable for improved positioning.

GinSoaked

Its the Transmit CCQ you want to try and increase. 100% means no data is lost and needs re-transmitting. Check the ubnt comunity fan club site for info on how that is calculated.

I've noticed with one of my setups that very small changes to the radio alignment can make surprisingly big changes to the quality of the connection.

If you still have trees in the way test also on a rainy day, sometimes that can kill everything.

mikeecho

I've found that double glazing is killing my signal.
I mounted one antenna outside, and I got a massive improvement in speed.

I'll get some flat ethernet cables to allow both antennas to be mounted outside on the windows and still allow for the windows be closed.

I'm using a Ubiquiti nano 5ac loco
Transmitting 70m with a few trees in the way.
Currently being 90mb

GinSoaked

There's a massive difference in how well 2.4GHz radios cope with obstacles compared to 5GHz ones. I've both set up here at home (linking up neighbors) and the 5GHz performs much worse when used in place of the 2.4Ghz ones. I haven't found double glazing a major issue but I think it depends on the coating on the glass.

Marlow

GinSoaked wrote: »

I haven't found double glazing a major issue but I think it depends on the coating on the glass.

Ah here .. none of this tech was designed to penetrate anything. If you want a working link, you'll put it outside and not inside a window FFS !!

The more obstacles you put in the way, the crappier it gets.

And yes, 5 GHz needs an even clearer line of sight.

On the other hand 2.4 GHz has to deal with interference from Zigbee, Bluetooth, Angeleye Babymonitors, Alarm systems, Video senders, Cattle cams and god knows what. They are all in the same frequency spectrum. So your issues become a LOT more random on 2.4 GHz.

/M

GinSoaked

Marlow wrote: »

Ah here .. none of this tech was designed to penetrate anything. If you want a working link, you'll put it outside and not inside a window FFS !!

The more obstacles you put in the way, the crappier it gets.

And yes, 5 GHz needs an even clearer line of sight.

On the other hand 2.4 GHz has to deal with interference from Zigbee, Bluetooth, Angeleye Babymonitors, Alarm systems, Video senders, Cattle cams and god knows what. They are all in the same frequency spectrum. So your issues become a LOT more random on 2.4 GHz.

/M

Just for simplicity I have 2.4GHz radios with one running from inside a window over about 250m and its just as good inside as outside. Obviously there is some attenuation but over that distance its not noticeable (the tree in the way is the major problem). Currently showing -63 dbm Signal Strength and -94dbm noise floor. I've 5GHz over around 500m and inside outside makes a very marked difference between near perfect signal and barely usable.

Its also worth giving some thought to what you are connecting to. No point going to extreme lengths trying to achieve 300Mbps throughput when you are connecting to an internet connection only capable of 10Mbps.

I agree there can be a lot of other interference in the 2.4Ghz spectrum but its not something I suffer from too much living down in a valley surrounded by trees. Often on sites I've noticed from the airView tool that its the lower 2.4Ghz channels 1-7 that have the most interference. One reason I suspect is the default channel on a lot of devices is channel one which is doesn't get changed very often.

babelfish1990

GinSoaked wrote: »

Just for simplicity I have 2.4GHz radios with one running from inside a window over about 250m and its just as good inside as outside. Obviously there is some attenuation but over that distance its not noticeable (the tree in the way is the major problem). Currently showing -63 dbm Signal Strength and -94dbm noise floor. I've 5GHz over around 500m and inside outside makes a very marked difference between near perfect signal and barely usable.

Its also worth giving some thought to what you are connecting to. No point going to extreme lengths trying to achieve 300Mbps throughput when you are connecting to an internet connection only capable of 10Mbps.

I agree there can be a lot of other interference in the 2.4Ghz spectrum but its not something I suffer from too much living down in a valley surrounded by trees. Often on sites I've noticed from the airView tool that its the lower 2.4Ghz channels 1-7 that have the most interference. One reason I suspect is the default channel on a lot of devices is channel one which is doesn't get changed very often.

All windows are not the same. Modern A-Rated Pilkington glass or similar has a metallic reflective layer that reflects heat and radio waves. Older glazing without the metallic layer is not a major problem for WiFi penetration.

GinSoaked

babelfish1990 wrote: »

All windows are not the same. Modern A-Rated Pilkington glass or similar has a metallic reflective layer that reflects heat and radio waves. Older glazing without the metallic layer is not a major problem for WiFi penetration.

Lets put it this way for sorter distances its well worth trying it inside through a window before you spend time, money and effort mounting a radio outside. Ubiquti give you a nice web interface that shows you exactly how well the radio is performing so you can see for yourself exactly how much improvement you get inside or out. I try not to put both AP and Station inside.

ARH privilege

I had tried to connect, distance was 60-70 meters. I used 36db antenna on both sides. Laptop was showing full signal but download speed did not exceed 2Mbps... usually was around 1mbps. My problem most probably was software one. Antennas were bought from Aliexpress, so most probably were bellow 36db. I have tried them while was on holiday to connect free wifi around our hotel. When weather was good I could see access points on the other side of the bay ( 3-4 km). I could see some packets coming but I could not send any... There are some antennas which could allow you do that. My personal opinion - you can, but cost will be quite high, for sure will cost you more than 2-3 year subscription to an ordinary internet provider.

niallb

Your antennas could have too much gain for such a short distance (60-70m as described).
High directional gain is achieved by having a much narrower beam which makes it harder to aim.
They could well have ended up just missing each other.

What were the antennas plugged into anyway and how long are the cables from the antennae?
You could be losing a lot of your gain before you ever get to see the signal.

A pair of Ubiquiti LOCO5AC NanoStation Loco 5AC will pump nearly 100Mb at that sort of distance and are reasonably easy to align.
As @GinSoaked said, the interface gives you very useful feedback when you're setting them up. They're about €50-€60 each.

Set a pair of those up in bridge mode effectively gives you a single ethernet cable with a big gap in the middle.

oscarBravo

ARH privilege wrote: »

Antennas were bought from Aliexpress, so most probably were bellow 36db.

Unless they're absolutely huge, they're not within an ass's roar of 36dB. This is a 24dB antenna from a reputable manufacturer, and it's 650mm in diameter. Gain is to a large extent a function of antenna size. Most cheap antennae I've seen advertised with 36dB gain are probably closer to 3dB.

mikeecho

I've had my pair of Ubiquiti LOCO5AC NanoStation Loco 5AC 's up and going for a short while.

I'm beaming across 70m, but with trees in the way, yes there is a gap, but not much of one.

I've mounted both antennas outside on windows.

At the recepitants location, the nanostation is connected to the basic BTwhole home mesh. (4 pack on Amazon for £99)

Results: 90Mbps
Ping & jitter are at acceptable numbers

Only in very heavy rain has there been any loss of signal.