Hi,
This is my first post in the forum
I wanted to know what antennas users/Pros use for PtP needs.
Both Flat Panel (MIMO) and MiMO dish as well as Panel.
i was looking at different companies like Lanbowan, Jirous, ARCWireless.
Lanbowan has 27 dbi Flat Panel ( Not MiMO) which others are not offering.
ARC has got good reviews on this forum but jirous has got best port to port isolation(MIMO).
Can you all please share your thoughts on antennas. Cuz a good Radio is nothing without a good antenna.
My requirement is to have a good PtP links long distance from 10-50 KMs range in very crowded (Noice) environments.
I have been trying different brands with different results and its difficult to test the brands in live environments, just thinking to take an advise here on the forum and buy the same and test it.

Thank YOu

Uttam

Not a Single reply so far. WOW

i think it also depends on your site of work.

what kind of terrain do you plan to put it to use?

PtP links always work better on grids than compared to panels.

i refuse to agree with that grid works better than panel.

if you have seen Proxim, Motorola and other carrier class sub 6Ghz equipment they are all using Panels. Also it is more on the Beamwidth that matters on PTP links.

what about radwin,ceragon.... they come with grid fittings.
It is easier to have panels for fixed boxes so that it can connect even if antenna r not properly aligned or los is not very clear. motorola canopy does have reflector fittings fittings. Panels r for entry products targetting people who don't want to put some extra effort in their links.

well said mahnet....

but what do you think about beamwidth which i had mentioned earlier.

that's what actually matters... and for long range powerful links i think 9 degrees and below is fine... what do you say?

i think it also depends on your site of work.

what kind of terrain do you plan to put it to use?

"Site of work" i assume you are asking about site locations, then its city environment (90%) and generally dry weather.

Regarding beam width the mentioned antennas have around 6 deg of beam width.

what about radwin,ceragon.... they come with grid fittings.
It is easier to have panels for fixed boxes so that it can connect even if antenna r not properly aligned or los is not very clear. motorola canopy does have reflector fittings fittings. Panels r for entry products targetting people who don't want to put some extra effort in their links.

Your comment is very interesting " Panels are for entry level people".
how many takers are there for this comment here in the forum ??

Dear Uttam
For wireless PtP links depending on the distance and bandwidth throughput you can use either Semiparabolic/Parabolic grid or solid state antenna.Path loss has to be calculated first for the distance first as it gives the final bandwidth throughput based on which you decide which of the two antennas to use.Whether you use FIFO or MIMO radios for the purpose again depends on the bandwidth you want to push.If you want small amounts of bandwidth to transported say upto 5 E1's a good fifo radio and antenna combination will do which is lt cheaper than MIMO radios.Also the frequencies matter as it helps controlling interference levels.
good luck.

27dbi to 23dbi grid antenna does give 9 deg to 6 deg beam width. depending on manufacturer it can vary a few.
grid is less affected by interference & betters ccq, hence better throughput. I will still say Panel is for Beginners

27dbi to 23dbi grid antenna does give 9 deg to 6 deg beam width. depending on manufacturer it can vary a few.
grid is less affected by interference & betters ccq, hence better throughput. I will still say Panel is for Beginners

Do you have any sound reason to believe GRID being better than Flat Panel ?

27dbi to 23dbi grid antenna does give 9 deg to 6 deg beam width. depending on manufacturer it can vary a few.
grid is less affected by interference & betters ccq, hence better throughput. I will still say Panel is for Beginners

Do you have any sound reason to believe GRID being better than Flat Panel ?

Please read through http://wireless.ictp.it/handbook/C4.pdf

Also in simple words grid has larger area to collect the signal and focus it to the feeder. and hence signal is stronger. It would surely give 2-3 dbi better signal than a panel and that means almost 50-60% more power. Do it yourself and you will know the best you want with the kind of terrain u r in.

Also in simple words grid has larger area to collect the signal and focus it to the feeder. and hence signal is stronger. It would surely give 2-3 dbi better signal than a panel and that means almost 50-60% more power. Do it yourself and you will know the best you want with the kind of terrain u r in.

That's too simple.
A grid of the SAME size as a panel MIGHT give bigger gain. But it depends on the exact design of both the grid and the panel antenna what the end result is.
Grid, or dish, panels have better resistence against unwanted signals from non focal directions but nowaday some panel antennas alse give very good results in these (Reduced side lob antennas).
Where gain on dish or grid antennas mainly is the result of the sheer size of the antenna a panel antenna also gains more when bigger.

Saying a 'grid' is better than a 'panel' is therefore is something like stating that one car drives faster than the other..... It all depends on the design.
The only definite pro of a grid compared to a panel is the windload. That is for the same size definately lower on a grid.

Hello everyone,

MSGEMSO here, Electromagnetic Spectrum Engineer out of Kansas in the USA. I have worked in the IT world for over 17 years and I specialize in antenna design, construction, and the IOM of the radio path. I have built antenna systems all over the world but am by no means an expert on all things radio.

Grid vs. Panel- The debate. This is a question of need, not what is "better". The reciprocity of an antenna, by design, is finite. The panel has advantages that the grid does not have and vice versa. Grid antennas have the unique ability to better conform to the scientific length of an antenna material to create a properly propagated radio wave and can change on the fly as the signal changes (i.e. if in frequency hop).

The panel will emulate that distance but the metal panel itself will no be exact in distance as the grid will be. Wavelengths are precisely measured invisible "lines" that are multiples of the power applied to make that wave stronger. The panel is a solid state mix of metal and nonconducting material coated in a weather-proofed shell to better fight the elements in which it is installed. The channels that represent the frequency in use have corresponding sectors inside of that panel that are actively transmitting that signal and that is the main difference between panels and grids.

The radiated pattern of a grid is much larger than a panel of the same size with equal amounts of energy applied (according to design). The waterfall charts that encompass the frequency range of both devices will show varying gains for each device depending on weather, minerals, vapor, electromagnetic activity, and human error (VSWR, path loss, etc.).

Isotropic values are not what we encounter in the real world and therefore they should not be applied to the antenna when planning a networks path outside of the LAN.

Very interesting discussion. I hope it continues to grow in responses. Good day everyone.

-MSGEMSO | Kansas | USA

PtP links always work better on grids than compared to panels.

This is not a scientific answer and not a good answer from someone of high rank in a technical (volunteer) forum. This answer should be disregarded by anyone looking for valuable insight into the question of topic.

hi again,

what if in a PTP link one end we use 27dbi Grid and the other we use 27dbi Panel.

How will be the performance rated for say 5 kms??????

and welcome "MSGEMSO" btw.... how did you recv. a karma so fast??

I don't think you would be able to tell the difference in a properly engineered link.

I have found that panels work much better as a CPE if signal is a little spotty, poor fresnel, shooting through or around trees, just about any typical customer's link around here.

With a grid the signal is reflected back to a dipole, with the panel the entire front is the antenna. I think it really just comes down to a panel having more surface area that is actually receiving signal.

I have both as CPEs and almost all of my P2P shots are grids, with the exception of one backup link. When I have a signal issue with a CPE that is using a grid I swap it for a panel and generally the problem goes away.

I have both as CPEs and almost all of my P2P shots are grids, with the exception of one backup link. When I have a signal issue with a CPE that is using a grid I swap it for a panel and generally the problem goes away.

Is that with similar gain antenna? Otherwise its not a real comparison. Your comment is interesting, I would like to know.
Before I would think a grid would have better 'penetration' power in regard to shooting through trees because the radiowave energy bundle is more concentrated.
But after your comment I might start to think a panel has better change to recieve some reflected signal (leafs, buildings) good enough to use as the grid might have. But than, siso 802.11 technology depends on one signal beam only and does not like any other multipath receipts. So this might plead for the grid again...?

20dBi grids vs 19dBi panels. In poor signal situations the 19dBi Rootenna beats the grid every time, quite often has better signal than a couple of my 24dBi grids with integrated cable.

If it is a clean shot then there isn't much of a difference, but throw a couple of limbs or tree tops in the way, panel wins.

I think it ultimately comes down to surface area. The panel essentially has several 2dBi circuits (not the right term) in phase with each other covering roughly 18x18 panel. The grids have a nice reflector that focuses the signal on a dipole. The odd twisted signal may not hit the dipole just right when dealing with poor conditions.