Hardware Feedback

I would love to see the Cambium Antenna's have an external GPS port in the same area as the RF connections with another at the top of the Antenna where the GPS puck sits.

I understand this would require another cable but I belive it would be worth it.

We are having issues with birds getting to the gps cable the current way it is. I am sure other people are having pest issues also.

This would leave the GPS cable protected.

Also a cover that clips on to protect the cables going to a smart antenna would be great too.

If not for this series it would be a great addition for the AC series.

1 Like

For pointing I'm using a small tool case with inside one 12v 5Ah battery, one small access point 2,4 Ghz wifi, a passive POE. In this way I can power any ePMP SM device (except 1000 with GPS Sync for AP and 2000) from the base of the tower and with my smartphone connected in wifi to the small access point I can reach the eAlign tool on the web interface.

I also use a magnet on my smartphone cover to attach to the tower building and leave my hands free!

One thing that I would prefer it would be longer screws on Force200 so it could fit on poles of 55/60 mm diameters and more. Actually if we use a pole more than 50 mm of diameter, we need to change screws with longer ones or we can use fixing bracket on the contrary (but then we need to use pipe wrenches to tighten the bracket).

Look at the picture too see what I mean... sorry for my bad English!

Another very bad thing that could be better is, over sector AP antenna (120 or 90 degrees) for ePMP1000 connectorized with GPS Sync as AP, you use stainless screws, those are frequently that after only some months if we need to loosen them, they often seizen up and we need to use a grinding wheel or a saw to cut them otherwise they are blocked!!!

Screw materials of Force200 or ePMP2000 antenna are really better and they won't seizen up so often!!!

Anyway keep doing such a great job!!!

Best regards,

Paolo

Hi Paolo,

Thank you for all of your great feedback and the picture. If the Force 200 had longer screws to fit poles with larger diameters, would that change the installation process for smaller poles?

Do you have any tricks that might help other community members with screws that seize up? An earlier poster mentioned dielectric grease as one way of preventing this issue.

Kindly,

Julia

Thank you all for your posts and feedback. Feel free to continue sharing.

Below is our list of winners. Please send your shipping address to solutions@cambiumnetworks.com and include your shirt size.

ttelford

jydcom

vidyait

ninedd

reighbread

newkirk

mkamel

tboggess

brubble1

Chris_Bay

Chris-T

paolo-pftech

1 Like

Hi Julia,

can't wait to get the t-shirt! :) Thanks!

Here in Italy we use poles from 40 to 60-70 mm of diameters, so I think Force200 with screws just 2-3 cm longer would be enough. I think in smaller poles that wouldn't be a problem, even because the mounting bracket would be always the same.

About the screws that seize up, the problem occurs only with stainless steel screws like Force110 or Connectorized AP Antennas (those 90 and 120 degrees panel from Cambium). Using screws like Force200 o ePMP2000 that are not stainless steel, they won't seize up, even after 1 year under rain and other weather conditions.

Anyway for preventing stainless steel to seizen up, I've used marine grease with lithium that really rocks and works perfectly even after about 10 months in a tower in mountain!

Hope this may help...

Kindly regards,

Paolo

Julia, since you asked for feedback - good or bad - the following is a repost of what I posted back last fall. 

This needs to be fixed.....

Would whoever is in charge of the mechanical design of the Force 110 parabolics change the design of the clamp assembly to the same as the clamp assembly on the Force 200's. 

 

The Force 200 clamp assembly is much easier to install and align at customer's locations than the Force 110

clamp design. 

Most importantly, you can actually adjust the azmuth and elevation of the Force 200 parabolic's. 

Every time we install a Force 110, we verbally spit out every cuss word in the book trying to get one aligned. 

 

I agree with you Danny but I think with Force200, the old Force110 are unuseful and except to mount them on larger antennas!!!

Force200 clamp assembly rocks... except for poles larger than 50 mm!! :)


@Danny Ray Boyer wrote:

The Force 200 clamp assembly is much easier to install and align at customer's locations than the Force 110

clamp design. 

Most importantly, you can actually adjust the azimuth and elevation of the Force 200 parabolic's. 


Danny,

Thank you for re-sharing this information. Why is the Force 200 clamp assembly much easier to install?

How do you currently make azimuth and elevation adjustments to the Force 110? Are there any tricks that you have picked up over time to overcome the mechanical design challenges that other community members could learn from? 

"Every time we install a Force 110, we verbally spit out every cuss word in the book trying to get one aligned. "

You poor man, how often do you have to deal with those horrible things these days ? We still have some around for installs where we need the 2nd ethernet port to power another radio but thankfully that is almost never.  Even then when possible I'll just run second cat5 or use a 2ft ubiquiti dish to avoid having to mess with a 110 dish.

At least they improved the speed on their terrible UI.  Mounting a 110 with the buggy and slow as molasses UI was most rage inducing combination I ever had the displeasure of working with. 

1 Like

First off, I love the picture Julia chose on the opening post. That tower looks very familiar....

Force 180 would be perfect with a ball joint mount - like the UBNT nanobeam.  We often have to mount these on non-vertical "things" and we end up using a  Mimosa mini-bar mount to bring the Force 180 into vertical alignment.  RF Elements made a ball joint for the old integrated radio and I was hoping to see one for the Force 180.  And a bubble level on the top of the Force 180 for those that are very particular about perfectly level mounting.

Love the new Force 200 dish.  I bring it and a 1/2" ratcheting wrench up and that is all I need (I think the bolts are actually a mm size but the 1/2" fits nicely).

The ground lug on the 2000 AP is impossible to get at once the radio is mounted in the sector antenna housing.  We have to remove the radio at the top of the tower to get our ground leads on.  I hate having to remove anything 100' in the air.

For alignment, we use a small 110v battery power suply: http://a.co/a2o7KgO  I love this device. We plug in the Cambium injector into it and use our laptop to get at it. That battery runs for many installs before charging.

I also love the fallback IP address that is on every ePMP radio.  That is how we get at them for alignment. Don't have to lookup IPs in the field.  The only cautionary tale is make sure you log into the radio BEFORE it attaches to an AP.  Once it is attached to an AP, you really have no idea which radio on your network will answer the fallback IP request.  We got burned with that a couple times before we realized some other radio out there was answering, not the one we were physically attached to.

2 Likes

@Au Wireless wrote:

I also love the fallback IP address that is on every ePMP radio.  That is how we get at them for alignment. Don't have to lookup IPs in the field.  The only cautionary tale is make sure you log into the radio BEFORE it attaches to an AP.  Once it is attached to an AP, you really have no idea which radio on your network will answer the fallback IP request.  We got burned with that a couple times before we realized some other radio out there was answering, not the one we were physically attached to.


A few things help with that problem - surest is to set up an L3 firewall rule on all radios (APs and SMs) to block traffic with dest IP 169.254.1.1 on WLAN interfaces.  (not simple if you have to add to hundreds of radios by hand - but simple if you roll it into your default config, or use cnMaestro to push the settings)  Strictly speaking, you should only need that rule on the APs to achieve the same effect.

Anyway, sorry for the OT response.

j

2 Likes

AU Wireless,

Thank you for all of your feedback. This is extremely helpful for us to hear both what we are doing well and what we should continue to work on.

I appreciated all of the good ePMP man shots in your video, and it was great to see an installation from your perspective, except for when the camera pointed downwards, then it was a little unnerving (However, I'm continually impressed by how high tower climbers climb to get people connected).


@Au Wireless wrote:

Force 180 would be perfect with a ball joint mount - like the UBNT nanobeam.  We often have to mount these on non-vertical "things" and we end up using a  Mimosa mini-bar mount to bring the Force 180 into vertical alignment.  RF Elements made a ball joint for the old integrated radio and I was hoping to see one for the Force 180.  And a bubble level on the top of the Force 180 for those that are very particular about perfectly level mounting.

The ground lug on the 2000 AP is impossible to get at once the radio is mounted in the sector antenna housing.


Where would be a better grounding lug location, and why?

Other community members, what equipment do you use to mount the Force 180 on non-vertical "things"?

This on the AP side??

Screen Shot 2017-07-18 at 4.13.11 PM.png

Better spot for the ground lug??  Maybe the bottom?  Another request on the ground lug - make the head of the lug bolt larger. When we try to put anything larger than like 14 gauge wire on there, it won't stay under the screw head - the screw head just pushes it out.

I'm not a fan of the ground lug on the back, the biggest reason is it makes it sigifianctly more difficult to field service.  

everything in the air is complicated 10 fold,   if we need to replace one after the install,  bending 6ga (my desired minimium ground contact) is difficult, if its on the back of the radio the person having to replace it has to free the radio from the sector, then some how hold the radio safely while disconnecting and then reconnecting the new radio, this is a saftey hazzard due to drop risk of the radio. the ground lug needs to be accessiable after the radio has been safely attached to the sector to reduce drop hazzard in my opinion.


attached is a photo of commonly used 6ga single hole ground lug.   double hole lugs are the most common used for the cell carriers.   i'd be happy with this sized lug contact with   quarter 20 hardware, this lug is sized for 3/8 hardware.  


as a side note, if you designed this lug hole to pass all the way through the radio, and makes contact near the most heat generating componet of the radios, i'm willing to bet having this thick of a ground contact would have an extra impact on the overall temp of the radio. 


@Cambium_Julia wrote:

Chris,

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the visual. For the ePMP 2000, the grounding screw was moved to the back of the radio, where you can attach larger gauge cables because you are no longer limited by the tight enclosure in the radio. What are your thoughts on this placement?

Feel free to ignore the salt/fog labeling and that the grounding screw is a little smaller than it is supposed to be.


 


@Chris_Bay wrote:
everything in the air is complicated 10 fold, if we need to replace one after the install,  bending 6ga (my desired minimium ground contact) is difficult, if its on the back of the radio the person having to replace it has to free the radio from the sector, then some how hold the radio safely while disconnecting and then reconnecting the new radio, this is a saftey hazzard due to drop risk of the radio.


How would a climber hold the radio while changing the grounding cable? It seems like you wouldn't have enough hands or horizontal surfaces to make that change. I can now understand why there would be a drop risk during that switch, and why it would be easier to have the grounding lug on the front of the radio.
 

@Cambium_Julia wrote:

@Chris_Bay wrote:
everything in the air is complicated 10 fold, if we need to replace one after the install,  bending 6ga (my desired minimium ground contact) is difficult, if its on the back of the radio the person having to replace it has to free the radio from the sector, then some how hold the radio safely while disconnecting and then reconnecting the new radio, this is a saftey hazzard due to drop risk of the radio.


How would a climber hold the radio while changing the grounding cable? It seems like you wouldn't have enough hands or horizontal surfaces to make that change. I can now understand why there would be a drop risk during that switch, and why it would be easier to have the grounding lug on the front of the radio.
 

the problem is a climber can't really use a hand to hold the screw, screw driver and the radio. you've got to find a place to pin the radio down while you get the screw and cable lined up, then grab the radio to tighten the screw.   the flat surface space is nearly none existent so you've got to use your leg to do it. 

having the grounding lug on the front would make it easier because the ground cable wouldn't be installed until the radio has been installed on the sector antenna, then there is no need to hold onto the radio while trying to screw in the ground cable and at this point the drop risk is changed from 1 pound radio to a bolt or screw weighing less than an ounce. 

1 Like

There are NO tricks when trying to mount Force 110 parabolics.

If you look at the Force 200's, the design of its mount is much superior to the design of the Force 110 mount. 

For example, on the Force 200's - you mount the parabolic on the pole and point it in the general direction that it is suppossed to aim.

Adjust the azmuth left and right.  

Lock down the azmuth adjustment, then loosen other second set of screws on the mount and adjust the elevation for max signal.  Then tighten the elevation screws. 

Go back and loosen the azmuth screws and pan the azmuth of the dish for max signal.  Tighten up everything and you are done. 

On the Force 110 parabolics, you have only ONE SET OF SCREWS that tightens up everything. 

You cannot make both azmuth and elevation adjustments at the same time, plus tighten up the one set of bolts and expect the parabolic to stay where you want it. 

Have the guy that designed the Force 110 mount go up a tower an try to mount one himself.  He will be ashamed for every putting that mount on the market.

Futhermore, you would think that customers (such as us) that (for various reasons) pay extra buying the ePMP AP's and SM's radios and the Force 110 parabolics (instead of the Force 200 paraboloics) would be getting a decent mount with the parabolics. 

Someone in management with some mechanical experience needs to get a Force 110 and a Force 200 and compare the two mounts.  They will easily be able to see the difference.

brubble 1 says it correctly in his post: "Mounting a 110 with the buggy and slow as molasses UI was most rage inducing combination I ever had the displeasure of working with. 

I, and many others out in the field, agree with brubble 1's comments above.

Danny Ray Boyer,

Thank you for your honest feedback. We value your input and conduct these conversations to clearly and exactly understand your needs. Our design team is fully engaged in incorporating your feedback, and you will see proof of that in our future products.

Sincerely,

Julia

OK

Many thanks

jyd