Prev: higher speed with wireless than wired!
Next: NEWS: Clash of the Titans: The Battle To Become The Mobile Search Leader
From: Don Phillipson on 28 Jun 2010 17:11
Wireless broadband was always marginal here (at least one
mile from the tower, with trees in the line of sight ) and became
impossible the day the windows were replaced with modern
"Energy Star" units, double-pane sealed units filled with gas
(either argon or krypton, I forget which.) I could not be sure of
the cause, but managed to reach an ISP engineer. One of his
suggestions was to try the directional wireless modem at an open
window, i.e. no glass -- which immediately provided a satisfactory
signal. I have instructions for various tests thus will quantify the
difference if I can.

The engineer said he had never heard of either window structure
(aluminum here with steel magnets that hold the fly screens in place)
or gas-filled sealed panes obstructing wireless signals. Has anyone else?

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)


From: John Navas on 28 Jun 2010 17:33
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:11:23 -0400, in <i0b3ar$gpq$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
"Don Phillipson" <e925(a)SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:

>Wireless broadband was always marginal here (at least one
>mile from the tower, with trees in the line of sight ) and became
>impossible the day the windows were replaced with modern
>"Energy Star" units, double-pane sealed units filled with gas
>(either argon or krypton, I forget which.) I could not be sure of
>the cause, but managed to reach an ISP engineer. One of his
>suggestions was to try the directional wireless modem at an open
>window, i.e. no glass -- which immediately provided a satisfactory
>signal. I have instructions for various tests thus will quantify the
>difference if I can.
>
>The engineer said he had never heard of either window structure
>(aluminum here with steel magnets that hold the fly screens in place)
>or gas-filled sealed panes obstructing wireless signals. Has anyone else?

The likely cause is window coating, which typically metal film.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
From: Mike Easter on 28 Jun 2010 17:41
Don Phillipson wrote:

> "Energy Star" units, double-pane sealed units filled with gas
> (either argon or krypton,

It isn't the gas, or the glass (itself) or the framing.

Window glass often has coatings or 'components' in or on the glass that
cause the problem, especially metallic ones.

Some of the same features/characteristics that prevent/deter infrared
radiation penetration of glass, are obstructive to wireless radio.


--
Mike Easter
From: George on 28 Jun 2010 19:26
On 6/28/2010 5:11 PM, Don Phillipson wrote:
> Wireless broadband was always marginal here (at least one
> mile from the tower, with trees in the line of sight ) and became
> impossible the day the windows were replaced with modern
> "Energy Star" units, double-pane sealed units filled with gas
> (either argon or krypton, I forget which.) I could not be sure of
> the cause, but managed to reach an ISP engineer. One of his
> suggestions was to try the directional wireless modem at an open
> window, i.e. no glass -- which immediately provided a satisfactory
> signal. I have instructions for various tests thus will quantify the
> difference if I can.
>
> The engineer said he had never heard of either window structure
> (aluminum here with steel magnets that hold the fly screens in place)
> or gas-filled sealed panes obstructing wireless signals. Has anyone else?
>

If the windows were touted as "low e" you found your problem. Various
metal oxide coatings are either in the glass or coating the glass to
lower the emissivity. Metal is also great for shielding RF.
From: DanS on 28 Jun 2010 20:12
"Don Phillipson" <e925(a)SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in
news:i0b3ar$gpq$1(a)speranza.aioe.org:

> Wireless broadband was always marginal here (at least one
> mile from the tower, with trees in the line of sight ) and
> became impossible the day the windows were replaced with
> modern "Energy Star" units, double-pane sealed units filled
> with gas (either argon or krypton, I forget which.) I
> could not be sure of the cause, but managed to reach an ISP
> engineer. One of his suggestions was to try the
> directional wireless modem at an open window, i.e. no glass
> -- which immediately provided a satisfactory signal. I
> have instructions for various tests thus will quantify the
> difference if I can.
>
> The engineer said he had never heard of either window
> structure (aluminum here with steel magnets that hold the
> fly screens in place) or gas-filled sealed panes
> obstructing wireless signals. Has anyone else?
>

Yes, that is what I told you the other day.

The engineer needs to get up to speed.


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: higher speed with wireless than wired!
Next: NEWS: Clash of the Titans: The Battle To Become The Mobile Search Leader