Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Need help with WIFI bridge?  (Read 2146 times)
N5KBP
Member

Posts: 294




Ignore
« on: April 14, 2014, 03:08:22 PM »

I need to upgrade my wifi connection to my shop/hamshack. I have the Cable modem & wireless router in my utility room near a window that is visible to my shop. In the shop ( about 200 feet away) I am using a Linksys WET11 with a pringles can antenna connected to a 4 port switch unit to connect my computers in the shop. Lately it is getting a little unstable. I have upgraded the router and the switch unit but it is not as reliable as I would like. I would like to upgrade the bridge to a little more modern technology than the wet11 b/g unit. I really do not want to use a repeater and take the throughput hit not to mention putting wireless adapters on the computers that aren't wireless, but that may be my best solution. What would you network gurus suggest I do? Or could you suggest a different topology other than digging a trench and burying a couple hundred feet of pvc conduit and cat 5 cable?

Marty
N5KBP
Logged
K4JK
Member

Posts: 297




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2014, 06:30:00 AM »

You could try a wifi yagi instead of the pringles can antenna.

Or:

I know you don't want to bury cable but people have been using ethernet over coax with success... You could maybe get some direct-bury RG6 and a couple coax-to-cat6 ethernet adapters and try that. You should get much better reliability and speed that way. Just make sure the devices you buy will work over that length of cable run.
Logged

ex W4HFK
K5UNX
Member

Posts: 276


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2014, 07:04:36 AM »

Get a better antenna. Something like this maybe . .

http://bit.ly/1m58VNs  -  This is a shortcut to Overstock.com

My dad has a large dish antenna that is about 2 ft in diameter. Uses it to get wifi across a lake from a public access point.

Logged

W8JX
Member

Posts: 5904




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2014, 08:01:16 AM »

I need to upgrade my wifi connection to my shop/hamshack. I have the Cable modem & wireless router in my utility room near a window that is visible to my shop. In the shop ( about 200 feet away) I am using a Linksys WET11 with a pringles can antenna connected to a 4 port switch unit to connect my computers in the shop. Lately it is getting a little unstable. I have upgraded the router and the switch unit but it is not as reliable as I would like. I would like to upgrade the bridge to a little more modern technology than the wet11 b/g unit. I really do not want to use a repeater and take the throughput hit not to mention putting wireless adapters on the computers that aren't wireless, but that may be my best solution. What would you network gurus suggest I do? Or could you suggest a different topology other than digging a trench and burying a couple hundred feet of pvc conduit and cat 5 cable?

Marty
N5KBP

Have you scanned spectrum to see if it is clear? The problem with 2.4 ghz b/g/n Wifi is that the spectrum is very narrow and can be crowded. Before you do anything new wireless you might do a site scan with a app like Inssider on a laptop or Droid smart phone.
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
KF7CG
Member

Posts: 836




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2014, 10:58:01 AM »

Several notes:

Ethernet originated on coax; remember the days of thickwire and thin wire (rg58) ethernet.

I believe that the instability problem is a result of too much 2.4 GHz WIFI in your area. A router and bridge that do 5.8 GHz WIFI will likely help. 308 channels instead of 12.

All my laptops are capable of seeing and hitting with various degrees of reliability all the WIFI servers within a half mile of my house from inside the house.

Go to something that supports dual-band "N" or "A/C" WIFI for a more solid connection.

KF7CG
Logged
WG8Z
Member

Posts: 195




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2014, 06:38:17 PM »

Get a couple of Ubiquity M5 Nanostation locos. (5ghz) About $130 for the pair. I'm running 500ft thru a bush and a couple of trees. Solid 200mbs+ connection. More than handles my Internet speed of 16MBS, cool thing is File sharing on network is zippy!
Easy setup here
 http://community.ubnt.com/t5/airMAX-Configuration-Examples/airMAX-Configure-a-Point-to-Point-Link-Layer-2-Transparent/ta-p/419941
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 5904




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2014, 08:46:38 AM »


I believe that the instability problem is a result of too much 2.4 GHz WIFI in your area. A router and bridge that do 5.8 GHz WIFI will likely help. 308 channels instead of 12.


I do agree with there likely being too much traffic as the 2.4 ghz band is small. The channel number is misleading though as G spans several channel and N is even worse. With B most of the channels were indeed usable. Funny thing is they never tell you that on the box though.  They 5.8 ghz A band has well over 100 channels allowed in US and very few people go there because it cost a be more and fewer choices. It is worth the trouble though as it is free of traffic and interference from cordless phones and microwave ovens.   
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
WA2ISE
Member

Posts: 148




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: April 28, 2014, 01:31:52 PM »



I know you don't want to bury cable but people have been using ethernet over coax with success... You could maybe get some direct-bury RG6 and a couple coax-to-cat6 ethernet adapters and try that.

You could just run a length of cat 5 cable if you are willing to do a cable.  Use the telflon version of cat 5, as I think it holds up better to sunlight and being buried in the ground.  In theory, you can have up to 100 meters of Cat 5 for a run.  This would make a faster and more secure connection.
Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 12856




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2014, 01:48:38 PM »

The world has turned upside down. Everything that used to be wired (like telephones) is now wireless and everything that used to be wireless (like TV) is now wired  Grin  Everyone wants to use a limited resource (RF spectrum) in order to avoid the effort of running wire.

Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!