Hi  @ITV 

 

(1) - the top interference content block is empty. With the EAP245, this was filled with the 3 EAP's and a certain percentage.

>>>Could you please share with us some screenshots of this page?

 

(2) - high drop rates - sometimes over 60% for longer period of time. With the EAP245 this was zero all the time.

>>>UR EAP Calculation mechanism is different from EAP245 and generally counts more dropped packets. Let's focus on issue 3;

 

(3) - clients seem to be sticky and don't select the best possible EAP. This was not the case with the EAP245's.

Please give us the following info to understand this issue:

1. Are the three EAP653 UR installed at the same locations as EAP245?

2. What's the distance between them?

3. What kinds of clients are having this issue? Or all wireless clients?

 

  @Vincent-TP 

 

Thank you for your quick response and to the point questions - great!

 

(1) - See atttached image: this is the top-interference block as I see it in de local Omada controller.

This applies for both tabs - 2.4-Ghz and 5-Ghz.

 

 

 

(2) - I understand - calculation method is important - also because I don't believe an all zero's all the time.

 

(3) - below some more details.

Yes - all 3 EAP's are in the same building and about 15-20 meters from each other.

All 3 have low settings on transmit power:

* 2.4-Ghz: custom with a value of 9 (same as EAP245)

* 5-Ghz: low (same as EAP245)

Reason for this setup is the thick walls and HR++ windows between the 3.

 

All wireless clients have the same issues. What worries me most is the drop in client signal strength as reported by the EAP.

On average the EAP245 reported a client signal strength of 60-dBm. While the EAP653-UR reports an average of 70-dBm.

Since this is a drop-in replacement (i.e. everything else being equal) it is not something I would expect.

 

However the 653-UR is smaller then the EAP245 - most likely because the antennas are smaller. With the site-effect of less signal receiver coverage. With that in mind: would the EAP683-UR be a better choice? Since the device is even bigger then the EAP245 and also has more antenna's it may have a better signal receiver coverage?

 

What is your view on all the above?

 

 

With warm regards - Will

 

 

 

 

  @Mjimsas - no - wasn't able to fix this.

 

I shipped them all back and (re-)added the EAP245.

 

  @Oliv2831 - mmm... interesting case...

 

First - I'm not aware of an EAP245 with a PoE-out port.

Second - the EAP245 is labelled as EOL - meaning it may not be available.

 

Which leaves the EAP653-UR or EAP683-UR as a kind of next-best-thing. 

But honestly - neither of these have the signal quality of the EAP245.

At least not the ones I have tested for a short period of time.

 

You may want to consider the EAP613 or EAP653 (preferred), install one in each room and keep the transmit levels to a minimum.

For example use 10-mW for the 2.4-Ghz radio and 15 or 20-mW for the 5-Ghz radio.

 

This would (kind-of) force your devices to pick the 5-Ghz radio.

Which then gives the best performance because there is a radio in each room.

 

If an EAP breaks, the devices in that room may still have 5.0-Ghz connectivity from the adjacent room.

 

Would you be in a position to share a floorplan of the building and its rooms (including sizes)?

What materials are used in the walls and ceilings?

 

 

 

  @Oliv2831 

 

The 5-Ghz band is quite sensitive for walls and other "obstructions".

Meaning for the best possible performance you would probably need WiFi-6 devices.

The EAP245 doesn't have this. And is only a good choice in "quite" WiFi environments.

 

Based on the testresults with UR models and a laptop with a 2 meter distance it is not worth the money.

Hence the suggestion for having a 653 in each room.

 

The 615- and 655-wall might also be a good alternative as they have a PoE out port.

However, having this model in each room is kind of mandatory...

 

Outdoor models have a far better reach - up to 300 m2 (i.e. up to 9,77 meter radius).

But they have no PoE out port and are at least 50% more expensive.

 

Please note that all these radius results are theoretical...

The final "say" is the wall between the room and the hallway.

Combined with the transmit power of any given mobile device.

 

To summarize:

Area (m²)	Radius (m)
144	≈ 6.77 m
188	≈ 7.74 m
300	≈ 9.77 m

 

Btw - did you know the controller is able to run coverage simulations?

You could run this on a laptop, create room lay-outs with the EAPs.

It then gives you a kind-of heat-chart showing the coverage across the room(s).