I suspect they did it in the 802.11n chipsets because you can't control
how the user is going to orient their handheld device. I guess what you
gain in our world is that using the wrong antenna is still right.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Nate Burke" <n...@blastcomm.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 11/22/2016 6:09:37 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 2.4 antenna options
I read through the whitepaper, and still don't understand it. My basic
takeaway was 'We can do this cool thing, but it really doesn't gain you
anything' It specifically says there is no net SNR benefit.
On 11/22/2016 5:05 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
I have tested it on multiple occasions with both ePMP and UBNT radios,
and it does seem to work like they say. Whether it works better or
worse or the same as keeping everything the same, I don't know, but
the signal does pretty much stay the same if your rotate the antenna
45 degrees.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:02 PM, George Skorup <geo...@cbcast.com>
wrote:
There aren't two independent transmitters in a dual stream MIMO
radio, just one. So the RF output power is divided and thus out of
phase. That's how my pea brain understands it anyway.
On 11/22/2016 4:49 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
...I'm not saying I understand it by the way. Just saying I have no
reason to disbelieve it. If in doubt, turn your SM 45 degrees and
see if your signal changes.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
To: "Animal Farm" <af@afmug.com>
Sent: 11/22/2016 5:45:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 2.4 antenna options
So how does the connector distinguish between these antennas and
relay information to chip set to "phase differently"? I am assuming
these antennas are passive with no smarts.
On Nov 22, 2016 3:42 PM, "George Skorup" <geo...@cbcast.com> wrote:
Phase. Yes, it's built into the chipset. 450 does it too. At least
the 3.65.
On 11/22/2016 4:34 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I think so...
-----Original Message----- From: Nate Burke Sent: Tuesday,
November 22, 2016 3:29 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG]
EPMP 2.4 antenna options
So if you were to use like a v/h UBNT antenna instead of the Dual
Slant antenna, They both should work? Wondering what the 3x
price difference between antennas gains you.
On 11/22/2016 4:26 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
Supposedly it makes up for the loss by using the desired signal
component from both antennas.
I remember reading the original white paper, and I remember
thinking I understood it for about 5 minutes or so.
-----Original Message----- From: Nate Burke
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 3:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 2.4 antenna options
So you have a Dual slant AP and a V/H SM? Isn't that just
losing signal
for no reason?
On 11/22/2016 4:21 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
They've apparently got some electronic magic that can take the
received signal on V/H and calculate what the transmitted dual
slant signal was. It's been explained here, but I don't
remember the details. They assert that you can mix and match
safely. In fact they started out selling slant pol sector
antennas and V+H SM's, so they are/were confident enough in
this to make it the "default" setup.
It's a feature of their 802.11n chipset, so the computation is
done in hardware.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Nate Burke" <n...@blastcomm.com>
To: "Animal Farm" <af@afmug.com>
Sent: 11/22/2016 5:14:04 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] EPMP 2.4 antenna options
I'm looking at the Cambium 2.4 antenna C024900D004A, and it
lists it as being DualSlant +/-45 degrees. Does this mean that
the Force 200 2.4 radios are also Dual Slant to talk to this
antenna? I didn't find anything on the Force200 spec sheet
talking about slant. If you use a V/H Antenna as the AP, can
you not use the Force 200 as the SM?
