Lessons Learned from Antenna Experiments

[stevech]

insignificant difference over the entire coverage area.

 

[Just Checking]

Just Checking,

Did you encounter any problems while using single band antennas (2.4 ghz) RT-AC66R, ie, problems or damages to the 5 ghz radio?

I'm interested on increasing the 2.4 ghz range on my N66U, and most, if not all places sell only single band antennas for 2.4 ghz.

I came across several forums that state using a single band antennas is a definite no on a dual band router. Reason, which I don't understand, is something about standing waves destroying the radio. I'm not sure if there's any truth behind that.

I was wondering was there any problems with your 5 ghz radio, or your router at all after testing?

Thanks

The 2.4GHz antennas definitely will not "destroy" an RT-N66U router. I know this for a fact because I owned one and did a lot of testing of antennas with it before I sold it to a client.

The RT-N66U router has the same benefits to the signal quality as the RT-AC66R routers that I tested. Use the same alignment scheme as I suggested before and the same high gain antennas.

I am not a radio expert so I cannot say absolutely definitively that "standing waves will destroy the radios". I will say that I have been testing high gain antennas (2.4GHz, 5.4GHz, and 5.8GHz) for 10 months now and have not seen any indication of degradation in the output signal quality or sensitivity of the radios on the RT-AC66R routers that I used. I put this setup on an RT-N66R router for more than a year without any detectable degradation of that unit either.

From this actual test information I conclude that you are safe to use any of the 2.4GHz, 5.4GHz, or 5.8GHz high gain antennas you want with the possible exception of antennas that have powered amplifiers included.

Frankly, from what I can calculate for the electronics and the power input to the circuits, I do not believe that there is any risk at all from using these antennas on the routers. Maybe if you use a FW Hack and are driving the radios at super high wattage and the power transistors are weak, and the router is very hot, you might see a degradation due to the antennas - maybe.

 

[Just Checking]

I am having a R7000 with stock antennas. I was wondering is the netgear suggested \ | / a better setting or _|_ a better config?

I don't have a Netgear R7000 router so I cannot give you an absolutely definitive answer about that. Based on your circumstances of how much vertical coverage you need to achieve and the type and quantity of obstructions, one might be better than the other -or not. Try them both and find out for yourself. I encourage you to do your own testing.

The stock antennas on the R7000 are similar to those on the Asus RT-AC68 router which are (to my knowledge) the same as those used on the RT-AC66 router. I didn't see a lot of difference between the orientations you want to try for the stock antennas.

 

[Just Checking]

Thanks for the discussions about antennas, too. Are you concerned about bandwidth for a shared WiFi connection? I think I would be. Do tenants have an alternative, like going to the ISP themselves? Or could your ISP offer you some "business class" account that might include cabling for at least every floor?

(Maybe this is too far afield for this one thread's subject.)

Christine,
Those are very valid questions.

I offer a common WiFi connection as a low cost alternative to the tenants purchasing their own bandwidth from either a Cable or DSL ISP provider. The service I have is the highest bandwidth offered by the local DSL provider (40Mbps download, 20Mbps upload). The buildings I have are small so I don't have that many clients on at any time to use up the bandwidth. It has not been a problem yet. If there was a particular tenant who was downloading a lot of torrent files, it might be a problem. They would probably get their own dedicated service if that were the case. The local ISP's offer a basic package of 6Mbps download, 0.5Mbps upload which is the tenants alternative.

Letting the local ISP's install cable in my building is not an option for many reasons. The installers are hacks with little knowledge of networking. The buildings are historic with plaster walls and lots of woodwork that I am certainly not going to let some installer hack up. The construction methods used back then are not conducive to running cable. And finally, getting real professionals to do the job that I desire would cost far more than any revenue I could ever hope to achieve from that. I have done major updates to wiring, plumbing, and communications myself when doing remodeling of units. Without going into this in more depth, there are limited options.

 

[ChristineBCW]

(Thanks for that detour off-topic. So, I guess me and my TCIG - er, Texas Chainsaw Installer Group - shouldn't be expecting your call? Darn... another great prospect, down the drain! If I may, I can say that we do have experience with classic structures.)

(Oh... one more note... if you decide to use us, don't wait too long. We've got another piece of property being considered for our unique services. I can honestly say there's not a living soul who complains about our cabling.)

 

[Just Checking]

(Thanks for that detour off-topic. So, I guess me and my TCIG - er, Texas Chainsaw Installer Group - shouldn't be expecting your call? Darn... another great prospect, down the drain! If I may, I can say that we do have experience with classic structures.)

(Oh... one more note... if you decide to use us, don't wait too long. We've got another piece of property being considered for our unique services. I can honestly say there's not a living soul who complains about our cabling.)

This is totally off topic but...

Those are actually some really nice building exteriors. A little paint would do wonders... You have to be a little crazy anyway to want to own old buildings. An axe murderer or psycho chainsaw killer just adds a little charm.


http://comicbook.com/blog/2014/08/2...use-is-for-sale-for-the-first-time-in-almost/