[HELP] Transmit power restriction for RT-N66U

[richto]

Regardless of the law-related debate, I will make one thing clear tho: I have NO intention of implementing any webui interface that would allow one to change his regulation country in the router, or bypass the limitations implemented and enforced inside the driver.

A command line utility would do just fine if it resolved the limitations I raised above!

Hopefully someone will create something that addresses this, anyway. Rather annoying to be able to raise the power levels, but to be unable to use channels 12 and 13....

 

[GoNz0]

just to add, those of us in the UK with the N66U are probably running it on europe settings.

I fixed mine just now using the following.

nvram set pci/1/1/ccode=GB
nvram set pci/2/1/ccode=GB
nvram set wl0_country_code=GB
nvram set wl1_country_code=GB
nvram set regulation_domain=GB
nvram set regulation_domain_5G=GB

and now have a hell of a lot more 5ghz channels along with 200mw on 5ghz and 2.4ghz

before was 100mw on 2.4

 

[DrTeeth]

@ GoNzO

How can you be sure that your actual power output has increased and you are just not seeing the ability to enter a higher power figure in the GUI?

As stated correctly above by 'richto', the output limit on 2.4GHz is 100mW EIRP, and has been for a while. The Ofcom document I have to hand is dated December 2011.

 

[GoNz0]

it used to say 100mW on the 2.4ghz page, after setting the GB region and rebooting it now shows 200, it also confirmed this with the command 'nvram get wl1_TxPower' along with inSSIDer showing a power increase from 60 to 48db through 2 walls


Untitled-1 by GoNz0-, on Flickr

 

[TonyH]

Hi,
What do you expect by increasing the power to max value?. To get 3db increase in signal strength you need to double the power(on theory). By doing that it can cause over heating, noisy signal, shortening the life of radio chip. Most of time drastic result is not obtained. Mine is set at 75mW and it covers almost 3000 sq. ft. 2 story from basement to upstairs loft.

 

[GoNz0]

I expect nothing, just pointing it out as your reply has been said quite a few times, it is set to 80mw as it came out the box but when I saw the new limit I tried it before posting it as a FYI to other people.

I have a netgear WNDR4500 sat 6 foot away under the TV to allow me to get 400+mbs sat in the front room.

the asus replaced that as the main router and retired the wndr3700 to a wireless b to allow my old works PDA to connect with TKIP.

 

[DrTeeth]

Hi,
What do you expect by increasing the power to max value?. To get 3db increase in signal strength you need to double the power(on theory). By doing than it can cause over heating, noisy signal, shortening the life of radio chip. Most of time drastic result is not obtained. Mine is set at 75mW and it covers almost 3000 sq. ft. 2 story from basement to upstairs loft.

Yes, should only see a 3dB increase for a doubling of power. Not useful unless signal is marginal. That is half of one S point.

Overheating - doubtful. I expect the unit to be designed to run at the legal and software defined max levels without danger.

Noisy signal - Increasing the power does not cause a 'noisy' signal at all. Plus, the unit is operating within designed and legal parameters. Higher power CAN cause issues, but 'noise' and 'signal-to-noise' ratio stuff are not part of the equasion.

Shortening life of radio chip - unlikely and insignificant unless operating it well outside its specs and making it blow in a second. BTW, what is a 'radio chip' LOL?

Asus would not allow the power to be increased to a level to be significantly detrimental to the life of the transmitter components (not 'radio chip' please).

 

[TonyH]

Hi,
My idea of doing things is "do more with less". RF energy in excess is a pollution. I have a real life experience with flea power to mega power like radar. Instead of beating router all the time why not look at client device side as well? My record QSO is with S. Africa using 5 mW on HF with coherent CW. I never owned linear amp in my over 50 years HAM operation. And speaking of design specs. which one? mil-spec.(my back). industrial/commercial or consumer grade spec.

 

[bill1228]

Other thing to keep in mind is raising the transmit power on the router is only one side of the two way connection. You have to keep in mind that the transmitter of the PC or other device also influences the wireless connection. Doesn't matter how loud the router is yelling if it cannot hear the yelling of end client.
--bill

 

[Stimpy]

Raising the transmit power on the router is only one side of the two way connection. You have to keep in mind that the transmitter of the PC or other device also influences the wireless connection. Doesn't matter how loud the router is yelling if it cannot hear the yelling of end client.

Jeez, I get sick to death of this argument, it just keeps coming back everytime some poor guy advocates or wants to alter the power setting, most other people here continue that statement by saying that we should be happy with the default settings, and not even try to adjust them ourselves, like it's some kind of ham-radio/black art secret to owning and operating an RF device...

I really don't care that somebody can transmit a shortwave signal 500 miles with 1mW, my consumer grade 5GHz WiFi router is NOTHING like that technology, and it CAN be beneficial to up the power output a little in conjunction with taking appropriate measures on the receive end. I have taken care of the receive end of my WiFi network, and thanks to the settings posted by people like GoNz0, I can try to fix the transmit end. It's my right as a consumer, and as a human being. I don't rent my router from the government for petes sake! And if I kill it, I go and buy another one.

If I want to increase the power output of MY router, then that is MY decision. And using the logic that many seem to share here, then there would be no adjustable output level in any wifi device, and that gets people that want to adjust/troubleshoot/experiment/underpower nowhere, as then we can still only address one side of the equation, which can only be done by using higher gain/lower loss antennas. Oh, and by the way, I love the "it will burn your WiFi radios out" FUD even more. Please get lost with crap like that, as Asus and most other consumer grade WiFi manufacturers make only one model of each of their routers, and differentiate it by regional firmware settings alone.

Another thought to share, and maybe educate some of you... How come an Asus router in the U.S. won't burn out operating at 200mW, but one that works at 100mW in England (because of regional locking) will burn out if you up the power to 200mW? The answer is it won't burn out, It's the same bloody router!!!

Now please leave the people that want to adjust things alone, and maybe even help them if you know some secret, don't point your finger and tell us that we are naughty little fools for even thinking about altering a setting in our own equipment. This is the point of this forum, surely?


Rant over.

(bill1228, what you said is absolutely correct, and this rant is not aimed at you. It's just I, and many others here get shot down with the same/similar arguments every time the subject of increasing power output comes up.)

 

[joegreat]

(bill1228, what you said is absolutely correct, and this rant is not aimed at you. It's just I, and many others here get shot down with the same/similar arguments every time the subject of increasing power output comes up.)

Hi,

Better antennas with a high gain for the received signal can help here.
I started this thread and some other confirmed the initial findings.

With kind regards
Joe

 

[DrTeeth]

@ Stimpy

If I want to drive MY car after 20 beers that is MY right and sod anybody else. What a great place this rock would be if everybody were as selfish. Spot on point about it being the same router though.

 

[DrTeeth]

My record QSO is with S. Africa using 5 mW on HF with coherent CW. I never owned linear amp in my over 50 years HAM operation.

Nice QSO. Nice DX no matter what your QTH.

 

[DrTeeth]

@ GoNzO

I was having trouble using your code - I was misreading lines three and four of your code. I only realised what was going on when I stumbled across the first post in this thread with today's update.

For others, the third part of lines 3 + 4 starts with two letters and then a numeral. I was typing a letter and two numerals. The lower case L looks like a number 1 here.

I typed an 'nvram commit' line just to be sure after using your code.

 

[bill1228]

Stimpy, no offence taken.
I do not have an issue with folks changing the transmit power, have done it myself. I guess my thing is when folks think that increasing transmit power will cure all ills with their location and wireless connectivity.

 

[TonyH]

Nice QSO. Nice DX no matter what your QTH.

Hi,
MY call sign is VE6CGX/ex-HM1AY. For that QSO antenna was 2 element Quad at ~45 feet up, TX was mounted right at the feed point of the antenna to minimize power loss.

 

[GoNz0]

@ GoNzO

I was having trouble using your code - I was misreading lines three and four of your code. I only realised what was going on when I stumbled across the first post in this thread with today's update.

For others, the third part of lines 3 + 4 starts with two letters and then a numeral. I was typing a letter and two numerals. The lower case L looks like a number 1 here.

I typed an 'nvram commit' line just to be sure after using your code.

I use copy and paste

 

[vprasinos]

What about if I want to reduce the Tx power since I live in a single floor apartment? Reducing the Tx power to 2mW still gets me a lot of signal power through two thick concrete walls. The signal only slightly reduced from -40dbm (output power 80mW) to -75dbm (output power 2mW).

Does it matter what mW do we input or the statement "The maximum value is 200mW and the real transmission power will be dynamically adjusted to meet regional regulations" somehow adjusts the power no matter what I input in the web gui? Is there any other way to drastically reduce more the output power?

Also, I noticed that when I remove the antennas the signal reduces a lot. Is it better to reduce the actual signal power or take out the antennas?

 

[Stimpy]

@ Stimpy

If I want to drive MY car after 20 beers that is MY right and sod anybody else. What a great place this rock would be if everybody were as selfish

For the record, we're talking about the freedom to alter settings in a WiFi router, not murdering or raping. I like to think that I feel differently about those subjects than I do about upping the power in my router.

 

[Stimpy]

What about if I want to reduce the Tx power since I live in a single floor apartment? Reducing the Tx power to 2mW still gets me a lot of signal power through two thick concrete walls. The signal only slightly reduced from -40dbm (output power 80mW) to -75dbm (output power 2mW).

Does it matter what mW do we input or the statement "The maximum value is 200mW and the real transmission power will be dynamically adjusted to meet regional regulations" somehow adjusts the power no matter what I input in the web gui? Is there any other way to drastically reduce more the output power?

Also, I noticed that when I remove the antennas the signal reduces a lot. Is it better to reduce the actual signal power or take out the antennas?

I think that the wireless drivers in the router can only accept certain values, and has a number of preset values set. So if you type in 5mW, the driver will set the lowest value it can, which I think is 50mW.

It's one of the reasons it has been requested to have a real GUI for this type of thing, instead of the magical mystery tour numeric input we have now.

One thing I will say, is that it may not be a good idea to run the router without antennas attached. I don't think it would be good for the power amps, but this needs answering by an electrical engineer, or real RF expert.