Farm Network Wireless Expansion

[midwestfarmer]

First time posting in forum, just looking for suggestions on hardware to make a wireless connection buildings on my property that can support cameras in the near future and have internet there as well, without breaking the bank and have wifi outside in a mesh network type setup.

 

I am getting out of area of knowleage in this situation, I know I can make PTP options work. Have done a 5.5 mile long PTP on Rocket M900's with 30 MBPS connection stable, then a ISP provider came and went with that for more speed and what not.

 

I currently have a TP-link TP-Link Omada Hardware Controller OC200 now, to make a mesh network between two buildings so I can internet in the other building, see in attached image. Using TP-Link EAP225-Outdoor in both spots, would have reconnection issues when power went out between this link but other that no issues when working.

 

There is some trees by internet building but there are in a row and not heavy canopy, oriental pine type, shouldn't affect connectivity I believe

 

But now coming to realize I need something that can handle many camera's and the higher volume data that camera's would bring and just the vast area that would need coverage here. I have used ubiquiti ISP design center and there recommended hardware seems a bit much. Was hoping to used TP-Link items since I have there controller already but I am open to whatever makes sense.

 

I watched Linus tech tips for years and learned a lot. I am just out of area knowledge here and technology changes every year if not sooner and I don't know limits of these devices. Would rather not dig trenches for running cable everywhere, I know cable is best but would just be expensive and cutting concrete to get close to some buildings.

[DraconisMaximus]

I know a bit about this as my employer uses setups like this but it's not my department so I'm definitely not an expert. I’ll give you some things to consider / questions to answer.

 

First, do you really need the whole property to have WiFi coverage or just the buildings? Your total property appears to be about 400 ft x 400 ft. That’s 160,000 ft², 15,000 m², 3.7 acres. That is an enormous area to cover with client side WiFi. The buildings look to be about 25% of that which is a much more manageable area. For reference, your TP-Link EAP225-Outdoor lists a maximum range of 300 m² or 3200 ft². Back of the napkin math then says you would need 50 of these to cover the whole area. For something like this to work effectively most or all of them would need to have wired connections to a switch. Other AP options will face similar limitations. Decent quality outdoor APs generally have between 1500 m² and 5000 m² quoted max ranges. The key word there is maximum.

[DraconisMaximus]

That’s where PTP WiFi becomes a much better option which it sounds like is already your plan.

 

Somethings to consider 1^st though:

 

• Elevations are huge factor here; so, what are the heights of the buildings and other potential anchor points. Also, is the property itself flat or is there a gradient.

• If you are able to have one or two centrally located omnidirectional nodes that the other antennas can target that will simplify the process a lot. Otherwise a 90 degree base station could probably work from your stated point of origin if the elevations are compatible.

• The much cheaper 5 GHz and 2.4 GHz PTP systems are not only slower than the newer 60 GHz one but they also use the same frequencies as your client side WiFi so proper frequency management is essential. Weigh the pros and cons here carefully.

• As you noted, these types of setups can be sensitive to power issues. As an example the otherwise widely lauded Tarana 60 GHz antennas are notorious for their long startup times (3-20 minutes). Using UPS backups will help with this a lot.

• Don’t underestimate the interference that trees or any other physical obstructions will cause to your system.

• Whatever you mount the antennas to will need to be extremely stable. These systems require precise aiming and if they move in the wind it will disrupt the connection. If when the wind stops the do not return to their original position, then they will need to be recalibrated. This is why buildings are generally preferable to towers for anchor points.

[DraconisMaximus]

My final point of consideration would be related to Ethernet. Don’t overestimate the cost of installing Ethernet. Especially in a cost to benefit analysis. Direct burial cable costs $0.15 - $0.50 per ft depending on the standard used. With a maximum range of 328 ft / 100 m you could reach nearly all of your buildings or all if midway switches are used (this is better practice anyways). It will also require less long term maintenance.

 

As far as burial costs go the biggest cost there is actually labor / time. I would guess that being on a farm either you or someone else there already has the tools and knowledge to run / bury cables. Additionally, you can reduce the amount of burial necessary by running above ground conduits along the buildings.

If time is the concern just be aware that getting a multi-node PTP system properly aimed and calibrated it no easy feat either.

[midwestfarmer]

I guess I shouldn’t have said I need Wi-Fi the whole property, more of getting internet to other parts of the property efficiently and can handle camera’s recording, since camera’s will probably get added throughout the years for one central location of a DVR until some buildings get replaced, lots of old sheds and barns for future replacement
 

Property is flat, mounting points would be at least 16ft, can get more height at starting point from using an existing TV antenna mount mounted to roof of building estimating 32ft of height. All mounting would be on the building and solid.

 

Sector antenna is something I was playing with in the ubiquiti design center, I believe a 60° antenna would cover all the areas I was aiming for in their designing tool.

 

From my understanding of what I see with the different GHz options, I think 5GHz would be sufficient in this current scenario but I also don’t know in the end, just out of realm of knowing what to do, I can install anything and figure out the software end of things in the end. 

 

Cable digging or knifing I currently don’t see as a cost effective option, I don’t have anything to dig with, when ISP came to install fiber line, I had to pull their little ditch witch knifing machine with a tractor to get through the driveway, very hard packed, and then found hidden concrete under the gravel I didn’t know about, in the end I see wireless options be a more attractive option and probably be cheaper in the end, I also don’t work on the farm as my full time job, work off farm.

[Donut417]

26 minutes ago, midwestfarmer said:

I believe a 60° antenna would cover all the areas I was aiming for in their designing tool.

 

Bare in mind you need transmitters on each of the buildings. WiFi clients are not going to have the power to transmit back. 

29 minutes ago, midwestfarmer said:

Cable digging or knifing I currently don’t see as a cost effective option,

Wiring up all the buildings is probably not cost effective. Id do a Hybrid approach. It looks like some buildings are close together. Wiring up those buildings and linking one or two buildings via a P2P bridge might work better. Keep in mind you will likely need Ethernet for clients like Cameras and such, unless your planning on using Wireless cameras? But then you have to fuck around with figuring out a power strategy for them. Where as IP Ethernet cameras are powered over the very cable providing a data connection. 

 

[DraconisMaximus]

55 minutes ago, midwestfarmer said:

From my understanding of what I see with the different GHz options, I think 5GHz would be sufficient in this current scenario but I also don’t know in the end, just out of realm of knowing what to do, I can install anything and figure out the software end of things in the end. 

The biggest issue with the 5 GHz antennas is that they share frequencies with the 5 GHz client WiFi.

Especially with several active 5 GHz links, for proper function you likely need to only use 2.4 GHz and 6 GHz bands for your client APs. The 60 GHz don’t have this issue but are much more expensive so it’s just a cost / benefit decision.

You could probably do it with a single base station and several directional antennas.

 

24 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Bare in mind you need transmitters on each of the buildings. WiFi clients are not going to have the power to transmit back. 

Yes, assuming PTP and not just meshing, then a basic setup would look something like this (very crude and fast paint sketch):

[DraconisMaximus]

Another question that may matter is what type of ISP do you have?

5 hours ago, midwestfarmer said:

I know I can make PTP options work. Have done a 5.5 mile long PTP on Rocket M900's with 30 MBPS connection stable, then a ISP provider came and went with that for more speed and what not.

If your ISP is a "Fixed Wireless" provider, then you will need to coordinate with them to ensure that your equipment doesn't conflict with theirs. You may even be able to contract the setup to them. Sometimes you can even get contracted as a tower owner (sharing the tower on your property with other nearby clients) for reduced fees.

[midwestfarmer]

I figured I would need stations at each building pointing back at starting antenna or the access point which is fine. The current outdoor WiFi system would be replaced with this new system. 

 

Hybird approach is also what I was planning/thinking, just need that wireless bridge(ptmp) , buildings wired inside, just wireless on the outside. Probably a hybrid approach for camera as some buildings are 200ft long and will have animals in them, do have power in said building and would possibly make a wireless network inside building for wireless cameras and devices for the future install, one project at a time though. 
 

14 minutes ago, DraconisMaximus said:

Another question that may matter is what type of ISP do you have?

If your ISP is a "Fixed Wireless" provider, then you will need to coordinate with them to ensure that your equipment doesn't conflict with theirs. You may even be able to contract the setup to them. Sometimes you can even get contracted as a tower owner (sharing the tower on your property with other nearby clients) for reduced fees.

The fixed ISP would probably not be interested in helping with this system. They have a fiber line into building with their supplied router device with their settings that are locked on it, all I can do is hook a cable to a network switch box to divide it out. Their router network is inside a double lined steel building, exterior and interior lined steel panel, so interference with a new ptp network would be minimal most likely.

 

26 minutes ago, DraconisMaximus said:

The biggest issue with the 5 GHz antennas is that they share frequencies with the 5 GHz client WiFi.

Especially with several active 5 GHz links, for proper function you likely need to only use 2.4 GHz and 6 GHz bands for your client APs. The 60 GHz don’t have this issue but are much more expensive so it’s just a cost / benefit decision.

You could probably do it with a single base station and several directional antennas.

 

Yes, assuming PTP and not just meshing, then a basic setup would look something like this (very crude and fast paint sketch):

This would basically be the end product, just point to point delivering and sending and dividing up from there, in simple term I would be my own WISP(wireless internet service provider), the big guys covering huge amounts of rural area, I am just trying to take care of me and me only. Since I don’t have neighbors that are super nearby like in the city, I don’t have a to worry about their networks bleeding into this for interference.
 

If I had infinite amount of resources to do the the super perfect system I would, like just for instance, run Ethernet or even fiber everywhere in a conduit, I probably would but I am limited with a budget and available free time

I guess I was just looking for recommendations on what to buy for this system to work, so many options and price

points, I have this feeling I know it can be done but don’t know how to get there and cost effectively in the end.

[DraconisMaximus]

2 minutes ago, midwestfarmer said:

The fixed ISP would probably not be interested in helping with this system. They have a fiber line into building with their supplied router device with their settings that are locked on it, all I can do is hook a cable to a network switch box to divide it out. Their router network is inside a double lined steel building, exterior and interior lined steel panel, so interference with a new ptp network would be minimal most likely.

Fixed Wireless is like what you are planning except as a service generally with hundreds or thousands of clients. This type of ISP is common is rural areas of the Midwestern and Southern USA. As you are lucky enough to have fiber to the home, you should not have to worry about interference.

[midwestfarmer]

Would anyone have any suggestions for TP-link hardware to make this setup work so I could use the controller I already have or would going to ubiquiti be the easiest way?

[Donut417]

26 minutes ago, midwestfarmer said:

Would anyone have any suggestions for TP-link hardware to make this setup work so I could use the controller I already have or would going to ubiquiti be the easiest way?

I cant suggest hardware but I know TP Link does make the same stuff that Ubiquti does. So you should at least be able to find something that suits your needs. 

[DraconisMaximus]

1 hour ago, midwestfarmer said:

Would anyone have any suggestions for TP-link hardware to make this setup work so I could use the controller I already have or would going to ubiquiti be the easiest way?

I don't take a side a on whether it is warranted, but the US Government seems to intent on proceeding with its plan to ban TP-Link. Just something to consider before making a major investment. I don't know about their PTP stuff, but their consumer grade gear does seem work well. I would classify Ubiquiti as upper-middle tier in terms of ther PTP gear. You will also find more public documentation than other brands. Many telecoms are moving to Tarana now for its improved better funtion and stability, but the cost is a barrier to most consumers. The third big US player is Cambium but they are the odd one out now. Ubiquity now meets or exceeds their capabilities while generally being cheaper. TP-Link's PTP gear seems to explicitly geared towards consumers who do not need to be NDAA compliant like telecoms do.

[midwestfarmer]

23 minutes ago, DraconisMaximus said:

I don't take a side a on whether it is warranted, but the US Government seems to intent on proceeding with its plan to ban TP-Link. Just something to consider before making a major investment. I don't know about their PTP stuff, but their consumer grade gear does seem work well. I would classify Ubiquiti as upper-middle tier in terms of ther PTP gear. You will also find more public documentation than other brands. Many telecoms are moving to Tarana now for its improved better funtion and stability, but the cost is a barrier to most consumers. The third big US player is Cambium but they are the odd one out now. Ubiquity now meets or exceeds their capabilities while generally being cheaper. TP-Link's PTP gear seems to explicitly geared towards consumers who do not need to be NDAA compliant like telecoms do.

Well I haven't heard of those before and will research them, thank you. Government does government things, just trying to get a working system that's all