Wireless Network over 1 km possible?

[koolmer 0]

Hi everybody!

 

I will have an interesting job in the next year and I am not sure yet how to do it. There are 3 buildings that are 500 m away from each other. They are not in the same Street, but in the same part of town. The building in the middle should have a control room to control everything in all 3 buildings and see all cameras.

 

There are between 16 - 20 cameras in each building. Now the question is how to transmit the pictures to the control room. This is going to happen over IP, but how do I connect the buildings together? I am not sure if I have a line of sight, because the buildings in between might be higher (have to check it). I have checked Ubiquiti equipment, but it really confuses me.

 

Now, is it possible to establish a RELIABLE (also in Snow and heavy rain!) WLAN between those buildings? What equipment should I use? I would like to have 100 Mbps or more.

 

Edited November 1, 2010 by Guest

[hardwired 0]

Line of sight is going to be a necessity to get the kind of data rates you are talking about, you may have to use masts to extend high enough to accomplish that, or find another site to use as a relay point.

 

The highest throughput you are likely to get with Ubiquiti equipment is about 60Mbps (easily achieved at 1Km with Ubiquiti hardware, with quite a bit of fade margin for rain/snow), beyond that you will need to either use multiple parallel links with link aggregation in the switches at each end (LACP or OSPF), or some very high end hardware.

 

You might want to look at the option of a server at each location, with just viewing/playback running over the link to a central station, (Milestone and Exacq can easily do this, as can other NVR softwares), the bandwidth requirements would be much lower.

 

When just running viewing bandwidth, a few Mbps could be sufficient, and that could run on non-line of sight 900Mhz links.

 

Getting 100Mbps actual throughput (or more) from a wireless link raises the price VERY significantly (as in, a server at each site might be cheaper!)... often $10,000 USD or more, for 150-250 Mbps links.

[koolmer 0]

Hmm thanks for the reply. You will see that I edited the post. It is only about 500 meters actually.

 

The cameras are watched 24/7. I am not good at calculating the necessary bandwidth actually. You can see in the image how many cameras there are. Now lets say I would want to transfer them in D1 with 6fps. Realistic? I am using H.264 hardware encoding cards from Hikvision.

 

Edit (only saw this now): Yes there will be a server at each building and only live images get send over. I am planning to use NetvisionDVR cards for the servers and then access them in the control room with client Software.

[hardwired 0]

It would probably be best to try and hook up a server and client over a hardwired link, and see what kind of throughput you will have/need in that configuration.

 

Depending on the server configuration, you might not get that framerate, even with a local connection, due to server/client limits.

 

Best to figure that out first, and then work with your wireless links.

 

I'm not sure about Hikvision, but often, servers have settings to allow adjusting compression type/amount for remote viewing to work with available bandwidth.

[koolmer 0]

Ok - I actually have a setup where I could test that.

 

It's a Netvision server and a client. The client is only 20 m away from the server and everything is connected with Gigabit Network. Usually the Client is only used to display 6 cameras in D1 @ 12fps. I don't know if it really reaches 12 fps, but it looks quite smooth. The delay is about 1 second. However when I choose more cameras to be displayed (16) at the client, the refresh rate on the client gets VERY poor.

 

I don't know why this is. The bandwidth should not be the problem and the PCs cannot be the problem either. Both computers are very powerful.

 

I have to find a program that tells me how much bandwidth is used. Does anybody know a good one?

[Electryko 0]

Hi,

 

I use Wavesight tranceivers in these situations and they are not really expensive compared to others.

 

The WaveSprint, WaveFlow and WaveMax wireless bridging systems provide secure, high bandwidth video communications over distances of up to 40km, on unlicensed 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.

 

WaveSprint provides short distance wireless bridging, with data rates of up to 54Mbps, at distances up to 1km. WaveFlow meets requirements for wider area communications at distances up to 5km with data rates up to 108Mbps in turbo mode, while WaveMax offers the same class-leading data rates at distances up to 40km.

 

Also Wavesight uses reflections of the buildings to get from a to b sometimes.

Be carefull that the vision is not completely blocked, also wireless connection goes through trees but not when their wet.

The wireless connections are encrypted and secure.

 

 

Greets,

Electryko

[Sawbones 0]

Line of sight is going to be a necessity to get the kind of data rates you are talking about, you may have to use masts to extend high enough to accomplish that, or find another site to use as a relay point.

 

The highest throughput you are likely to get with Ubiquiti equipment is about 60Mbps (easily achieved at 1Km with Ubiquiti hardware, with quite a bit of fade margin for rain/snow), beyond that you will need to either use multiple parallel links with link aggregation in the switches at each end (LACP or OSPF), or some very high end hardware.

 

You might want to look at the option of a server at each location, with just viewing/playback running over the link to a central station, (Milestone and Exacq can easily do this, as can other NVR softwares), the bandwidth requirements would be much lower.

 

When just running viewing bandwidth, a few Mbps could be sufficient, and that could run on non-line of sight 900Mhz links.

 

Getting 100Mbps actual throughput (or more) from a wireless link raises the price VERY significantly (as in, a server at each site might be cheaper!)... often $10,000 USD or more, for 150-250 Mbps links.

 

Even their wireless-N stuff?

[koolmer 0]

Hi,

 

I use Wavesight tranceivers in these situations and they are not really expensive compared to others.

 

The WaveSprint, WaveFlow and WaveMax wireless bridging systems provide secure, high bandwidth video communications over distances of up to 40km, on unlicensed 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.

 

WaveSprint provides short distance wireless bridging, with data rates of up to 54Mbps, at distances up to 1km. WaveFlow meets requirements for wider area communications at distances up to 5km with data rates up to 108Mbps in turbo mode, while WaveMax offers the same class-leading data rates at distances up to 40km.

 

Also Wavesight uses reflections of the buildings to get from a to b sometimes.

Be carefull that the vision is not completely blocked, also wireless connection goes through trees but not when their wet.

The wireless connections are encrypted and secure.

 

 

Greets,

Electryko

 

I had a look at WaveSprint. It should be enough for my application. BUT it says "optimised for use up to 1Km. With up to 54Mbps you...". I hate this unprecise "up to". I would like to know what I WILL get and not what I might get. Has anyone tested this system? How does it react to heavy rain or snow? What's the price for 1 complete system (for one bridge)?

[hardwired 0]

Line of sight is going to be a necessity to get the kind of data rates you are talking about, you may have to use masts to extend high enough to accomplish that, or find another site to use as a relay point.

 

The highest throughput you are likely to get with Ubiquiti equipment is about 60Mbps (easily achieved at 1Km with Ubiquiti hardware, with quite a bit of fade margin for rain/snow), beyond that you will need to either use multiple parallel links with link aggregation in the switches at each end (LACP or OSPF), or some very high end hardware.

 

You might want to look at the option of a server at each location, with just viewing/playback running over the link to a central station, (Milestone and Exacq can easily do this, as can other NVR softwares), the bandwidth requirements would be much lower.

 

When just running viewing bandwidth, a few Mbps could be sufficient, and that could run on non-line of sight 900Mhz links.

 

Getting 100Mbps actual throughput (or more) from a wireless link raises the price VERY significantly (as in, a server at each site might be cheaper!)... often $10,000 USD or more, for 150-250 Mbps links.

 

Even their wireless-N stuff?

 

Yes, this is with the "N" rate equipment. Keep in mind, I have tested this with IPERF, in real world conditions, with TCP packets which load a connection far more heavily than UDP, because they require an ACK return for each packet delivered.

 

The 54/104 Turbo data rates often listed for A/B/G equipment is the modulation rate, throughput (even in perfect conditions) is approximately 22-45 Mbps (UDP).

 

Also, manufacturers rate throughput as an aggregate of upload and download rates, which can artificially inflate specs (keep in mind, video is almost completely unidirectional traffic).

 

Rating this way gives rates in the 200-300 Mbps range for the Ubiquiti equipment, but if you use these kind of specs for trying to calculate a link for video, you are going to be sorry.

 

For link quality calculations, there are multiple vendor sites that have link calculators (Ubiquiti's is here, at http://www.ubnt.com/airlink/ ).

 

For the best link quality modeling, I use Radio Mobile http://www.cplus.org/rmw/english1.html ,but it has a really steep learning curve, plus requiring a pretty good knowledge of the specs for the particular wireless equipment you are using.

 

BTW, Ubiquiti equipment is capable of 100+ KM range, if terrain and Fresnel zones are clear (If you are doing links of any significant length, get an understanding of what Fresnel zone means before you start).

[Sawbones 0]

Yes, this is with the "N" rate equipment. Keep in mind, I have tested this with IPERF, in real world conditions, with TCP packets which load a connection far more heavily than UDP, because they require an ACK return for each packet delivered.

 

The 54/104 Turbo data rates often listed for A/B/G equipment is the modulation rate, throughput (even in perfect conditions) is approximately 22-45 Mbps (UDP).

 

Also, manufacturers rate throughput as an aggregate of upload and download rates, which can artificially inflate specs (keep in mind, video is almost completely unidirectional traffic).

 

Rating this way gives rates in the 200-300 Mbps range for the Ubiquiti equipment, but if you use these kind of specs for trying to calculate a link for video, you are going to be sorry.

 

For link quality calculations, there are multiple vendor sites that have link calculators (Ubiquiti's is here, at http://www.ubnt.com/airlink/ ).

 

For the best link quality modeling, I use Radio Mobile http://www.cplus.org/rmw/english1.html ,but it has a really steep learning curve, plus requiring a pretty good knowledge of the specs for the particular wireless equipment you are using.

 

BTW, Ubiquiti equipment is capable of 100+ KM range, if terrain and Fresnel zones are clear (If you are doing links of any significant length, get an understanding of what Fresnel zone means before you start).

 

Most interesting... I'm guessing you for an Amateur Operator. Thanks for the info... I always recommend that people be VERY skeptical of the throughput of wireless equipment, including the "turbo" modes and other marketing garbage.

 

802.x wireless can be very touchy, and between interference, drop-outs, clients getting knocked off and re-associating with the AP, and so forth, it's always better to go with hard-wired whenever feasible.

 

Unfortunately, it's not always feasible... I'm in a project right now that would require hundreds of yards of trenching, drilling under multiple large concrete slabs, etc if we wanted to hard-wire the cameras. I took one look at it and said "Ubiquiti it is!"

 

Fortunately, we're only dealing with a couple of cameras, and have easy LOS to the AP.

[koolmer 0]

What about rain & snow. Does that influence the Mbps? Could the connection break? Would a system made for longer distance compensate for the possible loss through rain and snow?

 

@ hardwired

How does that work with the multiple links? There are lots of words in your post that I don't understand

[Metalheadkicks 0]

Hi,

 

I use Wavesight tranceivers in these situations and they are not really expensive compared to others.

 

The WaveSprint, WaveFlow and WaveMax wireless bridging systems provide secure, high bandwidth video communications over distances of up to 40km, on unlicensed 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.

 

WaveSprint provides short distance wireless bridging, with data rates of up to 54Mbps, at distances up to 1km. WaveFlow meets requirements for wider area communications at distances up to 5km with data rates up to 108Mbps in turbo mode, while WaveMax offers the same class-leading data rates at distances up to 40km.

 

Also Wavesight uses reflections of the buildings to get from a to b sometimes.

Be carefull that the vision is not completely blocked, also wireless connection goes through trees but not when their wet.

The wireless connections are encrypted and secure.

 

 

Greets,

Electryko

 

I had a look at WaveSprint. It should be enough for my application. BUT it says "optimised for use up to 1Km. With up to 54Mbps you...". I hate this unprecise "up to". I would like to know what I WILL get and not what I might get. Has anyone tested this system? How does it react to heavy rain or snow? What's the price for 1 complete system (for one bridge)?

 

 

Koolmer,

 

I just came across this discussion and wanted to comment on your query. Wavesight has launched two new products that have not been updated on the website. WaveSprint Turbo and WaveSprint Base. WaveSprint Turbo offers 54Mbps upto 2KMs and 108Mbps upto 1Kms. These radios are designed specifically for live video transmission with minimal/barely visible delay in video stream and are meant to be used outdoors 24-7 (IP-67 cert.)

 

"Up to 54/108Mbps" term is used probably to save companies from litigation if your unable to achieve the advertised 54mbps. Personally I have tested the units using Iperf and was able to achieve >60mbps on a 54mbps link over >500mtrs. This is possible cos of the proprietary compression involved, however please note this is data.

 

Video on the other hand is already highly compressed and cannot be compressed further. Hence you would be able to achieve a max of 25-30mbps of video data over the 54mbps link. This value doubles up for 108mbps.

 

Wireless N for bridge links is only a gimmick cos a majority of the products out there have an Ethernet port which is limited to 10/100mbps. If any product has gigabit port included, price would be considerably higher.

 

I am a technical engineer working for Wavesight and would glady be able to help. Just give us a call on 0044 1582 578160 and ask for Irshad.

 

Cheers!

- Irshad

[Rocket 0]

I would never use the Wavesite equipment again, we moved onto the SilverNet 300Mbps stuff after trying a load of other rubbish stuff as well. Their 11n is designed for CCTV and is so much better. We even get support now.

 

We get 95Mbps throughput on a point to point link at 1KM, this dosent matter if it is Compressed video or not. They also have a really good monitoring software silverview that has a built in data tester which is really handy.

 

They also have Gigabit ethernet version which is 240Mbps throughput. We havent need to use this but going buy what we have had then i believe them.

 

As for 300Mbps radios being a gimmic, you couldent be further from the truth. Why use obsolite 54Mbps stuff when you can use 300Mbps with MIMO?

 

I cant recommend Silvernet enough.

 

Ron

[Metalheadkicks 0]

I would never use the Wavesite equipment again, we moved onto the SilverNet 300Mbps stuff after trying a load of other rubbish stuff as well. Their 11n is designed for CCTV and is so much better. We even get support now.

 

We get 95Mbps throughput on a point to point link at 1KM, this dosent matter if it is Compressed video or not. They also have a really good monitoring software silverview that has a built in data tester which is really handy.

 

They also have Gigabit ethernet version which is 240Mbps throughput. We havent need to use this but going buy what we have had then i believe them.

 

As for 300Mbps radios being a gimmic, you couldent be further from the truth. Why use obsolite 54Mbps stuff when you can use 300Mbps with MIMO?

 

I cant recommend Silvernet enough.

 

Ron

 

Because wireless-n spec was not designed to be used for long range. Period. Wireless n is a excellent I totally aggree. You even get the max 240mbps. Try achieving that at longer range (lets say > 15KMs) and you will know. I was trying to educate people not to fall for some of the advertised gimmicks you see.

 

You even get 108Mbps with WaveSprint Turbo which will do 90Mbps of video so, using n spec doesnt serve any purpose here. We use n spec radios as well for smaller systems requiring higher capacities but that does not mean we want to do away with 40KMs WaveMax units which work on older technologies but will do the job. Also all Wavesight equipment comes with free monitoring software locally and remotely (separate device - not free) over GSM. It has link diagnostic test as well.

 

I tend to test a lot of gear and some of the expensive n spec radios out there really do the job quite very well, although I cannot comment on the max ranges they are capable of. If you do come accross any, kindly let us know.

[Rocket 0]

Sorry for hijacking the post

 

 

You even get 108Mbps with WaveSprint Turbo which will do 90Mbps of video so, using n spec doesnt serve any purpose here. We use n spec radios as well for smaller systems requiring higher capacities but that does not mean we want to do away with 40KMs WaveMax units which work on older technologies but will do the job.

 

erm, a 108Mbps radio will not give you 90Mbps of video, that is rubbish. maybe 40Mbps at a push with a very good link.

 

The 54/104 Turbo data rates often listed for A/B/G equipment is the modulation rate, throughput (even in perfect conditions) is approximately 22-45 Mbps (UDP)

i think this is about right on the old 54/108 technology thats got to be 8 or 9 years old now. I wouldn't want a car that old....

the 11n is 150mbps on a single antenna and 300 on a dual antenna, latest technology, we get 95mbps test on either.

Because wireless-n spec was not designed to be used for long range. Period.

 

we are quoting in an 11n max at 25km so i will let you know how that gets on. the silvernet guys are very confident and said they have an 11n link in at 33km.

 

as for sales gimmicks, all you wireless companies are the same you all want USP's. But i think that the silvernet stuff just works, also putting an indoor 11n router into an outdoor box isn't very good either, ahem net***r etc... probably what you have used for your short high bandwidth hops.

 

you should have a look at the silvernet 11n stuff it is brilliant if you havent already. Designed for outdoor use.

http://silvernet.com/equipment/11n-outdoor-wireless-range.php

 

Their 11n max says it does up to 60KM

 

 

this is a micro link up to 2km

 

 

Ron

[thewireguys 3]

It's to funny every wireless company that I have talked to says the other companies suck and we are better.

[hardwired 0]

It's to funny every wireless company that I have talked to says the other companies suck and we are better.

Yes, there's certainly no lack of (biased) opinions on the subject, that's for sure!

 

I've tested/and/or considered a pretty wide range of products on the market, as well as following feedback from other users on several manufacturers forums, as well as wireless internet provider forums.

 

My general opinion is that products that are targeted for the CCTV market are generally overpriced in respect to their performance. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily bad products, but for my usage, the cost/performance ratio just doesn't match up. (and, for more basic users, ease of usage may be a stronger consideration than it is for me).

 

Discussions about various modulation schemes may be interesting (and are...to me, at least), but are somewhat outside the realm of what most users need-a reliable data link carrying a reasonable rate of data, at a price the customer can afford.

 

My personal choice for a large number of my installations has been Ubiquiti equipment, due to the fact that their price/performance ratio has been the best currently available.. Perfect? no, they have their quirks, along with any other product, as well as having fairly severe supply problems (although that's not necessarily a bad thing, as indicating their products are selling as fast as they can ship them).

 

They have almost no direct support available (people using their products generally have a high(er) level of knowledge about setting up wireless gear), although they have a robust forum group (and wiki) that is fairly helpful. So, not necessarily for everyone (having said that, several of my local wireless internet providers, as well as many others around the country, with thousands of customers each, are changing all of their customers to Ubiquiti equipment)

 

There are a large number of products out there with higher performance in some instances... But, they also come with a price tag that is well in excess of the cost of several megapixel cameras, or more...And I haven't come up with a really good way to justify that kind of pricing to most of my customers (the government sector has been an exception to that, though!)

 

I am always looking for other options, though, and for more complicated installs, have been using equipment from Mikrotik (even less user friendly, though, although much more powerful for routing functions).

 

Overall, just watch out for marketing hype, and do your homework before deploying wireless.. My recommendation is to at least read "Wireless Networking in the Developing World",http://wndw.net/download.html, to get a better knowledge of how wireless works, and experiment with various products, before deploying wireless links to your customers.

[Sawbones 0]

I have some of the Ubiquiti gear deployed, and it's been quite solid so far.

 

Their price-to-performance ratio is hard to beat.