True or Not? - Page 4

G8tK33per · 07-08-2003

Only in the land of opportunity! I wonder if Lois is tasting...I mean testing...the theoretical results on Brent.

lincomatic · 07-08-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by sparafina
Well this is completely off-topic but it is different as patents go. Check out.

and i just had to read this while eating lunch...

G8tK33per · 07-08-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic
and i just had to read this while eating lunch...

No fruit salad, I hope.

dan426 · 07-11-2003

We finally agree on something and that is finding the science about the WiFi-Plus antenna. As I do not have an analyzer, I called the company. They suggested some tests that I could do to prove some of the theories.

Take antennas of of the AP, as this would scatter signal in multiple random paths, once again trying both the Yagi and then the M-Beam.

Test Equipment- Orinoco Silver 30mv
Lynksys Wap11 - Rubber ducks removed
Lynksys Booster
Hyperlink Yagi 14dBi
Wifi-Plus 4in 12dBi Multi-Polarized M-Beam style

M-Beam Results
I could connect to AP from 30 ft, 1 wall

Yagi - connected at 8 ft, no walls

repeated test several times got very similar results

Test 2 Suggested by WiFi-plus

Find Hotspot with Yagi turn antenna to horizontal - note signal strength as Polarization of antenna changes. Repeat using M-beam.

Results:
Yagi 100% signal in Vertical aimed at Hot spot - line of site
turn toward Horizontal half way 60% signal full horitontal droped signal occasional low quality and then drop again.

Ultra-M Beam - Vertical aimed same hot spot, about same signal sometimes less, 0 noise( this surprised me as I expected a Multi-polarized to pick up more unwanted signal) Turn toward Horizontal 50% half way , maintained 2 bar signal in full horizontal.

Yagi - required a more pricise pointing, M-Beam was far more forgiving when pointed in general direction.

Would like to see similar test from anyone with a yagi.

Thorn · 07-11-2003

I'll all in favor of getting down to the science, but there are some real questions about this comparison:

First, calling the WiFI-Plus company to get information on how to do comprison testing wrong. ANYTHING they said should be suspect as giving a possible advantage to their product. For example: Why remove the antennas from the AP? That's a bad idea for several reasons, chief among them is that it is not a real world test. It would be better to use a standard known antenna, and turn off diversity to prevent the diversity switch from influencing the tests.

Standardized testing methods should be followed, NOT anything that any one company recommonds. Would you call Chevrolet to ask about how to conduct comparison tests between a Chevy Blazer and a Ford Explorer? If you want to be unbiased about it, use the test methods used by the ARRL or the FCC.

Secondly, if their antenna is a 12 dBi, then testing against a 14dB Yagi it is silly. For a true test, it should be 12dB against 12dB, and the H and V beam-widths should be the same. The old "apples to oranges" rule applies. This can be shown in some of your results. For example, you say "Yagi - required a more pricise pointing." Of course it would. The Yagi has a 30°H, 30°V beam-width, as opposed to the 50°H, 40°V of the Ultra-M.

Finally, using figures such as "100% signal" are next to useless. (100% of what?) Any truly useful RF testing should be in dBm, as it is a universally accepted measurement for 2.4GHz RF communications. This makes the results verifiable. Additionally, Signal, Noise and SNR values should be collected.

07-08-2003	#46 (permalink)
G8tK33per Asshole Emeritus Join Date: May 2003 Location: Goomba's Booty Boardwalk Posts: 6,150	Only in the land of opportunity! I wonder if Lois is tasting...I mean testing...the theoretical results on Brent. __________________ "My mind is aglow with whirling, transient nodes of thought careening through a cosmic vapor of invention." Sons of Confederate Veterans

07-11-2003	#50 (permalink)
Thorn Did you do the math? Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Villa Straylight Posts: 10,430	I'll all in favor of getting down to the science, but there are some real questions about this comparison: First, calling the WiFI-Plus company to get information on how to do comprison testing wrong. ANYTHING they said should be suspect as giving a possible advantage to their product. For example: Why remove the antennas from the AP? That's a bad idea for several reasons, chief among them is that it is not a real world test. It would be better to use a standard known antenna, and turn off diversity to prevent the diversity switch from influencing the tests. Standardized testing methods should be followed, NOT anything that any one company recommonds. Would you call Chevrolet to ask about how to conduct comparison tests between a Chevy Blazer and a Ford Explorer? If you want to be unbiased about it, use the test methods used by the ARRL or the FCC. Secondly, if their antenna is a 12 dBi, then testing against a 14dB Yagi it is silly. For a true test, it should be 12dB against 12dB, and the H and V beam-widths should be the same. The old "apples to oranges" rule applies. This can be shown in some of your results. For example, you say "Yagi - required a more pricise pointing." Of course it would. The Yagi has a 30°H, 30°V beam-width, as opposed to the 50°H, 40°V of the Ultra-M. Finally, using figures such as "100% signal" are next to useless. (100% of what?) Any truly useful RF testing should be in dBm, as it is a universally accepted measurement for 2.4GHz RF communications. This makes the results verifiable. Additionally, Signal, Noise and SNR values should be collected. __________________ Thorn "Read Altas Shrugged. Compare it to today. Repeat as necessary"

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-11-2003	#49 (permalink)
dan426 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 6	We finally agree on something and that is finding the science about the WiFi-Plus antenna. As I do not have an analyzer, I called the company. They suggested some tests that I could do to prove some of the theories. Take antennas of of the AP, as this would scatter signal in multiple random paths, once again trying both the Yagi and then the M-Beam. Test Equipment- Orinoco Silver 30mv Lynksys Wap11 - Rubber ducks removed Lynksys Booster Hyperlink Yagi 14dBi Wifi-Plus 4in 12dBi Multi-Polarized M-Beam style M-Beam Results I could connect to AP from 30 ft, 1 wall Yagi - connected at 8 ft, no walls repeated test several times got very similar results Test 2 Suggested by WiFi-plus Find Hotspot with Yagi turn antenna to horizontal - note signal strength as Polarization of antenna changes. Repeat using M-beam. Results: Yagi 100% signal in Vertical aimed at Hot spot - line of site turn toward Horizontal half way 60% signal full horitontal droped signal occasional low quality and then drop again. Ultra-M Beam - Vertical aimed same hot spot, about same signal sometimes less, 0 noise( this surprised me as I expected a Multi-polarized to pick up more unwanted signal) Turn toward Horizontal 50% half way , maintained 2 bar signal in full horizontal. Yagi - required a more pricise pointing, M-Beam was far more forgiving when pointed in general direction. Would like to see similar test from anyone with a yagi.