- Analogue datapot - 1 Update
- Just curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your desktop computer - 12 Updates
- How is this possible? - 1 Update
| sound.service@btconnect.com: Oct 22 09:17AM -0700 Hi, haven't come across this before, but I have a unit with several datapots. They aren't the usual square wave out things, they have 4 connections, and the outputs output a varying analogue output from the (eg 5v) input. for clarity, 2 pins are 5v and ground. The 2 outputs output 0 - 5v sinewaves when turned, 90 degrees apart I think, so direction can be determined. Don't even know what these are called, and haven't found anything similar so far. They are the size of a typical 6mm shaft clicky datapot from Alps or Bourns, but obviously don't click, or have any discrete steps at all. Unit in question is: https://www.long-mcquade.com/134528/ Cheers, Gareth. |
| Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 21 05:21PM On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 09:58:21 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote: > $100 (or so) "gen2" NBE-5AC-19, or the $80 (or so) NBE-M5-19. They are > perfectly suited to a kilometer shot, linking at 256QAM with as little > as 12 dBi conducted. Ah. Finally. Now you're doing the hard stuff, which is give good advice. o It's trivially easy to quibble (that's why the trolls do it all the time) The trolls can't actually add _any_ on-topic value to this thread topic. o They post merely for their own amusement. Just watch. What's harder is to advise people like pjp who have real-world questions. o It seems to me that almost any Ubiquiti CPE will work for a kilometer. Nothing wrong with those CPE choices for pjp, which others can also use: o $100 NBE-M5-19 o $175 NBE-5AC-19 Even just one of these radios will vastly increase what you can do at home. o Ubiquiti NBE-M5-19-US NanoBeam M Series 5 GHz 19dBi dual pol <https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-NBE-M5-19-US-NanoBeam-19dBi-dual/dp/B00JEJDJ7E> Here's what an ad says, for the people on the ng who aren't familiar: o 5 Ghz frequency, 150+ Mbps Throughput, 15+ km range o Networking Interface: 10/100 Ethernet Port, Enclosure: Outdoor UV Stabilized Plastic o Power Supply: 24V, 0.5A PoE Adapter (Included), Power Method: Passive PoE (Pairs 4, 5+; 7, 8 Return) o Wind Loading: 45.4 N @ 200 km/h (10.2 lbf @ 125 mph), Wind Survivability: 200 km/h (125 mph) <https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Networks-Nanobeam-NBE-M5-19-High-Performance/dp/B00JFQV6GC> The reader may note the wind & the distance claims (15+km is ~10miles) o Note we still don't know what country pjp is in (nor wind conditions). This set is a bit more expensive but it's AC: o Ubiquiti NBE-5AC-19 2-PACK 5GHz NanoBeam AC 19dBi Airmax AC Bridge CPE airOS <https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-NBE-5AC-19-2-PACK-NanoBeam-Airmax/dp/B015YN8VJO> >> o Hence, for pjp to attain a puny kilometer over Wi-Fi is a given. > Even so, a pair of AirMAX radios do not use "WiFi" between them; > especially the modern "5AC" line. True. It depends on how pjp (and others) set up their radios. o For example, in this setup as an AP, it's using WiFi <https://i.postimg.cc/XJChDCPr/spare-access-points.jpg> o Likewise with this setup as a bridge (using latop Ethernet) <https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg> For a puny kilometer LOS, WiFi will work just fine also, IMHO o Assuming he can punch through whatever foliage he must punch through > of the world, but can cause issues on windy days. > Trying to punch through 100 meters (or more) of thick foliage? The plan > is bad, get another one. We punch through foliage all the time Dan. o So do lots of other people Dan. Yes, it attenuates the signal, no doubt about it. o But the claims by the trolls it can't be done are just not correct To help pjp I posted _lots_ of articles on punching through foliage. <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.electronics.repair/mfFaPuRWHmg/fG7iOl_kCAAJ Can the trolls do that? Nope. They're all childish & sadistic. o They can't & won't ever post anything purposefully helpful. In their entire lives! (They love their worthless chitchat.) o And yet, if they disappeared, the world would be a better place. Worthless trolls infest any juicy public potluck they can find. > correct approach is to cut a path (or follow an existing one, such as an > access road), or go above the treetops, or below the foliage (if the > forest density doesn't prevent that). In contrast to the worthless childish sadistic posts of the trolls... Here's a Fresnel Zones excerpt from Jeff Liebermann's posting recently: o Where this is the kind of sharing Usenet is supposed to be about *** *** *** *** *** The purposefully helpful info below is from Jeff Liebermann (verbatim). *** *** *** *** *** <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_zone> If the system/signal is circular polarized, the Fresnel zone will have no effect, because a deflected circular polarized signal changes rotation upon deflection and the result is to become virtually invisible to the receiver, regardless of whether it arrives in phase or out of phase. For example, a RHCP signal that hits a street, or a wall, or anything else, then becomes a LHCP signal, and is therefore invisible to the RHCP receiving antenna, regardless of whether it arrives at the receiver in-phase or out-of-phase. In other words, if you happen to be using circular (or at least elliptical) polarization on your link, you can forget about the Fresnel Zone. Most Wi-Fi hardware uses linear (vertical and horizontal) polarization. With linear polarization, the problem is that at various radii from the direct line of sight, the direct signal cancels with a reflected wave, forming "rings" of high and low signal levels. The rings with no signal or total cancellation are where the reflected path is some multiple of 1/2 wavelength longer than the incident path. This does NOT happen with circular polarization, where the polarization changes "sense", where the polarization changed from (for example) RHCP to LHCP when reflected. The receive antenna "sees" both the incident RHCP wave, as well as the LHCP reflected wave. However, since the receive antenna cannot hear the wrong "sense", it only "sees" the incident RHCP wave and no cancellation occurs. So, if you want to build a link that isn't ruined by Fresnel Zone effects, think circular polarization. Also, if your path goes from a mountain top, to ground level in a valley, and you have to deal with a temperature inversion layer, chances are good that when the inversion layer is particularly noticeable and at some specific altitude, the signal will disappear for a while when it decides to wander off along the inversion line. You might be able to visually see the other end of the link, but can't get a decent RF signal along the same path. Also, please consider the effects of fade margin or system operating margin. This is how much stronger the signal happens to be than some reference level, usually somewhere near a minimum usable signal level or BER (bit error rate). This fade margin statistically translates to the amount of time per year your link will be down. SOM Reliability Downtime dB Percent per year 8 90 876 hrs 18 99 88 hrs 28 99.9 8.8 hrs 38 99.99 53 mins 48 99.999 5.3 mins 58 99.9999 32 secs For wi-fi, I like 20dB as a good but arbitrary fade margin for calculations. Lastly, the various link calculations and data sheet specifications tend to be for the BEST case situation. In other words, reality sucks and your results will follow accordingly. Whatever happens along the path, environment, or with the equipment, will ALWAYS increase losses and decrease range. I can post (for find in the Usenet archives) how I do a link calculation if anyone wants it. Note: I had some surgery Monday, am recovering normally, but feeling lousy. I need some time to recover. Please forgive me if I don't reply to questions and comments immediately. Bah Humbug(tm). -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
| Elder Jones <Elder@spambottrap.net>: Oct 21 12:35PM -0500 It seems that recently said: > PerhSps they would if you STFU about them/ Maybe it is self inflicted. Jeeez. You dont realize you are the trolls that should stfu you idiots. |
| Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.xxx>: Oct 21 01:55PM -0400 On 10/21/2019 1:21 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote: > The trolls can't actually add _any_ on-topic value to this thread topic. > o They post merely for their own amusement. Just watch. No, it is to call attention to your arrogant behavior. > In their entire lives! (They love their worthless chitchat.) > o And yet, if they disappeared, the world would be a better place. > Worthless trolls infest any juicy public potluck they can find. The world would be a better place if you did not denigrate others. You bring this on yourself. YOU CANNOT ignore it. As longs as you bring it up, others will respond. You like the attention. |
| Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.xxx>: Oct 21 01:57PM -0400 On 10/21/2019 1:35 PM, Elder Jones wrote: > It seems that recently said: >> PerhSps they would if you STFU about them/ Maybe it is self inflicted. > Jeeez. You dont realize you are the trolls that should stfu you idiots. If Arlen stops his silly stuff I'd stop too. He has to show his superiority. Just as you had to reply. See how it works. |
| "pfjw@aol.com" <peterwieck33@gmail.com>: Oct 21 12:16PM -0700 Feeding trolls is much akin to mud-wrestling with a pig. The pig enjoys it. |
| Troll <troll@alt.home.repair>: Oct 21 03:59PM -0400 On 10/21/2019 1:21 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote: > The trolls can't actually add_any_ on-topic value to this thread topic. > o They post merely for their own amusement. Just watch. And you're off-topic and cross-posting to multiple groups. |
| Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 21 09:20PM On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:59:08 -0400, Troll wrote: > And you're off-topic and cross-posting to multiple groups. The useful takeaway is that we can extend our WiFi range by miles. o Where fixing WiFi range is something people do all the time using this <https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg> If you have no need to ever extend you WiFi range, so that you can paint your pool or so that you can use your electronics far from the house, then this thread is the wrong topic for you to post on. For example, simply plugging this into your laptop, vastly extends range: <https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg> Which group(s) do you think fixing/setting up WiFi is inappropriate on? If you feel this thread is not for one of these groups, tell us why: <http://tinyurl.com/alt-internet-wireless> <http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair> <http://tinyurl.com/sci-electronics-repair> It will be interesting to hear your factual adult rationale. -- It's likely the group(s) with all the childish trolls, is it not? |
| Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 21 09:22PM On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 17:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote: > Because it's a Powerbeam. Hi Dan Purgert, The useful takeaway is that we can fix our WiFi range by miles. Facts: o On the outside, it's called a "nanobeam" <https://i.postimg.cc/905nFgxX/nanobeamnanobridge.jpg> o On the inside, it's called a "powerbeam" <https://i.postimg.cc/Dzq9Bsjs/pb-m2-400-nanobeam.jpg> o And, the dish is steel. <https://i.postimg.cc/pLXCzFxC/powerbeam-nanobeam.jpg> Assessment: o Moving forward, I'll call it a "powerbeam" <https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg> In that photo above, you can use just the horn to extend your range by bridging your laptop Ethernet to WiFi, without much fuss as it's light plastic. Essentially, you set up the router software & then you can plug that powerbeam horn into any Ethernet ready laptop or desktop to vastly extend the WiFi range. Except for price, this beats a USB dongle (IMHO), where it's certainly no more costly than adding a repeater would be. You can use the laptop with both horn & dish, but it's gonna be bigger. <https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg The useful takeaway is that we can extend our WiFi range by miles. > Therefore, the unit you keep referring to as a "Nanobeam" is, in fact, a > "Powerbeam". > Perhaps you're familiar with "The artist formerly known as Prince"? I have no problem naming the device formerly known as a nanobeam as a "powerbeam". o I was never one to quibble about such semantic things anyway It's the trolls who can only quibble about such things that cloud the otherwise adult technical valuable conversations on Usenet. Back to JP Gilliver's question and to pjp's question o I think any of the suggested Ubiquiti WiFi devices will work. A LOS kilometer is puny for WiFi with these things, is it not? Since we're trying to repair his Internet signal, we need to know of pjp a. What country b. What wind conditions > If he purchases a "5AC" device, there is no question about "setup". > They cannot do 802.11 wifi, at all, end of discussion. Let's clarify a few things for the general observer of this thread on that. 1. Since we're discussing TWIN devices, this "5AC" idea is feasible. 2. However, the distances are puny where 802.11 LOS will work just fine. 3. Plus, "5AC" generally costs more, where it's not needed (IMHO). 4. And the setup requires, at least "slightly" more knowledge. 5. Worse, WiFi re-use, which I do all the time Dan, is not possible. Bear in mind, once you have one of these devices, you find uses for them! <https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg> Simply because, at WiFi they are as powerful as you can possibly get. -- The useful takeaway is that you can extend your WiFi range by miles. |
| Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 21 09:45PM On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 21:18:12 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote: > signal doesn't make it any more understandable. Note that this can be > somewhat alleviated by being in comparatively "rf quiet" areas. I don't > happen to be in one of those :(. Dan, Clearly you and Jeff and Johann know far more than most here, including me, so here's a basic set of related questions which, I think, the answer to will edify MANY people on this ng! WHAT RANGE CAN YOU ENVISION FOR THIS SETUP AT THE FAR CORNER OF A PROPERTY? o Either just the PowerBeam horn (set up legally) plugged into the laptop: <https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg> Or, the entire PowerBeam (set up legally) plugged into a laptop RJ45: <https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg> Pointing to, oh, say, this bullet & planar antenna set up near the house: <https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg> Assuming, of course, clear LOS, low to no interference, etc. stuff. o I haven't tested the range, but it works fine for hundreds of feet, Dan. Do you think it could go much longer LOS, Dan? The second question is more apropos for JP Gilliver's "cantenna" query: WHAT RANGE CAN YOU ENVISION FOR THAT SETUP TO A TYPICAL HOME SOHO ROUTER? The answer to both those questions, would be of use to many I think: a. How far can the PowerBeam connect to a Bullet (& 15dBi) planar antenna b. How far can that same PowerBeam connect to a typical WiFi home router? -- The answer to those questions, I posit, will astound some people. |
| Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 21 10:10PM On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 22:40:06 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > situation as described, to do other than use a high gain aerial at > _both_ ends. And I get the impression that pjp is in a _very_ quiet > area! Hi JP Gilliver, I did NOT run the math (I generally just test stuff out in practice), but I wanted to mention something when you noted the "cantenna" stuff we all played with many years ago (yes, me too, before I knew what I know now). If anyone is contemplating extending the range of their Wi-Fi router, one of the _easiest_ ways to get up to the legal limit allowed by the FCC, is simply to plug this spare $100 PowerBeam horn into the back of the router. <https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg> Voila! Instant range. o In seconds, you now have a powerful omni access point at your router Way better than any "cantenna" will ever be o Simply by plugging in the horn to the back of your router It doesn't even need to be a "WiFi router" in fact o It could just be a switch! It's really that easy to vastly extend the range of your home WiFi. The point is that, after having futzed with all those "cantenna" ideas, and after having bought plenty of those consumer-grade WiFi extenders over the years, my advice is to simply plug one of those horns into your router. Or, you can plug the horn into the laptop. o Or, both. I don't know what range is possible under ideal conditions o But I've asked Dan Purgert to purposefully helpfully suggest what he thinks is possible under those two (actually three) conditions: a. The PowerBeam horn plugged into the router RJ45 (legal setup) b. The PowerBeam horn plugged into the laptop RJ45 (legal setup) c. The PowerBeam horn plugged into both the router & the laptop Whatever range under ideal conditions that Dan Purgert assesses o I would say are easily doable by ANYONE on this newsgroup who needs it I suspect the Wi-Fi range under ideal conditions will be measured in miles o But I will defer to Dan Purgert's greater knowledge in that area -- You will likely be astounded at what range you obtain with this setup. |
| Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 22 03:19AM On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 00:10:58 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote: > beach resort or something); but when it comes to static PTP links; just > sticking to the proprietary protocols offered by the radios results in a > more reliable connection long term, through varying conditions. Hi Dan Purgert, I'm advocating they plug the device into the any RJ45 they have handy o Voila! Instant WiFi extended range! Everything I speak about here is range that almost anyone here can attain o Simply by using the Plain Jane Wi-Fi 802.11 protocols they already use For example, they can plug this PowerBeam horn into a router or switch o And by doing so, they instantly attain Wi-Fi range at maximum legal power <https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg> Note very clearly Dan Purgert ... this works with EVERYTHING they have now o It works with mobile devices, laptops, desktops, routers, switches, etc. *It works with anything & _everything_ that uses Plain Jane Wi-Fi, Dan.* You are, apparently, advocating non-Wi-Fi protocols, for "long shots" o Which is fine, for "long shots"... but it doesn't work with everything Even so, you said (& I agree) that Plain Jane Wi-Fi can go for miles o In this thread, I'm advocating use of Plain Jane "Wi-Fi" devices You apparently have a pre-defined predilection for the non-Wi-Fi protocols o But your innate preference for those specific non-Wi-Fi protocols o Does not make suggestions based on Plain Jane Wi-Fi protocols "daft" It just doesn't. Non-Wi-Fi protocols are simply another way of accomplishing the same task o Particularly for "long hauls" (where you're talking many miles) Which is fine but that's NOT what this thread is mostly about Dan. o Even pjp's distances are laughably puny for Wi-Fi protocols, Dan. So stop saying that the use of WiFi protocols to extend range is daft, Dan. o The WiFi protocols work just fine for extending range at home, Dan. If someone on this thread simply wants to increase their range at home o Then the Plain Jane 802.11 WiFi protocols are just fine, Dan. In fact, the Plain Jane 802.11 protocols with EVERYTHING they have, Dan. o For you to imply that's "daft", is, well, it's daft Dan. I have nothing against your suggestion of non-Wi-Fi protocols o But EVERYTHING I'm suggesting to extend home range is via WiFi protocols It's not daft, Dan, to use WiFi protocols to extend range at home. o In fact, it's a great idea for home use that works wonderfully well I'm advocating they plug the device into the any RJ45 they have handy o Voila! Instant WiFi extended range! Elegant. Simple. Powerful. Functional. Beautiful. KISS. 'Repurposable. -- The elegant beauty is that it simply works with everything that's WiFi! |
| Fox's Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: Oct 22 07:23AM -0500 On 10/22/19 6:29 AM, Johann Beretta wrote: > is, what the water content of the leaves is.. Etc etc etc. > You try it. If it doesn't work it doesn't work. If it does > work, then it works. Case in point. I wanted to link my shop to the house LAN. I bought a pair of Ubiquiti Litebeam M5 links. One on the front of the shop and one on the front of the house. Not bad, 65 MBS. Then spring happened. My Pecan tree and the neighbor's in the front yard leafed out. My link speed dropped to about 100 KBS. I moved the house transceiver to a sign out next to the street. Line of sight again. Link speed went up to 150 MBS. Meanwhile, everything at the shop acted like it was just plugged into the AT&T U-Verse modem/router. As it should be. Side note: Arlen is a carbuncle on the ass of humanity. Every one of his diatribes has been a bullshit laden rant. Whether it be Apple fucking it's customers, front end tire alignment or this crap about WiFi. -- "I am a river to my people." Jeff-1.0 WA6FWi http:foxsmercantile.com |
| "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <paul@hovnanian.com>: Oct 21 06:31PM -0700 > I am amazed that > the ground could work so well. Maybe it's because the ground here is > so wet. Maybe for a while. But your voltage regulation is going to be poor. Power co needs to come out and fix this. -- Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ On a clear disk, you can seek forever. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No Response to "Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 14 updates in 3 topics"
Post a Comment