Extending Wi-Fi to an outbuilding
Discussion
Gary C said:
That's the exact unit I use at my local end.I use the kuwifi at the remote end simply because it has a 12v input (for my battery power) . Still a great unit, albeit 2.4ghz, which is incidentally better than 5ghz for going through obstructions.
Thanks all, let me digest all the info, and I'll put up a shopping list and how I envisage it to be setup (just to confirm).
All I need it for is a wi-fi security camera. So if it does drop out occasionally, but then regains the signal and works again, I'm fine with it. With the powerline adapter, once it dropped out, that was it even after unplugging both ends and starting again.
All I need it for is a wi-fi security camera. So if it does drop out occasionally, but then regains the signal and works again, I'm fine with it. With the powerline adapter, once it dropped out, that was it even after unplugging both ends and starting again.
dr_gn said:
Thanks all, let me digest all the info, and I'll put up a shopping list and how I envisage it to be setup (just to confirm).
All I need it for is a wi-fi security camera. So if it does drop out occasionally, but then regains the signal and works again, I'm fine with it. With the powerline adapter, once it dropped out, that was it even after unplugging both ends and starting again.
I don’t think you’ve ever said is the cctv external or internal? All I need it for is a wi-fi security camera. So if it does drop out occasionally, but then regains the signal and works again, I'm fine with it. With the powerline adapter, once it dropped out, that was it even after unplugging both ends and starting again.
This could make a significant difference.
buggalugs said:
Captain_Morgan said:
Spot on on your suggestions.
I’d simply add general the reason you need both is that wifi comms is a 2 way conversation, meaning while the single node of the bridge pair can reach the target the client device in the remote location can’t reach the bridge node.
I always suggest folk think about dropping stones in still water you want the ripples to bisect before ebbing away, if one of those stones are smaller it won’t reach the other side.
Sometimes true but think about your mobile phone, you have a big antenna on a mast at one and and a tiny one in your phone.I’d simply add general the reason you need both is that wifi comms is a 2 way conversation, meaning while the single node of the bridge pair can reach the target the client device in the remote location can’t reach the bridge node.
I always suggest folk think about dropping stones in still water you want the ripples to bisect before ebbing away, if one of those stones are smaller it won’t reach the other side.
The mast sizes are also a factor of client capacity, significantly greater power & generally directional elements. The masts are more sensitive to help with the weaker handset signal strength but undoubtedly the weak link is the handset.
You see this in the 4/5G thread where folk in weak service areas use external/directional antennas & see significant upticks in throughput.
Captain_Morgan said:
dr_gn said:
Thanks all, let me digest all the info, and I'll put up a shopping list and how I envisage it to be setup (just to confirm).
All I need it for is a wi-fi security camera. So if it does drop out occasionally, but then regains the signal and works again, I'm fine with it. With the powerline adapter, once it dropped out, that was it even after unplugging both ends and starting again.
I don’t think you’ve ever said is the cctv external or internal? All I need it for is a wi-fi security camera. So if it does drop out occasionally, but then regains the signal and works again, I'm fine with it. With the powerline adapter, once it dropped out, that was it even after unplugging both ends and starting again.
This could make a significant difference.
I've got an old stable building which we have to drive through to get to the house. It's open at the rear, with electric iron gates at the front. The camera is inside the 'drive-through' part, at eye level pointing to the gates. I can then see who is at the gate. So the front and rear are effectively both open with the camera in the middle.
It may even be possible to point the transmitter almost directly at the camera, if that's any use?
Captain_Morgan said:
buggalugs said:
Captain_Morgan said:
Spot on on your suggestions.
I’d simply add general the reason you need both is that wifi comms is a 2 way conversation, meaning while the single node of the bridge pair can reach the target the client device in the remote location can’t reach the bridge node.
I always suggest folk think about dropping stones in still water you want the ripples to bisect before ebbing away, if one of those stones are smaller it won’t reach the other side.
Sometimes true but think about your mobile phone, you have a big antenna on a mast at one and and a tiny one in your phone.I’d simply add general the reason you need both is that wifi comms is a 2 way conversation, meaning while the single node of the bridge pair can reach the target the client device in the remote location can’t reach the bridge node.
I always suggest folk think about dropping stones in still water you want the ripples to bisect before ebbing away, if one of those stones are smaller it won’t reach the other side.
The mast sizes are also a factor of client capacity, significantly greater power & generally directional elements. The masts are more sensitive to help with the weaker handset signal strength but undoubtedly the weak link is the handset.
You see this in the 4/5G thread where folk in weak service areas use external/directional antennas & see significant upticks in throughput.
buggalugs said:
Right but generally speaking when you want WiFi in an outdoor area you put an AP on the side of the building and don't worry too much about the size of the antenna in people's phones, so while you're not technically wrong about the whole '2 way conversation' thing it's not always necessary to have big antennas at both ends for things to work well, particularly 2.4ghz at 30M line of sight.
100% get that.That the op had said he’s got zero wifi from the home when it’s 30m away led to belt & braces approach. It being unclear if something about the remote location was ‘blocking’ wireless, as ever there’s a lot of interpretation when advising someone over a forum.
There was also a more general aspect of illustrating why some folks experience poor wifi even with mesh or extenders as they put a node in the dead zone rather than in a mid point between.
Griffith4ever said:
Gary C said:
That's the exact unit I use at my local end.I use the kuwifi at the remote end simply because it has a 12v input (for my battery power) . Still a great unit, albeit 2.4ghz, which is incidentally better than 5ghz for going through obstructions.
Power of course maybe an issue and I don't know if the camera has an ethernet port or is just wifi ?
Gary C said:
Griffith4ever said:
Gary C said:
That's the exact unit I use at my local end.I use the kuwifi at the remote end simply because it has a 12v input (for my battery power) . Still a great unit, albeit 2.4ghz, which is incidentally better than 5ghz for going through obstructions.
Power of course maybe an issue and I don't know if the camera has an ethernet port or is just wifi ?
dr_gn said:
Sort of both, but effectively external:
I've got an old stable building which we have to drive through to get to the house. It's open at the rear, with electric iron gates at the front. The camera is inside the 'drive-through' part, at eye level pointing to the gates. I can then see who is at the gate. So the front and rear are effectively both open with the camera in the middle.
It may even be possible to point the transmitter almost directly at the camera, if that's any use?
Yeah kinda, again unfortunately it’s more options rather than a definitive answer.I've got an old stable building which we have to drive through to get to the house. It's open at the rear, with electric iron gates at the front. The camera is inside the 'drive-through' part, at eye level pointing to the gates. I can then see who is at the gate. So the front and rear are effectively both open with the camera in the middle.
It may even be possible to point the transmitter almost directly at the camera, if that's any use?
Firstly as mentioned there are different frequencies that wifi works on, 2.4, 5 & 6GHz.
To just use one of the suggested wireless bridges you would either have to match the band of both cameras & wifi ‘bridge’ (it’s very likely that the camera is using 2.4GHz frq), or you have to put a accesspoint at the remote end if you use a 5GHz bridge’s. Or instead of wireless bridges you could try a outdoor accesspoint this will have both main frq’s 2.4 & 5GHz.
The risks with the bridge option are that if you can’t confirm the frq the camera runs on you have a mismatch between bridge & camera & so have to put in accesspoint in the remote location so just a £20-30 hit. Or that in the future you have to replace the cctv & that replacement is on a different frq.
Or as said you try a outdoor accesspoint that has 2.4 & 5GHz likely about the same cost as a pair of the point to point bridge, downside is if it didn’t work (unlikely imho) you either buy a second external accesspoint to go in the remote location or send it back & go with the bridge option.
Sorry it’s more options rather than a definitive answer.
One thing to consider is depending on who/what your internet service is you could test the connection options by buying a long cable allowing temporary move your router out near where the external bridge or accesspoint would be, then you can get a better sense that the wifi will reach before committing to a way forward.
Edit: just to add if considering the outside accesspoint I’d consider something like this especially with the direction antennas as they’d allow you to direct them at the remote location.
https://www.broadbandbuyer.com/products/33345-tp-l...
Edited by Captain_Morgan on Thursday 30th March 12:12
Captain_Morgan said:
dr_gn said:
Sort of both, but effectively external:
I've got an old stable building which we have to drive through to get to the house. It's open at the rear, with electric iron gates at the front. The camera is inside the 'drive-through' part, at eye level pointing to the gates. I can then see who is at the gate. So the front and rear are effectively both open with the camera in the middle.
It may even be possible to point the transmitter almost directly at the camera, if that's any use?
Yeah kinda, again unfortunately it’s more options rather than a definitive answer.I've got an old stable building which we have to drive through to get to the house. It's open at the rear, with electric iron gates at the front. The camera is inside the 'drive-through' part, at eye level pointing to the gates. I can then see who is at the gate. So the front and rear are effectively both open with the camera in the middle.
It may even be possible to point the transmitter almost directly at the camera, if that's any use?
Firstly as mentioned there are different frequencies that wifi works on, 2.4, 5 & 6GHz.
To just use one of the suggested wireless bridges you would either have to match the band of both cameras & wifi ‘bridge’ (it’s very likely that the camera is using 2.4GHz frq), or you have to put a accesspoint at the remote end if you use a 5GHz bridge’s. Or instead of wireless bridges you could try a outdoor accesspoint this will have both main frq’s 2.4 & 5GHz.
The risks with the bridge option are that if you can’t confirm the frq the camera runs on you have a mismatch between bridge & camera & so have to put in accesspoint in the remote location so just a £20-30 hit. Or that in the future you have to replace the cctv & that replacement is on a different frq.
Or as said you try a outdoor accesspoint that has 2.4 & 5GHz likely about the same cost as a pair of the point to point bridge, downside is if it didn’t work (unlikely imho) you either buy a second external accesspoint to go in the remote location or send it back & go with the bridge option.
Sorry it’s more options rather than a definitive answer.
One thing to consider is depending on who/what your internet service is you could test the connection options by buying a long cable allowing temporary move your router out near where the external bridge or accesspoint would be, then you can get a better sense that the wifi will reach before committing to a way forward.
Edit: just to add if considering the outside accesspoint I’d consider something like this especially with the direction antennas as they’d allow you to direct them at the remote location.
https://www.broadbandbuyer.com/products/33345-tp-l...
Edited by Captain_Morgan on Thursday 30th March 12:12
So that says it gives up to 200m coverage, and also covers both frequencies?
Surely that's go to be worth a try?
Captain_Morgan said:
dr_gn said:
OK thanks for the edit.
So that says it gives up to 200m coverage, and also covers both frequencies?
Surely that's go to be worth a try?
Certainly that’s the route I’d try myself.So that says it gives up to 200m coverage, and also covers both frequencies?
Surely that's go to be worth a try?
Must admit looking through the manual, the setup looks slightly scary, but there we go.
Presumably I'd still need to buy the switch/splitter for the ethernet cable, to go from my PC to the transmitter? I think the mains box included is just to provide power via the ethernet cable?
dr_gn said:
So to get this right - I only need the outdoor transmitter foxed to my house to both send and receive data from the camera - I don't need one at the camera end (or potentially might not need one). If I do need one, I just get another of the same, and would then need a router that that end?
Must admit looking through the manual, the setup looks slightly scary, but there we go.
Presumably I'd still need to buy the switch/splitter for the ethernet cable, to go from my PC to the transmitter? I think the mains box included is just to provide power via the ethernet cable?
1) Yes - try the local one first. The house one. Let it function as a well placed, high power, wifi access point. Nothing else needed at the camera end. Let the camera pick up this new high powered wifi. If the signal is too weak then yes, put a second unit at the camera end. It will NOT need a router at the camera end. You can simply enable it's wireless repeating mode. As per the diagram I drew for you.Must admit looking through the manual, the setup looks slightly scary, but there we go.
Presumably I'd still need to buy the switch/splitter for the ethernet cable, to go from my PC to the transmitter? I think the mains box included is just to provide power via the ethernet cable?
2) yes, you will need the switch (lets stop calling it a splitter for good practice from nwo on ;-) ) and etherenet cable at the local/pc end.
3) Yes, the mains box is to power the wifi unit via the ethernert cable. This "mains box" is a passive POE adapter.
You are going to need some cable.
1 premade short lan cable from switch to PC
1 premade cable from switch to POE injector
1 cable from POE injector to CPE (wifi unit) - this can be premade, or, custom made - depending on how you plan to get it through a wall (or how big a hole you are prepared to drill)
The new switch will come with a power brick too but that just adds complication to the diagram and is a given.
If the range is not enough (and I suspect it WILL be fine) then you add a second CPE at the cam end and put it in wifi repeating mode. Exactly as per my previous pic. It will simply receive the house wifi, and then rebroadcast it locally
1 premade short lan cable from switch to PC
1 premade cable from switch to POE injector
1 cable from POE injector to CPE (wifi unit) - this can be premade, or, custom made - depending on how you plan to get it through a wall (or how big a hole you are prepared to drill)
The new switch will come with a power brick too but that just adds complication to the diagram and is a given.
If the range is not enough (and I suspect it WILL be fine) then you add a second CPE at the cam end and put it in wifi repeating mode. Exactly as per my previous pic. It will simply receive the house wifi, and then rebroadcast it locally
Edited by Griffith4ever on Friday 31st March 10:33
dr_gn said:
So to get this right - I only need the outdoor transmitter foxed to my house to both send and receive data from the camera - I don't need one at the camera end (or potentially might not need one). If I do need one, I just get another of the same, and would then need a router that that end?
Must admit looking through the manual, the setup looks slightly scary, but there we go.
Presumably I'd still need to buy the switch/splitter for the ethernet cable, to go from my PC to the transmitter? I think the mains box included is just to provide power via the ethernet cable?
As Griffith4ever said, current ethernet cable to switch, cables to pc & poe injector, poe injector to accesspoint Must admit looking through the manual, the setup looks slightly scary, but there we go.
Presumably I'd still need to buy the switch/splitter for the ethernet cable, to go from my PC to the transmitter? I think the mains box included is just to provide power via the ethernet cable?
(I can’t recall if the accesspoint I suggested comes with a poe injector, I believe it does - note these are ‘directional’ ensure you connect the power side to the accesspoint)
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff