S
southwalker
Do all routers put out a signal that is equal in strength or are some
more powerful than others.
more powerful than others.
G
GlowingBlueMist
Nope, much like all car radios do not pick up the same number of AM or
FM radio stations.
Many have adjustable outputs when used with 3rd party firmwares which
can set the output to double or even triple the value the stock firmware
can output, but at a cost. Unless you add a better heat sink and or fan
to the box the radio circuit usually burns out quickly.
Take a laptop and load a copy of inSSIDer on it and have someone else
drive you around the area. Watch the signal level and modem brand the
laptop picks up as you slowly cruise the area. That will give you some
indication of what router brands are in use in your area as well as
which ones are seemingly giving you the highest output (receive signal
on the laptop). True, the signal levels will vary due to the
construction of the buildings and such but you should be able to come up
with an average after a mile or two of monitoring in an urban area.
K
Ken1943
They all have a maximum allowed power output, per the FCC. But if they
use it ( heat is involved) is unknown. The type of antenna used can also
increase range, which is also configured into it. The tech info is kind
of confusing for the average person, so not easily understood.
All these routers with internal antennas, I have two, suck as far as I am
concerned. And this is where an external antenna comes into play. There
is more 'room' to increase the 'gain' of the antenna. It's sort of like
the old TV antennas that you have to point at the TV station for maximum
'gain'.
All in all what the manu futures say can be taken as ??????
They all lie
In other words, they all lie.
KenW
B
Big Steel
If you are talking about a wireless router, then I would say that some
can have more powerful signal strength. Some wireless router you paid
$20 for may have less of a range than something you paid $1,020 for I
would thing.
With wireless routers, the higher/elevation you can position the router,
the further the signal will travel.
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/setup/wirelesstips.aspx#fbid=IctjAdJrN8-
C
charlie
There also is a gotcha with antennas, particularly remote ones. The
connectors and cables used have a loss factor that is significant.
As a result all other variables ignored, two "identical" units may have
quite different operating ranges.
D
DanS
I'd say the firmware says you can set the output to double or
triple, but that doesn't necessarily mean it really is.
One other cost, however, is that some of the higher datarate
modulation schemes use both AM and FM modulation to provide the
faster rates. If you've already got the power to the highest
rail, there may not be enough headroom to properly modulates the
signal at higher datarates, causing a high packet error rate,
which could result in lower actual user throughput than slower
mod schemes.
P
Paul in Houston TX
http://www.dslreports.com/faq/wisp/3_Radio_power___other_legal_stuff
Power is much the same.
Antennas make the difference.
D
DanS
As an RF engineering technician, I've never bought into
connectors themselves as a cause for loss. There *is* a small
amount of loss, but if the connector is assembled properly,
this is negligible, and never figured into any link budget.
Coax, yes, cheap, thin coax can cause large amounts of loss
over distances of more than a coulple feet.
Here's a good reference chart....
http://www.w4rp.com/ref/coax.html
The top chart shows typical losses for "standard" type coax.
The second chart shows typical losses of Times Microwave LMR
series (read "expensive") of coax.
The third chart includes 2.4Ghz and 5.8Ghz, since the two
table above don't go over 1Ghz and 1.5Ghz, respectively.
S
s|b
Tnx for the interesting website. I noticed this:
| 5.150-5.250GHz Indoor 50mW (17dBm)
I have a Linksys (Cisco) E2000. No antennas, but I flashed the firmware
with DD-WRT. This enabled me to change the default setting (71mW) to
100mW. As a result, the signal was a lot stronger/better.
I could increase it /more/, but that would not be without risk. The
stronger the signal, the hotter the router. (100mW should cause no
problems.)
P
Paul in Houston TX
Yea. I am going to install a 1" micro fan in mine.s|b said:
Don't know how many amps those things take though.
May have to get a bigger power supply.
I will try to keep the rf output so that it does
not reach the street, or next door.
A
Allen Drake
That's an interesting goal because I see many signals from my top
floor and can select many that have no encryption. How would you
prevent this other than shielding you house? (thoughts of tin foil)
P
Paul
There's supposed to be a paint that can attenuate RF. So you could paint wallsAllen said:That's an interesting goal because I see many signals from my top
floor and can select many that have no encryption. How would you
prevent this other than shielding you house? (thoughts of tin foil)
and ceiling if you wanted. But, it would be super-expensive to do something
like that. The paint is priced for business users, not for home owners.
http://www.wireless-nets.com/resources/tutorials/rf_shielding.html
You can also make Faraday cages, with this kind of mesh. But again, nobody
could afford to put this stuff completely around the exterior walls of
a house. It wouldn't be practical. The mesh wouldn't hold up well to
the elements either, so would have to be "under cover" to last for
any period of time.
http://preparednesspro.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/faraday-cage-mesh-close-up.jpg
Paul
J
John Williamson
If you're redecorating anyway, you could try dry lining all the externalPaul said:
walls with foil backed plasterboard and bonding the individual sheets to
each other and ground. Add the metallic reflective foil to your windows,
too. You get the added benefit of a slight saving in heating and cooling
costs but while it's not a complete rf shield, a couple of walls of it
can certainly block any useful signal, as a lot of people with modern
houses have found and complained about on uk.d-i-y
Tciao for Now!
John.
C
choro
Have you all gone bonkers, or what?!
Me corrected your DICKtation from *Tciao* to *Ciao*.
Adios!
P
Paul in Houston TX
My Zoom modem has adjustable power by 20% increments.Allen said:That's an interesting goal because I see many signals from my top
floor and can select many that have no encryption. How would you
prevent this other than shielding you house? (thoughts of tin foil)
If necessary, shielding the 1/2 wave antennas would
be easier than shielding the house.
Or swap them out for bits of wire less than 1/2 wave.
A
Allen Drake
Yes but would it keep aliens away and block those black helicopters?
J
John Williamson
There are no black heli..... <No carrier>Allen said:
P
Paul
Hey, don't laugh. There are people making a fortune offJohn said:
the Tinfoil Hat idea.
http://www.lessemf.com/personal.html
Paul
A
Allen Drake
C
charlie
The "expensive" coax and connectors are good, but they are beyond the
price range for mass produced routers.
Some time ago, we measured various external antennas and connectors then
sold at retail for use with wireless routers. Perhaps the worst examples
were remote antennas intended to be used with P/C wireless LAN cards.
The cable and connector losses offset the rated antenna gain almost
completely.
My Ghz RF experience (before I retired) was mainly in development,
application, and lab testing of various military airborne "black boxes"
that covered about 2Ghz to above 20Ghz.
(Be nice, or all your microwave comm systems might suddenly not work,
and while we're at it, you can also forget your air surveillance and
missile guidance systems, and just maybe the instrument landing system
on your monarch's helipad.)