Unusual Medium Distance WiFi Need

[hall.curt]

I'm considering a project which will require medium distance WiFi (500 to 2000 ft) often through wooded areas. Getting a line-of-site connection in most of these locations would be difficult. Need enough bandwidth to carry a decent video signal.

Are there solutions that would not depend on a good line-of-site connection?
What amount of trees will cause a problem for typical WiFi bridge options?
Are their options that would minimize this impact (different band, antenna types, totally different solution)?

Thanks.

 

[COLGeek]

Is this for a static "target" or a mobile one? What is your budget?

Directional antennas could be used for static stations. If mobile, you could set up several repeaters in a given area (power could be an issue).

What are you trying to do?

 

[hall.curt]

Is this for a static "target" or a mobile one? What is your budget?

Directional antennas could be used for static stations. If mobile, you could set up several repeaters in a given area (power could be an issue).

What are you trying to do?

This is for a static application for wildlife behaviour monitoring. I'm primarily concerned about the amount of tree coverage. Also considering lowest power draw options as one end will be run on a solar rig.
I understand 2.4Ghz will handle the obstructions better than 5.0. Would 900Mhz be even better? I'm looking at UBNT Nanostation M which does come in a 900Mhz version.

 

[COLGeek]

The UBNT Nanostation M certainly has the range and looks promising from a connectivity perspective. Especially if you have a directional antenna from the "base station" pointed right at the "target station". What resolution of video do you hope to stream across this connection?

Also, in the observation area, do you have the means to power the device (backup source) in addition to the solar rig?

What will you be observing, if I can ask? This sounds very intriguing.

 

[vmfantom]

I'm considering a project which will require medium distance WiFi (500 to 2000 ft) often through wooded areas. Getting a line-of-site connection in most of these locations would be difficult. Need enough bandwidth to carry a decent video signal.

Are there solutions that would not depend on a good line-of-site connection?
What amount of trees will cause a problem for typical WiFi bridge options?
Are their options that would minimize this impact (different band, antenna types, totally different solution)?

Thanks.

If line of sight solutions aren't an option, the NanoStation M lineup may not work out so well since your setup wouldn't make point to point links feasible (especially if there's no power source that can reliably draw 8 watts for a second paired antenna in the woods) and the isotropic antenna gain isn't high enough for 2,000 feet with frequent thick obstructions. The datasheets mention 60 degree horizontal beamwidths on the M3 and M365 (3 and 3.65 GHz), or 43 degree horizontal beamwidths on the M5 (5 GHz). You probably don't want to bother with a 2.4 GHz solution for streaming video since the throughput would be low to start with. But using the M5 and estimating 5 dB of loss per tree with each tree spaced every 10 feet, I'm not seeing a way for you to hit even MCS0 (15 Mbps link rate) on 802.11n at 500 feet, much less 2,000 feet. And 60 degrees beamwidth (between the Nanostation and a given camera location) might be too narrow for you, you tell me. The 900 MHz and 3/3.65 GHz models need to be paired in an airMAX PTP/PTMP setup, and wouldn't function as wifi APs on their own because they aren't transmitting on wifi channels.

What you could look into is a tall mast with multiple sector antennas at 30 dBi of gain each, fed by an access point. Most of the signal would propagate through air rather than through trees that way. You can shop around for a beamwidth that would work for you, but 4 90 degree antennas would get you 360 degrees of coverage and the benefit over omnidirectional antennas is that you can tilt them to beam on your target areas. In any case, you really need to calculate your link budget to estimate how much signal attenuation you'd experience based on tree density and free space path loss.

 

[hall.curt]

The UBNT Nanostation M certainly has the range and looks promising from a connectivity perspective. Especially if you have a directional antenna from the "base station" pointed right at the "target station". What resolution of video do you hope to stream across this connection?

Also, in the observation area, do you have the means to power the device (backup source) in addition to the solar rig?

What will you be observing, if I can ask? This sounds very intriguing.

I live in an area with frequent bobcat and very rare (but confirmed) mountain lion sightings. My dream is to get some good footage of the elusive Mountain Lion. Until that happens I hope to enjoy viewing the bobcats, raccoons, coyotes, etc. Location will be along a creek which draws the critters in for water.

No power will be available at the target station, hence the solar rig. Good sun here - thinking a 125-150W panel, etc.
Video to stream will be 1080p30 or 720p60.
Right now I'm planning to use the Nanostation M 900Mhz at both ends. My thinking is the longer wavelength will help with penetrating the trees.

Thanks

 

[vmfantom]

The UBNT Nanostation M certainly has the range and looks promising from a connectivity perspective. Especially if you have a directional antenna from the "base station" pointed right at the "target station". What resolution of video do you hope to stream across this connection?

Also, in the observation area, do you have the means to power the device (backup source) in addition to the solar rig?

What will you be observing, if I can ask? This sounds very intriguing.

I live in an area with frequent bobcat and very rare (but confirmed) mountain lion sightings. My dream is to get some good footage of the elusive Mountain Lion. Until that happens I hope to enjoy viewing the bobcats, raccoons, coyotes, etc. Location will be along a creek which draws the critters in for water.

No power will be available at the target station, hence the solar rig. Good sun here - thinking a 125-150W panel, etc.
Video to stream will be 1080p30 or 720p60.
Right now I'm planning to use the Nanostation M 900Mhz at both ends. My thinking is the longer wavelength will help with penetrating the trees.

Thanks

You'd also need a router at the remote end, since the locoM9 (the 900 MHz model) is a PTP bridge and doesn't route wifi. That assumes you want to use wifi to connect the cameras rather than power over Ethernet.

To reiterate, the locoM9 does not route wifi, and according to the datasheet, it can be used only as part of a paired point to point or point to multipoint backhaul solution. Whatever wifi signaling you want to have done at point A or point Z would require separate routers or APs. Otherwise, you could use the locoM9's dual Ethernet ports to backhaul to a router in your house.

Your link budget without trees or any obstructions would get you RSSI of maybe 51 dBm at 2,000 feet, which would be well above the threshold to get you MCS15 (up to 300 Mbps link rates). That 100% line-of-sight scenario is what COLGeek alludes to, and what Ubiquiti is warranting is its performance. (78 dB of free space path loss offset by 28 dBm transmit power & 8 dBi receiver gain.) With 1 tree every 20 feet and 5 dB of loss per tree, though, you're doomed. So you'd need to mount the locoM9s above the tree line.

Very curious to hear what kind of RSSI readings and throughput you have after you buy the locoM9s and mount them below the tree line, though. Very few users follow up on this forum so any feedback would be great.

 

[COLGeek]

Given the range potential of the Nanostations, I really do think you'll be okay. You'll need to sort out the power situation at the target site (batteries, AC/DC conversion, weather proofing, etc). While there may be trees, you are much closer than the max range of the devices (of course in optimal, unobstructed conditions).

Critter watching is fun. You could use something as simple as one of the many game cameras for a non-realtime video capture to confirm your quarry, before spending a bunch of money to look at elusive critters.

http://www.browning.com/products/trailcams.html

https://www.trailcameralab.com/best-wireless-trail-camera-reviews-the-top-8/

 

[hall.curt]

The UBNT Nanostation M certainly has the range and looks promising from a connectivity perspective. Especially if you have a directional antenna from the "base station" pointed right at the "target station". What resolution of video do you hope to stream across this connection?

Also, in the observation area, do you have the means to power the device (backup source) in addition to the solar rig?

What will you be observing, if I can ask? This sounds very intriguing.

I live in an area with frequent bobcat and very rare (but confirmed) mountain lion sightings. My dream is to get some good footage of the elusive Mountain Lion. Until that happens I hope to enjoy viewing the bobcats, raccoons, coyotes, etc. Location will be along a creek which draws the critters in for water.

No power will be available at the target station, hence the solar rig. Good sun here - thinking a 125-150W panel, etc.
Video to stream will be 1080p30 or 720p60.
Right now I'm planning to use the Nanostation M 900Mhz at both ends. My thinking is the longer wavelength will help with penetrating the trees.

Thanks

You'd also need a router at the remote end, since the locoM9 (the 900 MHz model) is a PTP bridge and doesn't route wifi. That assumes you want to use wifi to connect the cameras rather than power over Ethernet.

To reiterate, the locoM9 does not route wifi, and according to the datasheet, it can be used only as part of a paired point to point or point to multipoint backhaul solution. Whatever wifi signaling you want to have done at point A or point Z would require separate routers or APs.

Thanks for both of the detailed responses. PoE will work for the camera I'm using.
Based on your comments on the first message - sounds like 2000 ft is going to be pushing it. Some of the possible locations are less obstructed so I may just start there and then test how far I can take it.