wireless internet interfering with C Band

[jmag487]

Unfortunately I am really threading a needle when it comes to hitting the ISP tower. There is really no other place on my house that will not be obstructed. And you can't tell from the picture, but the property really slopes downward from right to left on the picture, so placing a pole on the same line towards the tower would drop quite a bit in elevation so I would need a really tall post! I struggled for months to get decent internet and am happy I have that, so I really don't want to give that up. Prior to this ISP my only options were satellite internet and a MIFI hotspot (which I had and hated). Thanks again.
Jim

 

[wallyhts]

Unfortunately I am really threading a needle when it comes to hitting the ISP tower. There is really no other place on my house that will not be obstructed. And you can't tell from the picture, but the property really slopes downward from right to left on the picture, so placing a pole on the same line towards the tower would drop quite a bit in elevation so I would need a really tall post! I struggled for months to get decent internet and am happy I have that, so I really don't want to give that up. Prior to this ISP my only options were satellite internet and a MIFI hotspot (which I had and hated). Thanks again.
Jim

What about asking the wisp to switch you from 365 radio to 5Ghz radio.

 

[Stargazer]

This narrow line of site to wifi tower is why I suggest satellite dish being moved earlier. I understand how narrow a line of site can be for wifi having been involved in a wireless internet business before. If the radio on the wifi dish has LED lights that indicates the signal you could easily try moving it over while moving the satellite dish on the ground the opposite direction if you did not want to move the satellite dish far. The wifi dish would be easier to move than the satellite and it might not take much to get it out of the signal path.

 

[Pixl]

I agree with Titanium's advice and suggested location. Try moving it there and see if it still works. Sometimes tests fail, that is why we call them tests. You don't have to give it up, just put it back.

 

[FaT Air]

switch to 5ghz: I had 5ghz wireless aimed right over the top of the BUD with no problems.
Doubt that will happen as everything is invested in 3.6 equipment.
I had a feeling this 3.6ghz, when I read about it being opened up for WIMAX, would cause some headaches for terrestrial C band. Back in the late 70's and early 80's they were 'clearing' the band so as to not interfere with satellite. Go figure. $$$$???

 

[FaT Air]

You may, and I emphasize may, get the ISP to move theirs. [[only if they are very nice]] But think the outcome will be you'll have to move the bud.
Wondering: I wonder if an SDR* and LNBF would show a good place to place the BUD.??????? (null in signal?)
5150-3650=SDR tuning 1,500,000 (*cheap ~16 bucks, but limited, spectrum analyzer)

 

[KC9TIK]

Doubt that will happen as everything is invested in 3.6 equipment.

I work for a WISP and we only use 5gig.

Wondering: I wonder if an SDR* and LNBF would show a good place to place the BUD.??????? (*cheap ~16 bucks, but limited, spectrum analyzer)

Those cheap USB TV dongles with the Realtek RTL2832U chips have potential. http://hackaday.com/2012/03/20/software-defined-radio-from-a-usb-tv-capture-card/
Just add a power source through a one port power passing splitter to power the LNB from an STB and you're in business.

 

[FaT Air]

Discussion right here: http://www.satelliteguys.us/forums/231-Ham-Radio-SDR-amp-Police-Scanner-Technology

 

[Cham]

Just a 1 cent response here, may not be applicable to your situation, but I had trouble with my 900MHz WISP getting into my ham gear causing interference. Looking through the specs for the internet radio the ISP provides, the manufacturer specifies to use ONLY shielded cat5 or cat6 cable (STP) with properly terminated RJ45 connectors rated for shielded operations. I noted the ISP that installed my system used cheap plenum rated cat5e. I replaced the cable with cat5 stp cable rated for outdoors and my interference issue disappeared completely.
Having said that, with the interfering signal being very close to the desired C-band, the issue is likely related to direct propagation between the WISP transmitter and your C-band dish, so it may not be applicable. I would however talk to your ISP and let them be aware of your issue, maybe they would have a solution such as using another band or an alternate equipment arrangement.

 

[Stargazer]

3.6 ghz works better where there are lots of trees and hills vs. 5 ghz which requires more of a line of site. The lower the frequency the better it works with trees. This is why many have to use 900 mhz. Unfortunately the lower the frequency the less bandwidth you have. Sometimes you also see more interference since the signals are able to reach further.

 

[jmag487]

I was on the phone with the ISP last night and they were willing to walk around and test for another location for the ISP dish. But we're still knee deep in snow and it will have to wait a bit.
Jim

 

[FaT Air]

Good to hear.

 

[iBoston]

What is the result on this. I just found myself in the same situation being i've been pulling my hair out wondering why i cannot get a stable signal off my newly installed dish.

 

[Stargazer]

I just seen a new product listed with a c-band lnb that helps reject wifi signals.

 

[Titanium]

Feedhorn or block convertor (LNB) filtering does not address a transmitter/antenna causing in-band interference. The dish would need to be shielded from the WiFi transmitter.

 

[Cham]

Interference from 3.5GHz WISP systems should only affect C-band, if it's affecting Ku there is a chance they might be using a higher band but I don't think there is anything commercially available that operates close to the Ku band 10.5 to 12.7 downlinks.

 

[iBoston]

The Wimax dish is pointed south like the Cband dish. The Wimax dish is about 10 feet behind and 15 feet higher than the cband dish. I would rather move the wimax dish. Would putting the wimax further south than the Cband dish do the trick?

 

[Titanium]

So the WiFi is transmitting straight down the throat of the LNBF.... Relocate the WiFi forward of the C-band dish? Maybe?

A structure or other RF barrier would probably be better. I would put the WiFi antenna on the opposite side of a building or as far away as possible. A directional antenna will still radiate from side and back lobes. Grounded mesh panel(s) between the WiFi antenna and the C-band dish will also help.

The WiFi technician should be able to walk the area with a field strength meter and identify a better placement.

 

[iBoston]

So the WiFi is transmitting straight down the throat of the LNBF.... Relocate the WiFi forward of the C-band dish? Maybe?

A structure or other RF barrier would probably be better. I would put the WiFi antenna on the opposite side of a building or as far away as possible. A directional antenna will still radiate from side and back lobes. Grounded mesh panel(s) between the WiFi antenna and the C-band dish will also help.

The WiFi technician should be able to walk the area with a field strength meter and identify a better placement.

Ha, yea, i guess that is a good way of putting it.. But in all fairness the WIMAX dish isn't pointed directly at the cband dish!! Yea, the technicians are NOT that technical. Where does a directional antenna get the idea thinking its okay to radiate from side and back lobes?!!? That's not very well behaved of a "Directional" antenna!