I used to be told not to connect clients outside of the primary antenna pattern for fixed wireless. I’m not sure how valid that is universally, but it has stuck with me.
I am considering the XV2 Sector and Omni for some outdoor locations.
I am now curious - if I only need minimal coverage behind the primary coverage area, and if the projected coverage is enough for the back side of the XV2-2T1 (Sector), is there any logical reason to avoid using it? A different way - if I only need minimal coverage on one side of the AP, is it appropriate to rely on the limited rearward coverage of the sector, or should I always get the omni if I need any rearward coverage?
Hi @uberdome , in looking at the antenna patterns for both APs from the design docs, we can see that the coverage from the back lobe of the XV2-2T1 sectorized is significantly less than the XV2-2T0 omni. My own testing validates what the antenna patterns report. While there is some coverage supplied by the back lobe of the sectorized antenna, generally speaking, sectorized antennas focus the RF energy out the front of the antenna, thus reduce the coverage supplied by the back lobe. You can use our free online Wi-Fi Designer tool (see link below) to assist you determine what the coverage these APs will provide on your particular site map.
Thank you for the detailed reply; but it doesn’t answer what I intended to ask. I do use the Wi-Fi designer already, and I am comfortable with the rearward gain for the coverage I need.
My question is a bit more functional. I suppose I could ask it like this: if signal is projected to be enough to the rear of a sector, is it appropriate to use that signal on the back side of the sector?
The sector is designed to block signal to the rear… are there fundamental problems with relying on the signal to the side or rear of a sector antenna other than reduced gain?
