I am preparing to do that next.....

I just have to find some attenuators  rated for 6GHz with N connectors.....



Paul Hendry wrote:

Has anyone used radio to radio with attenuators to check pigtails?

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

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jenco Wireless
Sent: 03 March 2006 06:01
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pigtails..... and 5.8GHz low power....

It's called the Butterfly from www.bvsystems.com <http://www.bvsystems.com>. It was about $500. Money well spent :-). As far as I can tell, it is dead accurate !

Brad H

On 3/3/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

Which meter did you buy? What did it run you?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

----- Original Message -----

From: Jenco Wireless <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; WISPA General List <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 12:30 AM

Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pigtails..... and 5.8GHz low power....


Get a test meter. I got one from BVS Systems and LOVE it ! Roger Peters has had great piggies in the past. I just tested a UFL from Wisp-Router and it was 2 dB better than anything else (UFL) I have tried, but it was only 5" long, so I am sure that has something to do with the better "review". Once you have tested a few radio cards and pigtails with this meter, you will wonder how you ever lived without it.

Brad H

On 3/2/06, Blair Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

I can't 'directly' tell which is good or bad without testing....

As to what is wrong with them, I don't know.  I do know that the ones I
tested and published to the list were all new units.  They were opened
fresh for this test. I tested some other units as well, but I felt that
it made more sense to show the results from new, 'identical' pigtails....

I plan to buy sets of pigtails from other manufactures and continue to
test as I have time...

Tom DeReggi wrote:

The question is, how do you tell which pigtails are good and bad?
And more importantly why are the bad ones bad?

Is it the cable quality, the connector quality, the crimping/soldering
ofconnector to cable?
Is it the Ufl connector getting bend/loose where it clamps to the
radio connector?

Is there are more durable pigtail that gets around the problem?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


----- Original Message ----- From: "Blair Davis" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
To: "WISPA General List" < wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pigtails..... and 5.8GHz low power....


Some interesting results of pigtail testing.....

Link is 7.9 miles.  There is eyeball LoS with no fresnel zone
incursions. Antennas are V-pol.  Calculated link is -63db.

Client end:

RouterBoard 230 with MikroTik 2.9.13
SR5 card set to default TX power
u.fl to N-female pigtail
5 ft LMR-400 jumper
Hyperlink HG5827G 27db grid

AP end:

RouterBoard 230 with MikroTik 2.9.13
SR5 card set to default TX power
u.fl to N-female pigtail
5 ft LMR-400 jumper
Hyperlink HG5817P 17db sector

AP reports client at -71 with -100 noise floor

Test u.fl pigtails new in wrapper.

#1   AP reports client at -71
#2   AP reports client at -82
#3   AP reports client at -74
#4   AP reports client at -72
#5   AP reports client at -71

Obviously, not all new u.fl pigtails are the same.

Test mmcx pigtails new in wrapper.

#1   AP reports client at -73
#2   AP reports client at -74
#3   AP reports client at -74
#4   AP reports client at -75
#5   AP reports client at -73

Less spread on the mmcx pigtails.  The best mmcx pigtail seems to
about as good as an average u-fl pigtail.  However, this could be an
artifact of the SR5 cards mmcx port.

Draw your own conclusions, but I will no longer trust u.fl pigtails
out of the box.  Careful sorting of new u.fl pigtails could improve
signal quality by 3-4db.  At a client end this might not be worth
it.  At the AP, IMHO, it is well worth the time and effort.






--
Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
<http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/







--
Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ <http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/>



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

--


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ <http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/>

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.1/273 - Release Date: 02/03/2006


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.1/273 - Release Date: 02/03/2006

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to