Best wireless access point/repeater to use for 30m distance

I have been asked if there is a better wireless access point than the existing Belkin N600 in use at the moment to improve the wireless signal between office block and church computers.

The existing setup is Belkin N600 DB wireless N+ router (Model F9K1102v1) in the loft connected via CAT5 cable connection to the BT Hub 3 in the office which has a relative high download speed of between 12Mbps and 15Mbps (ADSL). The distance between the Belkin N600 and the computer that needs to receive the wireless signal is approximately 30m max. At present the signal is minimum too slow and useless, it cannot be used to download anything!

Unfortunately there is no duct between the two buildings and running a CAT5 or 6 cable is impossible because of the difference in height and the narrow road between the two buildings (see picture link attached).
I would appreciate if anyone knows of a better route/access point that can be used to improve the wireless signal between this two buildings.

http://i1304.photobucket.com/albums/s524/scopio1/201...

Outdoor kit such as http://amzn.to/2tztD2G (£75) may help to improve reach but a better bet would be a pair of something like http://amzn.to/2uTj7nu (£60.75 each) Ubiquiti Loco M5

With both units outside and with line of sight 30m should be fine, indoor antenna will suffer from things like wet roofs and walls blocking signal

Is it a public road or private? What is the highest point you can get to on the lowest side?

If you can get to maybe 8 to 10m then a steel catenary wire between the two and external Cat6 attached to that could solve it.

In reply to a post by MHC:

Is it a public road or private? What is the highest point you can get to on the lowest side?

Yes it is a private road within the church grounds.

The highest point of the lowest building is 6m.

We do need height clearance for refuse collection lorry!

See photos link attached;
http://i1304.photobucket.com/albums/s524/scopio1/201...

http://i1304.photobucket.com/albums/s524/scopio1/201...

http://i1304.photobucket.com/albums/s524/scopio1/201...

Whether we use a steel catenary wire or Nano M5 what cat cable would be best to use to connect it to the existing Belkin access point?

To the right of your 6m height is a tower ... if you could get from the 8m point to there and then run along the walls could be one option.

Or given that 6m is 20 feet, you may be OK as it is private land. A double decker bus is only 4.5m so check the refuse lorries and see what their maximum is and see how that compares to 6m. And by going to the guttering fascia level you might get some more.

A tight wire may droop 0.5m over 30m - my phone drop wire itself is 50m long and does not droop by more than about 1m.

As for cable - external Cat5e or Cat6 - no need for armoured, just UV protected..

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Outdoor kit such as http://amzn.to/2tztD2G (£75) may help to improve reach but a better bet would be a pair of something like http://amzn.to/2uTj7nu (£60.75 each) Ubiquiti Loco M5

With both units outside and with line of sight 30m should be fine, indoor antenna will suffer from things like wet roofs and walls blocking signal

I notice that the Ubiquiti Loco M5 is for a frequency of 5 GHz forgive me I don't know anything about frequency but will this work with BT Hub 3 which is 2.4 GHz although the Belkin N600 to which it is connected to is 5 GHz and 2.4 GHz capable and from which the Ubiquiti Loco M5 would be connected, so if the Belkin is set to 2.4 GHz same as the Hub 3 will Ubiquiti Loco M5 work?

I don't know anything about frequency but will this work with BT Hub 3 which is 2.4 GHz

You require a pair of external AP's

but a better bet would be a pair of something like http://amzn.to/2uTj7nu (£60.75 each) Ubiquiti Loco M5

The wireless on these Ubiquiti devices will not be available for end users to connect to, it is just used as a bridge.

So in your situation

Your hub 3 is connected (cat5) to one exterior AP.................wireless link to other AP on the remote building then that is connected either to PC (Cat5) or another wifi access point with a broadcast wifi signal.

Ian

Do not connect between the buildings that far apart using a Cat5/6 cable, you will create something called a ground loop, the wireless option is best and a much simpler installation method all round.

If you decide against using wireless, then use a fibre connection between the buildings which do not cause a ground loop.

The first thing that I need to clarify, which is not very clear from your comment above, is will a 5GHZ only AP such as the Ubiquiti devices work with the BT Hub3 which is 2.4GHz? Otherwise it is not worth thinking of using the Ubiquiti devices and having to find similar devices that are 2.4GHz.

From your comment

Your hub 3 is connected (cat5) to one exterior AP.................wireless link to other AP on the remote building then that is connected either to PC (Cat5) or another wifi access point with a broadcast wifi signal.

Using a point to point bridge is the easiest way to get an internet signal to the other build as a catenary wire complicates how the cable can be run which would be quite a long length because of the structure of the build and the private road between the two buildings so a point to point would be preferable.

Am I right in thinking that what you are saying is that from the existing Belkin AP in the say host building, connect the Ubiquiti devices and connect the remote Ubiquiti device to an AP and from this AP so as to have wireless access and also hardwire connect it to the desktop in the other building?

Just to clarify we do not intend to give people wireless access, as it is a church, but just connect a desktop in the other building to the internet assuming that the 2.4GHz Hub will work with the 5GHz devices.

In reply to a post by godsell4:

Do not connect between the buildings that far apart using a Cat5/6 cable, you will create something called a ground loop, the wireless option is best and a much simpler installation method all round.

If you decide against using wireless, then use a fibre connection between the buildings which do not cause a ground loop.

A catenary wire would be difficult to run as it would require it to be extended a long distance because of the private road between the two buildings and thus make the cable run almost 100m or more long!

A point to point bridge would be preferable.

In reply to a post by godsell4:

Do not connect between the buildings that far apart using a Cat5/6 cable, you will create something called a ground loop, the wireless option is best and a much simpler installation method all round.

There won't be any ground loop as there is no connection to earth at all.

will a 5GHZ only AP such as the Ubiquiti devices work with the BT Hub3 which is 2.4GHz?

Yes they will work fine, the wifi on the hub 3 has no bearing on the wifi bridge.

If you only require one PC at the remote location then using CAT5 is perfect, but as you have an existing belkin router (hopefully set up as an access point) then use this in the remote building

1) Set up one AP (IP address and wifi bridge settings); without looking at the manual for the ubiquit I cannot help further, but ensure the IP address is outside the DHCP range of the hub3 (below 192.168.1.64 I seem to remember).

2) Set up the second AP

These AP are probably powered by POE over the cat5 cable.

3) Use the belkin AP in the remote building or just use cat5 from the PC directly (via the injector) to the ubiquiti device.

Ian

This Belkin is a router, not an AccessPoint. Not even sure it can be configured as an AP. I think we need first to check that at least it can be configured to take the signal from the BT HH3 (to be precise, 'to route' the traffic) ?
5 Ghz has less wall penetration than 2.4 GHz. Stay with 2.4 for that reason alone, unless you have a very crowded WiFi environment. The BELKIN boasts it can do both, make sure you pick up its 2.4, not 5 GHz.

As far as I can see from the manual the BELKIN is a very basic device with hardly any possible settings. A hardware design from 2011 (regardless when it was bought)

Are you sure that any other device can connect to it wirelessly? If you have a VERY slow connection, are you sure it is really coming from this BELKIN?

Also most people underestimate that WiFi problems are hugely influenced by the sensitivity of the receiver, much mor than by the output power of the sender. Is the PC receiving OK if it's in range of a good WiFi signal?

Once these basic checks are done we can start thinking about buying new equipment.

And finally, who set it up this way? Has it ever worked before?

One more: "The standard minimum clearance over every part of the carriageway of a public road is 16 feet 6 inches (5.03 metres)." More here: http://www.hse.gov.uk

It works fine if you turn off DHCP and connect an Ethernet between the two devices.
This applies to virtually all routers.

I use a pair of Ubiquiti Loco M5s to link two buildings - I've found them to be rock solid, fast, and easy to configure. They shouldn't have any problem with a distance where you can see one from the other.

In reply to a post by sheephouse:

I use a pair of Ubiquiti Loco M5s to link two buildings - I've found them to be rock solid, fast, and easy to configure.

I have a network that currently includes about 20 Ubiquiti's (various models) and have to agree, they are brilliant. Excellent value for money.

In reply to a post by sheephouse:

They shouldn't have any problem with a distance where you can see one from the other.

Yeah, if anything, for such a short link you'll probably need to reduce the power on them, at full power they are good for links of several kilometres.

The Belkin router does have AP mode and works fine within the building it is setup in.
We do have a wireless signal which varies between 3 and 4 bars depending in which floor and room we are in.

Hi ian007jen,
Having had a look again at the buildings and spoken to the people concerned we will probably go with the catenary wire to take the external cat5e cable from one building to the other as there is enough height.
The setup would be as this drawn a diagram. http://i1304.photobucket.com/albums/s524/scopio1/201... .
I would like advice on whether this setup is possible and what may be the constraints on say the degradation on the signal strengths because of the length of cable if any.
I have tested the speed at the BT Hub3 and is 15.7Mbps with ADSL.
The BT Broadband Availability Checker http://i1304.photobucket.com/albums/s524/scopio1/201... FYI. Not sure why the checker says it is connected to cabinet 18 when I live in a flat directly above where the Hub3 is situated and for me the checker says I am connected to cabinet 2 which is 150m away!

Hi

Cat5e is good for 100Mbps or 1000Mbps at 100 metres so all should be OK.

Looking at your diagram

1) Do the AP's have more that one LAN (normally yellow) sockets?
2) I would change your single faceplate for double faceplates
3) I would put one of these http://www.broadbandbuyer.com/products/27606-solwise... (earthed) on both exterior wals

Ian

Yes the existing Belkin AP does have four LAN sockets; the two new AP�s we haven�t yet bought.
You mean a 2 Port Single Socket RJ45 Network Cat 5e Faceplate I would prefer it if possible as long as the two ports can be connected from a single feed and not having to run two separate feeds as running the cat5e cables are difficult enough as it is.
Fitting Solwise WL-ETHLIG-GIG Gigabit Ethernet Lightning Arrestors is a good idea.
I had an idea of what is required but I am not knowledgeable enough of how to achieve what is required.
Thanks for all your help.

the existing Belkin AP does have four LAN sockets; the two new AP�s we haven�t yet bought

Great.

Yep 2 port single socket Cat 5e.

The 4 LAN ports are in effect a switch so. In the main building you require 2 patch cables from the 2 RJ45 sockets into the back of the AP; and similar in the remote building (ensure your newly purchased AP's have >1 LAN socket).


Hope you understand...the exterior cable connects to one socket then patch cable to belkin.....the hub3 connects to the other RJ45 socket then patch cable to belkin.

Ian

In reply to a post by ian007jen:

The 4 LAN ports are in effect a switch so. In the main building you require 2 patch cables from the 2 RJ45 sockets into the back of the AP; and similar in the remote building (ensure your newly purchased AP's have >1 LAN socket).

Sorry don't understand this! Are you saying that I need to connect 2 patch cables into the back of the AP from the 2 RJ45 port socket and in the main building where do I connect the external cat5e to the lighting arrestor? Do not understand why two patch cables to the back of the AP.
I thought that one of the 2 port sockets connected via the internal cat5e from the BT Hub would connect to the Belkin AP and the other to the external cat5e to the lighting arrestor to extend it to the other building.

Hope you understand...the exterior cable connects to one socket then patch cable to belkin.....the hub3 connects to the other RJ45 socket then patch cable to belkin

.
This is how I realise the connection from the BT Hub to the 2 port socket has to be connected. But mystified about the two patch cables to the back of the AP.

Does this help
Piccy

Ian

Ian,

You are a star, thank you very much.

I have always believed a picture tells a thousand words and that is why when I ask a technical question I try to explain my self with a diagram of some sort. At my age nothing else will do.

Thank you again.

Might be slightly better to:

1. Run two Cat5e infrastructure cables between the two RJ45 sockets - converting the lower to a double and the upper to a triple.

2. With the upper AP in building one, connect that to one socket - fed from below and the other two, use a short patch cable as a loop to connect the incoming and outgoing Cat5e .

That way you remove the AP from the link to building 2.

Thanks for your suggestion and I can see the benefit of it. Unfortunately there is only one spare port available on the BT Hub as it connects the pc, a photocopier and the existing infrastructure cable so if I use the spare port to run another infrastructure I wouldn't have a port to connect the bottom AP which at the moment is just optional if the powers to be decide that they do not need the optional AP I will run another cable as you suggest.

The AP at the top of the first building is in the loft and does cover wireless signal to the whole of building one it just needs to be moved from the loft to the first floor to give better coverage to the ground floor and thus I would be able to do what you suggest.

Reason why the AP at the top of the first building is in the loft near a skylight was to gain wireless access to the pc in building two but the signal was very poor hence why they are now need to extend the Ethernet via cable.
This is for a church and why I need to consider the financial implications. Otherwise it would have been better to have another phone line + broadband in building two and that would have solved the issue.

Edited by deleted (Sun 30-Jul-17 15:20:31)

Just an FYI you have shared quite a lot of images outside of just that one. MIght wanna lock that down.

Sorry I thought that was for me. (:

Edited by deleted (Sun 30-Jul-17 15:28:01)

At least run the cable ... and with a three way socket at the top you will have a choice of either going direct in on via the AP.

Cost of the cable will be minor compared to the hassle if you decided to install it later.

you have shared quite a lot of images

Yes...thats the way one drive sharing seems to work....nothing I haven't wanted to share
Dont really want to sign up for different image sharing service

Thanks anyway Ian

I am prepared to do as you say as it makes sense.

The bit I don't understand is

With the upper AP in building one, connect that to one socket - fed from below and the other two, use a short patch cable as a loop to connect the incoming and outgoing Cat5e .

That way you remove the AP from the link to building 2.

If you could explain with a sketch I would be most grateful.

Sorry Its my age.

Give me an hour or so, an I will explain.

No problem, thank you.

Run two cables to the top ... called RC1 and RC2. Cost of extra cable is small.

Terminate those in a 3-gang RJ45 socket. USkt1 and USkt2

The cable to the other building OB1 will terminate in USkt3.

At the bottom terminate both cables in a 2-gang RJ45 - LSkt1 and LSkt2

If you have just one port on the hub, use a patch lead to LSkt, then another patch lead from USkt1 to the upper Belkin device and a further one back to USkt3 - that will achieve what is in the original diagram from ian007jen.

However, if you can get a further post on the hub, connect a second patch lead from there to LSkt2. Which will mean both USkt1 and USkt2 and available.

As before a patch lead from USkt1 to the Belkin and a patch lead from USkt2 to USkt3. That short loop effectively connects the cable OB1 direct to the hub rather than through the Belkin.


Does that make sense?

It does make sense or will do once I have drawn a diagram. Will post the diagram later on tonight to make sure I have got it right. Thank you all for your patience.

I am getting there just one confusion, see dia.

https://s19.postimg.org/umpbmmh1f/MHC_suggestion_1.jpg

As you have it there with LSkt1 and LSkt2 connected to the hub it assumes you have a spare port and will work fine


If there is no spare port on te hub, do not connect one of those and at the top the patch lead goes from USkt3 to an output on the AP.


I might also be inclined to get a small 5 port switch (fairly cheap) and then connect the hub to LSkt1, LSkt2, lower AP and Switch input. The connect the PC and photocopier to the switch. That will give a little more future proofing ...

At the present moment the Hub is connected to the cat5e going up to the top AP, the pc and the photocopier that leaves one port free.

My diagram of the proposed installation as your suggestion would have two cat5e to the top, one cat5e is the existing to the USkt1 for the AP, a new cat5e to the USkt2 and looped to USkt3 for the OB1. I don't understand why USkt2 cannot be used for the OB1. Why does USkt2 have to be looped with USkt3?
I understand what you say about the

switch (fairly cheap) and then connect the hub to LSkt1, LSkt2, lower AP and Switch input. The connect the PC and photocopier to the switch.

and it is not a bad idea although if the top AP is moved to the first floor the new bottom AP will not be necessary.

At the top you have the OB1 cable and the two risers, RC1 and RC2. You could physically connect using a punch down block OB1 toRC2, however, by terminating them in the back of RJ45 sockets to again build in a little flexibility. The patch cable then links the Rising cable to the OB1 cable. What you are effectively doing is making a 3 port patch panel.

Infrastructure cables are normally solid core and should be terminated in an IDC type terminal. I general, RJ45 plugs are designed for multi-strand cable which is used for patch lead - there are some specialised connectors that allow solid but you don't want to have to make RJ45 plug assemblies.

Now I can understand the reasoning. Thanks for the explanation.

I am finalising a drawing and will post when done.

I think I am close to finally completing this adventure, see what you think.


http://i1304.photobucket.com/albums/s524/scopio1/Pro...

That seems to look right. Will have another check in the morning when the effect of 18yo has worm off!

OK much appreciated.

That looks fine.

You now need to assure yourself and check that there are no others issues - height, lightning protection, fixing stability, safety of access ... ,

In reply to a post by MHC:

That looks fine.

You now need to assure yourself and check that there are no others issues - height, lightning protection, fixing stability, safety of access ... ,

Thanks, it won't be me getting up a ladder to fix the catenary wire, I am well past getting up ladders. I will just be fixing the items and running the cable on a solid footing! The fixing of the catenary fixtures will be to solid brickwork on a 1960's building and the other is not much older. Thanks for your concerns.

A million thanks to all who contributed to the thread and a special thanks to ian007jen and MCH for your patience and help given. Without your help this project would not be happening.

Robert