What is the optimal orientation of the R500

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 1 year ago
  • Answered
Photo of Vick Ehrmann

Vick Ehrmann

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 1 year ago

  • 1
Photo of Max O'Driscoll

Max O'Driscoll, AlphaDog

  • 322 Posts
  • 77 Reply Likes
Ideally place in centre of area to be covered horizontal upside down attached to ceiling.

Obviously varies with specific needs and especially building construction materials, line of sight opportunities, interfering radio/electrical sources, accessibiltiy for installation and areas of higher client density.

This orientation works well for my 25 APs covering large school over two sites:
common scenario 2 APs support 6 classes arranged diagonally opposite ends of classrooms lying 3 on top of 3, in extreme case it is block of 4 on top of 4. Low client density, poss 60 clients over the 2 APs at max. Obviously they are not in centre ceiling of each class but against near walls to improve coverage into next room.
(Edited)
Photo of Vick Ehrmann

Vick Ehrmann

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks Max,

Keep in mind this is not my design, was just hired to integrate it. 

Small hotel using a T5 modem as a backhaul and they want the R500 mounted to the concrete wall next to the T5. Mounting to the ceiling is not an option and the majority of the T5s are next to the bed behind the night stand. The only horizontal location is on the floor facing upward, under the night stand. 

There really isn't a good solution but have been going back and forth with the engineer that created the site design on whether the wall mount (Vertical Orientation) or floor mount (Horizontal Orientation) would offer a better solution. 
Photo of Robert Lowe

Robert Lowe

  • 147 Posts
  • 22 Reply Likes
why not change the AP to H500. This is designed to be wall mounted (at low level) and is 1/2 the physical size & 1/2 the price of the R500. Its still dual band and had PD-MRC. 
Photo of Vick Ehrmann

Vick Ehrmann

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I suggested that but never received a real answer as to why they chose to go with the R500 instead.   
Photo of Michael Brado

Michael Brado, Official Rep

  • 1982 Posts
  • 276 Reply Likes
R500 anteannas offer more coverage, as H500 is designed to cover one room (with additional LAN ports).

Sitting horizontal on the floor under the nightstand (or horizontal mounted from ceiling in the closet) would
probably provide better RF radiation pattern than wall mounted.  Concrete walls with rebar can possibly
block penetration to the next room(s), so do test with a laptop site survey at least, as you evaluate final
locations.
Photo of Robert Lowe

Robert Lowe

  • 147 Posts
  • 22 Reply Likes
Disagree with Michael on H500 use case. The H500 is an 'in room' AP as in it is designed to be wall mounted, has additional LAN ports and is physically smaller. I disagree on the coverage. No AP with EIRP of 19 & 23 DBm is designed to cover a single room. It's purpose is to allow the AP to be closer to the user and provide additional LAN services.

I have regularly installed these in hotels where the ratio is 1:3 and even up to 1:5 depending on construction.

I have also installed them in every room but have found that I need to turn off the 2.4 radio on 50% and even the 5GHz on some.

As for the R500, if you wall mount it the you have to appreciate that you are changing the AP footprint from its optimal. You will see less signal horizontally and more vertically. That said the AP had PD-MRC so performance shouldn't suffer as a result just coverage.

There is a Ruckus doc on AP mounting. I'll find it and post a link.