On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 13:35:29 +0000 (UTC), "Skavenger"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>I have been gathering information on Homebrew Wireless Antennas and have
>made a couple as an experiment.
>Basically its for accessing my wireless network from my garage which is some
>way off.
>My latest one out of a Mini Cheddars Can seemed to work well, I think.
>I have been measuring the signal strength using Net Stumbler but I am a bit
>confused and need some quick pointers.
>
>I understand that signal strength and Noise is measured in dBm and think
>from what I have read on the Antenna Shoot out that the lower the dBm the
>better.
>
>Netstumbler shows a graph with a left hand Axis that shows the Signal
>Strength and Noise according to the help file the signal strength should be
>in green( The higher up the graph the better, higher up the scale the lower
>the dBm reading) and noise in red if available.
>My graph only shows a green bar so I guess thats signal strength.
>Last night while testing my PCMCIA card only I got a signal strength of
>about 60 dBm when I attached the Antenna I got about 40 dBm (Wrote it down
>somewhere) if that is the case I just increased my signal dramatically.
>
>I know it got better because when accessing my Network the wireless networks
>Icon increased from 36Mbps to 54Mbps.
>
>Does anyone know of a software tool for bechmarking or measuring wireless
>signal strengths in order to accurately record results.
Mind if I not answer what you're doing wrong and simply tell you the
right way to measure gain with Netstumbler? The problem is that most
wireless cards simply do not have enough dynamic range to do a decent
antenna pattern or gain measurement. The granularity also sucks in
that the signal and noise levels are derived from an 8 bit (256
levels) value.
There right way(tm) is to use a reference antenna and an adjustable
attenuator. The reference antenna can be any antenna with a known
gain. It should be something with similar gain to the test antenna,
but it really can be almost anything. The adjustable attenuator goes
between the antenna and the receiver.
The test setup is important. It's important to eliminate any obvious
sources of reflections and multipath. The worst offender is a
roadway. There are web sites showing antennas mounted on tripods
about 3ft above the roadway. The test result are fairly erratic,
probably due to ground reflections. In addition, the midpoint Fresnel
Zone hits the ground, which causes additional path problems.
It is also very important to set the over the air data speed to a
fixed value. It can be just about any speed that gives a useable
measurement, but it should change. That's because the receiver
sensitivity varies with the speed. If the speed varies, the pattern
and reference levels will be ruined.
What I do is setup my test antenna on my flat rooftop and aim it at a
mountaintop about 4 miles away. The ground in between is a rather
large forested valley, which offers few sources of reflections.
Once you have a repeatable test setup, just setup the attenuator for
some arbitrary attenuation. I use about 10dB. Make VERY sure that
the test radio does not pickup or belch RF directly. All of it should
go through the antenna connector, not leak through the plastic box. If
you're stuck with a plastic box test radio, wrap it in aluminium foil.
Setup a reference level using Netstumbler or preferably a passive
sniffer such as Kismet. Record the level. Then, remove the reference
antenna and replace it with the test antenna. Adjust the attenuator
until Kismet or Netstumbler reads exactly the same value as with the
reference antenna. The difference in attenuator readings is the gain
difference between the two antennas. For example, if my reference
antenna has a gain of 8dBi and the attenuator showed a difference of
+2dB gain, therefore the test antenna has a gain of 10dBi.
Measuring the antenna pattern is done exactly the same way. Rotate
the antenna perhaps 15 degrees. Make the same measurement and record
the attenuator reading necessary to get the same measured level with
Kismet. Keep doing it all the way around with the test antenna. You
should get something like the theoretical antenna pattern. The only
added complications is that since the antenna is now pointing in all
kinds of different directions, the opertunities for reflections are
greatly increased. One test I helped run acted weired until we move
the cars parked behind the antenna.
If you have any furthur questions, it would nice to know:
1. What are you trying to accomplish?
2. What do you have to work with?
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
(E-Mail Removed)
#
http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
#
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS