In reply to a post by eckiedoo:

Think of yourself having a quiet conversation in English in a quiet pub, with another person, in the afternoon. No problems.

That evening, you and your companion return to the pub; and a large noisy group has arrived. Some are speaking English, whilst others are speaking in other languages.

You can no longer hold a quiet conversation; and it is with difficulty that you occasionally manage to exchange a word or sentence with your companion, hence slowing down the transfer of information.

Then a noisy motorbike starts up outside ...

I'm liking that analogy

In reply to a post by eckiedoo:

Whilst UKHardy07 is correct to suggest that you try each of those three Channels, 1,6 &11, in turn, I would add that if your Router allows you to do so, try it on "AUTO" Channel Selection as well.

I always leave the router on auto., currently channel 1, it was on 11 yesterday afternoon.

Mark

Afternoon Discus

If you have not already done so, I suggest that you download "inSSIDer 2", which is still available free from some download sites.

This would preferably be on to a laptop or other portable, WiFi equipped device.

Be wary when observing it.

A part of the 2.4 GHz Band may look "quiet" in WiFi terms; but it may be that other AUTO WiFis are avoiding non-WiFi noise in that part of the band.

So regard it as an observational tool, rather than an implicit guide.

---------------------

Other sources of "noise" in that band are BLUETOOTH Devices, a significant part of the modern electronic device world.

And think of the many other devices now offered with the "convenience" of WiFi connections - central heating/air conditioning installations, refrigerators and their remote supermarket purchasing lists, audio systems etc.

Most of the middle to long-distance buses in this area have (hopefully) internal WiFi along with their necessary connections to one or more mobile phone systems to give the onward connections.

I am aware of one person who could pick up the bus WiFi in his flat, about 50 feet, 15 metres from the stationary bus.

Most pubs, many supermarkets, fast-food chains etc.

Mobile phones being used as (temporary) WiFi Hot Spots.


Of course, it may be that you are relatively isolated from many of those public sources; but you may be tightly encompassed by domestic systems.

In reply to a post by eckiedoo:

A part of the 2.4 GHz Band may look "quiet" in WiFi terms; but it may be that other AUTO WiFis are avoiding non-WiFi noise in that part of the band.

AUTO is a great idea - sadly some router manufacturers have software that is seriously buggy in AUTO mode. Only a couple of years ago all the VM Superhubs in my street ended up on the same channel. Thankfully they've auto updated firmware.

5 GHz is a useful improvement as the range is so much less that RF pollution between homes is reduced - but also interference from other unlicensed equipment (microwaves are okay, its baby monitors, TV senders and older doorbells that seem to be worst).

Agreed that poor software could achieve that situation - but it could also be that there were non-WiFi devices causing severe interference on all the other channels; and that the forced, common channel was the "least bad".

Without a Spectrum Analyser etc, it would be very difficult to come to a definite conclusion.

-------------------

Agreed about the greater absorption and attenuation on the 5 GHz Band. As I have noted, it is averaging 10 dbs lower/worse/weaker around my house, compared with the 2.4 GHz from the same BB 2 Router, almost simultaneous measurements at each of 10 locations.

I note that the BB 2 has four WiFi aerials incorporated as etchings directly on to its PCB.

From the relative sizes, it looks as though one is 2.4 GHz, and the other three are 5 GHz.

---------------------

Having noted that on glossywhite's youtube posting, I opened up the now-redundant BB 1.


Much to my surprise, it has two aerials, both metal pressings rather than etchings.

By size, one seems to be 2.4 GHz and the other, distinctly smaller one appears to be 5 GHz.

The 2.4 GHz aerial is clearly visible through the vents on one side; and is held in moulded slots from the top and bottom main faces, the PCB having a clear rebate to allow ithe aerial to stand clear, with short wire connection to the PCB.

The other, apparently 5 GHz, aerial is near the other; but mounted directly on the PCB.

---------------------

I did a Search yesterday; but have not found any mention of its presence in the BB 1; nor any suggestion that the BB 1 may have been originally intended to be Dual Band WiFi.

This is based on their relative sizes, as expected the 5 GHz aerial is about half the size of the 5 GHz one.

That also applies to the BB 2 aerials, as far as can be discerned on that youtube posting, as all four show up vaguely through the PCB, rather than being seen directly.

With the BB 2 ones, both sizes are based on slot arrays; and there is on each, almost a "horn feed" in to a larger slot. also there is what may be a "Quarter-Wavelength" stub.

---------------------------

Thinking of such stubs and the about 12.5 cm wavelength, about 5 inches, for 2.4 GHz, leads on to considering particularly nails in walls etc around houses, so many nails, screws etc are about 1.25 inches or quarter-wavelengths; and the problems those can produce!

Fortunately, 2.5 inch or half-wavelength nails are much less frequently encountered.

Agree completely about a proper analyser - WiSpy looks good but you'd need to be a semi-pro to justify the cost.
http://www.metageek.net/products/wi-spy/

Interesting about the routers with antenna on the PCB. I think my mates TPLink is designed like this, with 2.4GHz on the PCB, and 5GHz on external antenna.

My ASUS RT-AC68U has 3 external antenna, and I suspect the 2.4GHz are internal, as the design has the box sitting upright. Of course AC only works at 5GHz but I get coverage in my flat brilliantly on 5GHz to my iPhone and laptop, and I control which one I use with two different SSIDs. The 5GHz gives me full FTTC speeds (50Mbps sync here) whereas with 2.4GHz in evenings when the kids are home on the estate, I get about 10Mbps at best :-/

Interesting idea about nails, I hope they're not affecting! Its been a long time from my CB radio days, LOL!

glossywhite's interior views of the Bright Box 2-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ly6kV-UUuZg

From 13 minutes and later.

Particularly at 13:04, one of the aerials shows up relatively clearly through the laminate.

Note the transmission line coming in from the bottom, opening out in to almost a cross-section of a satellite LNB!

The Gadget Show did a test last year on WiFi routers with 3 microwaves and baby monitors in the same room.

Very little difference was found with them off or on. The main difference was when they moved the laptop to another room then outside the building.

Seems like different wall construction was the big issue.

Regarding Attenuation/Power Level, I would accept that fully, from observing how it is in the house where a grand-daughter lives.

It is dates from about the 1880s, massive brick and stone walls throughout. Former Mine Manager's house, so nothing spared!

Not sure of the attenuation figures; but in speed terms on WiFi beside the router, about 11 Mbps.

Straight along one corridor, then at right angles in to a room - wavering 1 to 2 Mbps. Distance about 40 feet, say 13 metres.

Edited by deleted (Mon 21-Jul-14 17:16:36)

I live in a Victorian terraced house hailing from the 1890's and apart from Victorian bricks having a high iron content whoever did the renovations lined just about every wall with foil-backed plasterboard.

The router in the front room covers the two bedrooms at the front of the house and I need another access point in the main bedroom at the back to cover the ground floor at the back.

There's virtually no signal at the back of the house from the router which is a distance of around 25 feet.