Effectiveness of Reflective 2D and 3D Parabolic Shapes on Router Wi-Fi Signal

Strength Over Distance

Rebekah Kettler Keegan Laporte
Macomb Mathematics Science Technology Center
Physics
12B
McMillan / Cybulski / Dewey / Tallman
8 December 2014

Effectiveness of Reflective 2D and 3D Parabolic Shapes on Router Wi-Fi Signal

Strength Over Distance
The purpose of this research was to determine the effect of metallic reflective
antenna attachments on the strength of a Netis router signal to a Toshiba Satellite
Laptop over predetermined distances. Three antenna attachments were tested. The first
was a shallow parabolic dish that was placed behind the Netis router where the focus of
the dish was the center of the single antenna approximately one inch down the pole.
The second and third attachments tested were two different interpretations of a design
known as the Windsurfer Parabolic Reflector. The key difference between these two
designs was the use of aluminum inside the crossbar of the design.
The data for the power level was collected using open source software called
InSSIDer Home, and the data was collected as average decibel-milliwatts, or dBm. This
data was compared using descriptive analysis and it was determined that at 150 and
200 feet, all three antenna attachments were found to have a five and seven dBm
increase respectfully. The three attachments were all determined to be comparable in
their ability to increase the strength of the router signal at all distances. It is hoped that
future research can into further development of antenna attachments and their use in
providing improved signal strength of routers that utilize external antenna technology.

Table of Contents

Introduction.............................................................................................................1
Review of Literature................................................................................................3
Problem Statement.................................................................................................9
Experimental Design.............................................................................................11
Data and Observation...........................................................................................16
Data Analysis and Interpretation...........................................................................20
Conclusion............................................................................................................24
Acknowledgements...............................................................................................27
Appendix A Windsurfer Attachment Design One..................................................29
Appendix B Windsurfer Attachment Design Two..................................................31
Appendix C Parabolic Dish Focus........................................................................33
Appendix D InSSIDer Home Program..................................................................34
Appendix E Router Setup for Netis.......................................................................36
Appendix F Calculations.......................................................................................37
Works Cited..........................................................................................................38

Kettler - Laporte 1

Introduction
In 1997, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, or IEEE,
released the Standards IEEE 802.11, which detail the regulations and usage of
devices that would use wireless radio communication at the 2.4 GHz range to
communicate with a device through a network. This began the age of Wireless
Local Area Networking, or the well-known name, Wi-Fi (Wireless).
Modern Wi-Fi access points, typically a device called a router, transmit
radio signals at 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz frequency. Through radio signals, a router
transmits to and receives data from a device it is communicating with. A reliable
Wi-Fi signal that allows communication requires a minimum power output,
usually called signal strength, of -70 decibel-milliwatts, or dBm, while the set
maximum achievable signal strength is -30 dBm as defined by the IEEE in the
Standards for 802.11 (Part 11).
In 2012 approximately 61% of U.S. households had some form of wireless
system installed in their home (Lardinois). Today, users of wireless devices seek
consistent signal strength provided by their home router at any position in their
home. While most standard wireless antennas are non-directional monopole
antennas, or single wire antennas that disperse a signal in all directions, the
application of directing the signal of a router to improve the communication
between a device and its access point is worth considering. Antenna attachments
would provide a cheap and simple solution to a poor wireless signal of a router.
Given that many houses were built before architects could consider where a

Kettler - Laporte 2
wireless signal would most effectively propagate throughout a house, many
houses have poorly designed wiring that limits the router position to places
behind walls, at the far side of a house, or deep in basements (Purdy). These
antenna attachments have the potential to improve a signal inside a household
by aiming them upwards, or towards far sides of a structure, increasing the
coverage of the signal.
This research seeks to provide insight on the concept behind using a
metallic surface to reflect and focus a router signal in a specific direction to
improve the strength of a signal received by a wireless device. This research also
hopes to determine how 2D and 3D parabolic, metallic, antenna attachments
improve the received strength of a Netis routers signal by a computer. By testing
two types of a 2D design known as the Windsurfer, and one 3D parabolic dish, it
is hoped this research can provide meaningful information on improving signal
strength using antenna attachments, and better the wireless experience of router
users.

Kettler - Laporte 3

Review of Literature
Wi-Fi routers in the United States are devices that communicate with
computers and other Wi-Fi compatible devices by emitting radio waves at a
frequency of either 2.4, or 5 Gigahertz. For the 2.4GHz band, which was focused
on, there are 11 channels that are used in the United States, shown as x10 FCC
in figure 1 below (Lan/man). When multiple emitters such as a business with
multiple routers are used at the same time, modern routers are programmed to
automatically attempt to disperse their signals across these channels to reduce
traffic of communication. For these 11 channels there are no significant
differences between interference properties of each frequency.

Figure 1. IEEE Standard for Information Technology (Lan/man)

Kettler - Laporte 4
Wi-Fi is used to transfer high-speed data over distances around a few 100
meters, depending on product and placement. Since the beginning of Wi-Fi in
1985, the standards have been improved upon and the speeds have increased.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers is an international
organization of engineers and scientists in various fields of electronics, whose
purpose is To foster technological innovation and excellence for the benefit of
humanity (IEEE).
For routers to connect to a device such as a computer or mobile device,
under perfect conditions these radio signals have a direct line of sight with the
device to create a connection. Signal strength is measured using decibelmilliwatts, known as dBm, which is a logarithmic measure of power (Baird;
Acceptable Wi-Fi Signal Strengths). This unit stems from using milliwatts,
shortened as mW, a standard unit of power of an electrical device, combined with
the logarithmic measurement of intensity, decibels, which expresses the ratio
between two values of a physical quantity (Young). This scale provides an
understandable value of power emitted from a router or other device. The
formula below is used for calculating dBm from mW
dBm 10log 10 (mW )
However, in most cases, perfect conditions for signal strength meet the
interference of walls and other structures which cause loss of signal due to the
absorption and reflection of a material (Wi-Fi and Bluetooth). This loss of signal,
called attenuation, is specific to each material. Each material has a specific
coefficient of attenuation associated with it in regards to the absorption rate of

Kettler - Laporte 5
waves measured in decibels. ("Attenuation of Sound Waves; How Signal Is
Affected). Large, complex structures, such as houses, not only have a variety of
materials which cause varying amounts of attenuation, but also have interference
by metal such as copper wiring in a structure, duck work, or in some cases, the
buildings like skyscrapers out of steel and iron can also have interference. This is
similar to the faraday cage effect where a metal completely blocks off a signal if it
fully surrounds it (Rubin).
Wi-Fi signals can also be boosted by means of different types of antenna;
directional or non-directional. Different types of antenna will change the radio
signal dispersion in a radius around the router differently (Fung), however,
direction antennas provide higher signal strengths over non-directional antennas
when aimed properly. This is because by focusing the limited amount of strength
of a signal in one direction versus many, the received strength in the intended
direction will receive more of signal without even considering other factors. This
same concept was applied towards antenna attachments used on normally nondirectional antennas such as the Netis router antenna.

Kettler - Laporte 6

Figure 2. Signal Pattern for 2D Parabolic Shape

Attachments to antennas can also be used to improve the signal strength
received by a device by reflecting part of the non-directional signal off a metal
surface towards an area to increase the strength of the signal received. Figure 2
shows a visual of this effect.
By increasing the electromagnetic waves of the signal being reflected
towards an area, a device can more effectively detect and interpret the data
being received. Antenna attachments that function like this are satellite dishes
such as the Deep Dish Cylindrical Parabolic Template (Erskine), and the two
main designs being tested. The two designs being tested are the 2D parabolic
shaped Windsurfer and the shallow, 3D parabolic dish. While both designs are
similar in their functions of reflecting wave patterns in a forward direction,
differences in the power gain of the designs are expected because of the shape
and nature of the reflection, while a 2D reflector should bounce the signal from
the attachment in the forward direction, the signal will be reflected in the same Z
axis direction it began at. However, the 3D reflector should reflect the signal in a

Kettler - Laporte 7
broader manor. Possible differences in the power gains of the antenna
attachment designs are expected to be caused by this difference.
To measure the power of the router signal, Wi-Fi analyzer programs such
as InSSIDer Home are used to report data about nearby sources of Wi-Fi. This
software shows the signal levels of any router nearby in dBm values and displays
a real time graph of the signal strength and channel of the router signal
(Voyager8).

Figure 3. Graph of Logarithmic function

All the data was collected using a Toshiba Satellite laptop running the WiFi analyzer software InSSIDer Home. The software reads the power level of an
access point, the router, in dBm. To understand how dBm works, it must be
broken into its two main components- Decibels, and milli-watts. The decibel, or
10 times less than the Bel, the standard of unit of intensity, represents the
loudness of a wave. It is measured on a logarithmic scale.
dBm 10log 10 mW
The formula is shown above; see Appendix E for sample calculation. The
advantage of using decibels is to represent a very large span of values. Because
decibels, or Bels, have no unit, the unit milli-watt is used as a standard unit of

Kettler - Laporte 8
power, representing

0 dBm

as one Watt. In is important to note then, that all

negative values of dBm are actually small values between zero and one. See
Figure 3 for a visual.

Kettler - Laporte 9

Problem Statement
Problem:
To measure a significant power level difference of three reflector
attachments; two types of Windsurfer attachments and one parabolic dish, on a
Netis router compared to the unaltered standard Netis router antenna.
Hypothesis:
It was predicted that the second Windsurfer design would have the
greatest power increase compared to the standard Netis router antenna, and that
the antenna attachments would each produce at minimum a three decibelmilliwatt increase from the standard Netis router antenna.
Data Measured:
Three antenna attachments were tested. The first was a shallow parabolic
dish that was placed behind the Netis router in such a way that the focus of the
dish was the center of the single antenna approximately one inch down the pole.
The second and third attachments tested were two different interpretations of a
design known as the Windsurfer Parabolic Reflector. The key difference between
these two designs was the use of aluminum inside the crossbar of the design.
The data for the power level was collected using open source software called
InSSIDer Home. The independent variable was distance. Each data point was
measured across distance at intervals of 25 feet up to 200 feet in a direct line of
sight of the Netis router. Eight trials for each attachment were done. The
dependent variable was the power of the router. The power level of the router

Kettler - Laporte 10
was monitored for 30 seconds using the InSSIDer software and recorded in
average decibel-milliwatts, or dBm.

Kettler - Laporte 11

Experimental Design
Materials:
Windsurfer Attachment Design One
(Appendix A)
Windsurfer Attachment Design Two
(Appendix B)
Parabolic Dish (Appendix C)

InSSIDer Home (Appendix D)

Netis Router (Appendix E)
Toshiba Satellite Laptop
Extension Cord 100 Ft
(2) T.V Tables

Kettler Laporte 12
Measuring Tape
Blank Paper (8X11)
Marker
Windsurfer Design One.
Windsurfer Design Two.
Measuring tape
Netis Router
Extension Cord
Toshiba Satellite Laptop
T.V Table (1)

Figure 4. Main Experiment Materials

Shown in Figure 4 are the main materials used throughout the experiment.
The T.V tables were used to create a stable surface to measure the signal from.
The parabolic dish and the 8x11 sheet of paper are not viewed in the picture,
however the parabolic dish can be seen in seen in Appendix C and the 8X11
sheet can be seen in use in figure 4. Use of the software can be seen in
Appendix D.

Procedure:
Setup:
1. Follow Appendices A and B for instructions for constructing the Windsurfer
designs for testing. Construction must be completed prior to testing.

Kettler Laporte 13
2. Ensure the area for conducting the experiment is at least 200 feet in one
direction without any physical obstructions.
3. Plug extension cords into a nearby wall socket. Then plug the router into
the extension cord and bring the router out into an open area. Set the
router onto one of the T.V. tables.
4. Set the Toshiba Satellite laptop onto a second T.V table away from the
router.
5. Using the Toshiba Satellite laptop, connect to the wireless signal given off
by the router for the Windows 7 operating system. Click on the wireless
connections icon and connect to Netis. The signal given off should also
warn that it is not connected to the internet. This is normal and not a factor
for the experiment.
6. Troubleshooting if the router is not establishing a signal to the computer,
unplug and re-plug the router to the extension cord and refresh the
computers Wi-Fi connection queue.
7. Take a large piece of paper to act as a placemat for the router, using a
protractor and marker, mark off 12 points 30 degrees apart in a circle with
the router in the center. This mat is used to center the router in the
direction the computer will be measured from. See Figure 5 to see the
drawing design.

Kettler Laporte 14

Figure 5. Drawing Design and Setup

Part 1: Measuring Power Gain of Unaltered Netis Router Signal
1. Set up the computer so that it is 25 feet away from the router in an
unobstructed 200 foot path. The computer should be kept at the same
elevation as the router using the T.V. tables.
2. Open the InSSIDer software and record the average power of the Wi-Fi
signal in decibel-milliwatts. See Appendix D for finding the average power
measurement.
3. Continue to move the computer away from the router in increments of 25
feet in a straight path. Collect data up to 200 feet.

Part 2: Measuring Power Gain of Parabolic Dish Attachment

1. After finding the focus point of the parabolic dish, see Appendix C, place
the Netis router so that the distance to the center of the parabolic dish,
the focus point distance, is approximately an inch below the top of the
antenna.

Kettler Laporte 15
2. Set up the computer so that it is 25 feet away from the router. The
computer should continue to be the same elevation as the router. Make
sure that there is a clear path between the computer and the router.
3. Open the InSSIDer software and record the average power of the Wi-Fi
signal in decibel-milliwatts. See appendix D for finding the average power
measurement.
4. Continue to move the computer away from the router in increments of 25
feet following a straight path. Collect data up to 200 feet.

Part 3: Measuring Power Gain of Windsurfer Attachments

1. Place the original Windsurfer design over the top of the Netis router
antenna, and center the design so that it is aimed directly towards the path
of the computer. Refer to figure 5 for a visual.
2. Repeat steps 2-4 from Part 2 for windsurfer trials
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 for the second Windsurfer attachment.

Diagrams:

Kettler Laporte 16

Figure 6. Windsurfer Attachments Setup

Figure 6 shows how the Wi-Fi router looks with the Windsurfer antenna
attachment on it. During the trials, the Netis router is to be set up so that the
antenna is at the center of the mat and the router itself is in front of it, and is
pointing directly at the Toshiba Satellite laptop.

Kettler Laporte 17

Data and Observation

Table 1
Data and Observations For Normal Omni-Pole Antenna
Trial
Number

Router
Design
No
Attachment
No
Attachment
No
Attachment
No
Attachment
No
Attachment
No
Attachment
No
Attachment
No
Attachment

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Power
(DecibelMilliwatt)

Date

Distance
(ft)

11/4/2015

25

Constant

-52

11/4/2015

50

Constant

-54

11/4/2015

75

Fluctuated by 1 dBm but not a problem

-53

11/4/2015

100

Fluctuated by 1 dBm but not a problem

-54

11/4/2015

125

Constant

-54

11/4/2015

150

Constant

-55

11/4/2015

175

Constant

-60

11/4/2015

200

Constant

-65

Observations

Table 1 shows the observations of the trials and the power values of the
router using the unaltered Netis antenna. The data was found using the InSSIDer
Home software on the researchers computer used for the experiment. The data
is also interpreted graphically on the software to determine if a signal was
constant over time or had minor fluctuation. If the data fluctuated over time, it
was taken into account for the interpretation of the data in the next section.
Table 2
Data and Observation Table For Reflective Parabolic Dish
Trial
Number
1
2
3
4
5

Router
Design
Parabolic
Dish
Parabolic
Dish
Parabolic
Dish
Parabolic
Dish
Parabolic
Dish

Power
(DecibelMilliwatt)

Date

Distance
(ft)

11/4/2015

25

Constant

-51

11/4/2015

50

Constant

-53

11/4/2015

75

Constant

-53

11/4/2015

100

Constant

-53

11/4/2015

125

Fluctuated by 1 dBm
but not a problem

-53

Observations

Kettler Laporte 18
Power
(DecibelMilliwatt)

Trial
Number

Router
Design

Date

Distance
(ft)

Parabolic
Dish

11/4/2015

150

Constant

-54

Parabolic
Dish

11/4/2015

175

Fluctuated, by 1 dBm
but not a problem
down towards -54

-55

Parabolic
Dish

11/4/2015

200

Constant

-58

Observations

Table 2 shows the power values of the router using the Netis antenna with
the parabolic dish. While in trial five and eight the power oscillated between more
than one value, the value chosen by the researchers best represented the power
at that particular point. The fact that the power was not constant for these trials is
recorded throughout the analysis of the data and further discussed in Appendix C
on how to interpret the InSSIDer software.
Table 3
Data and Observation Table For Original Windsurfer Design
Trial
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Router
Design
Windsurfer
One
Windsurfer
One
Windsurfer
One
Windsurfer
One
Windsurfer
One
Windsurfer
One
Windsurfer
One
Windsurfer
One

Power
(DecibelMilliwatt)

Date

Distance
(ft)

11/4/2015

25

Constant

-51

11/4/2015

50

Constant

-53

11/4/2015

75

Fluctuated by 1 dBm but

not a problem

-53

11/4/2015

100

Constant

-53

11/4/2015

125

Constant

-53

11/4/2015

150

Constant

-54

11/4/2015

175

Constant

-54

11/4/2015

200

Constant

-58

Observations

Table 3 shows the power values of the router using the Netis antenna with
the original Windsurfer design from Appendix A. For this router design, only trial
three had an inconsistent power value by one dBm.

Kettler Laporte 19

Table 4
Data and Observation Table For Second Windsurfer Design
Trial
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Router
Design
Windsurfer
Two
Windsurfer
Two
Windsurfer
Two
Windsurfer
Two
Windsurfer
Two
Windsurfer
Two
Windsurfer
Two
Windsurfer
Two

Date

Distance
(ft)

11/6/2015

25

Fluctuated from at -49dBm to

-50dbm

11/6/2015

50

Constant

11/6/2015

75

Constant

11/6/2015

100

Constant

11/6/2015

125

Fluctuated by 1 dBm but not a

problem

11/6/2015

150

Constant

11/6/2015

175

Fluctuated by 2 dBm

11/6/2015

200

Constant

Observations

Power
(DecibelMilliwatt)
-49
-52
-52
-52
-53
-54
-55
-58

Table 4 shows the power values of the router using the Netis antenna with
the second Windsurfer design in from Appendix A. For this router design, trial
one, five, and seven had varying power values. No specific reasons were found
for this problem but the value that the signal best represented was picked based
on the amount of time on this value versus other values. For example, for trial
one, the power was between -49 dBm and -50 dBm, but was more often on -49
dBm, so this value was recorded.

Kettler Laporte 20

Diagram:

Figure 7. Sample Router Signal Setup

Shown in Figure 7 was a sample test done on the router to show how the
signal from the router was read. The signal for the router is shown under the
SIGNAL column, and refreshes ever second. A constant signal will have the
same signal value for 30 seconds or more. In the software use the graph on the
right to determine if the signal remains mostly constant. Occasionally there will
be power drops created by the electrical source used to power the router. This
problem was present in every trial that was conducted. While the power drops
were for nearly every trial able to be easily detected visually and ignored, for the
trials that varied this could have potentially caused inconsistent data. It is not
believed that this was the case for the trials conducted. Any trial that was found
unreliable was retested to an acceptable amount of variance. See Appendix C for
more details on using the InSSIDer Home software.

Kettler Laporte 21
Data Analysis and Interpretation
It should be specifically pointed out that the data received by the InSSIDer
software and interpreted below are averages found by observing the real-time
data over time intervals of 30 seconds. Most of the data points collected were
constant in such a way that a single number could reflect the value at that
distance of that router setup. However any fluctuations observed during that time,
usually a fluctuation from one point up and down by at most two dBm, were
interpreted by the researchers as random errors and therefore recorded in the all
graphical or table interpretations as limitations of the testing method.
Many outside factors of the experiment were accounted for, such as
varying signals and large object interference, like cars and buildings. However
several outside factors should be mentioned as possible problems with the data
collection. Mentioned above, fallouts randomly appeared in the graphs of the
data every few minutes. It is expected that the fallouts were caused by the
electrical supply to the router causing random jumps in the power level of the
router. This reason was expected because not only did the power level of the
router itself drop out, but a majority of the time multiple access points power
levels dropped by several dBm at that same. But once again the researchers
were able to notice these fallouts and ignore their effects because they were
typically over 10 dBm in power.
Another uncontrollable outside factor was the various other access points
that were within range of the experiment setup. These consisted of the routers
used within the building the research was nearby, as well as the routers of the

Kettler Laporte 22
houses nearby. These signals were dispersed across the 11 different channels
available, and throughout the experiment were on top of, and overlapping the
Netis signal. However, this interference was again not expected to have caused
any real interference with the data collected because of the nature of the signal
recorded (H. Mike). An analog of the why this interference does not cause an
effect on can be described in terms of how a person can hear others talking. If
two people were talking over each other, similar to if two access points were
communicating on the same channel, a person would not hear the volume at
which either person is speaking any differently if there were to only be one
person. In the same way, the InSSIDer software was able detect the power of the
unique Netis router signal without noticing interference from other devices.
The control measurement of the experiment, labeled as No Attachment in
the data, was measuring the antenna of the Netis router without any attachment.
This allowed the researchers compare the attachment setup to a real model of
the signal, the control, versus compared to an abstract expected value. That way
any outside factors that could have affected the data would have affected all the
data types. The distances from which the router was measured throughout the
trials were not randomized. It was not believed that randomization would reduce
or eliminate any outside factors that could have affected the data. However, the
signal of the router was measured for at least 30 seconds of a constant signal,
when applicable, to determine the average value of the signal for each trial.
The data was analyzed by comparing the different types of antenna
attachments to one another on a line graph. This method was determined to be

Kettler Laporte 23
the most helpful for visualizing how the power of the antenna setups behaved at
the different distances measured. There was not a specific statistical test
performed because the results achieved by the research were considered to be
single point averages, not a series of data points that could be averaged.
Changing this method of measuring to create multiple data points that could be
averaged was considered unnecessary because of the ability to monitor the
change of the power and record an equally accurate measurement.
-40
-45
-50
Power (dBm) -55

Normal
Reflective Dish
WindSurfer One

-60

WindSurfer Two

-65
-70
Distance

Figure 8. Comparison of Antenna Attachment Designs

Shown above in Figure 8, the three directional designs intended to amplify
the signal of the router in the forward direction show much better results than the
standard antenna of the router, especially at the furthest distances. Interestingly,
the three directional designs had the same value at the furthest distance away
from the router. At that point there was a 7 dBm difference between the

Kettler Laporte 24
directional designs and the standard router antenna. This translates to a 20%
increase when using the direction antenna at the maximum distance away from
the router. See Appendix E for sample calculation. However, besides the 175 feet
and 200 feet trials, the power differences between the designs were insignificant.
This can be seen in table 5 below describing the differences of the power levels
between each router attachment.
Table 5
Difference from Standard Router Antenna
Trial

Distance (ft)

Reflective
Dish (dBm)

Windsurfer
One(dBm)

25

Windsurfer Two
(dBm)
3

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

The researchers believe the power levels were similar at the shorter
distances because it was too close for the signal to actually begin to deteriorate
so the designs were not able to have different dBm levels. The only distance that
yielded a small but possibly significant difference between the router attachments
besides 175 and 200 feet was at 25 feet where the windsurfer two transmitted a
signal three dBm higher than the standard antenna alone. However this trial did
fluctuate by one dBm, and is only significant compared to the No Attachment
data, not the other router attachments.

Kettler Laporte 25
Conclusion
This experiment tested the signal strength of a Netis router at different
distances while altering the router signal using attachments to the antenna. This
was done by placing three different antenna attachments behind the antenna of
the router and measuring the power of the router at intervals of 25 feet. The
measuring of the signal strength was done using Wi-Fi analyzer software called
inSSIDer.
The original hypothesis predicted that the second windsurfer design would
have the greatest power increase compared to the standard Netis router
antenna, and that all the antenna attachments would each produce at minimum a
three decibel-milliwatt increase from the standard Netis router antenna. When the
data was analyzed, the second windsurfer design had similar power differences,
within one and two dBm, over the standard antenna compared to the other
antenna attachments, leading this part of the hypothesis to be rejected. However,
all the antenna attachments produced significantly improved power values
between five and seven dBm for the 175 and 200 feet trials, and at these
distances the hypothesis was accepted. However, the attachments were
insignificant for the first 150 feet of measurement.
The strength of a router signal is important because devices need to
detect the signal at a minimum threshold to be able receive data
(Baird;Networks). The improvement of a signal by five dBm helps a device stay
within this threshold which allows a device to continue to function properly. This
necessary amount of power varies slightly by the devices wireless card itself, and

Kettler Laporte 26
the environment around it, but it is typically above -65 dBm. Past this level and
the device, such as the Toshiba laptop used in the testing, will not be able to
effectively receive data from the router. This would be analogous to not being
able to hear a person speaking from across a room because they are either
whispering or other voices are too loud to make out the words. For electronic
devices, this is extremely detrimental to internet processes that require precise
data packet timing such as streaming movies, online video games, and video
chat ("Acceptable Wi-Fi Signal Strengths").
In terms of other research in this field, the findings agreed with other
researchs findings that router power levels decreased over distance (Networks),
and confirmed the findings of amateur projects with similar attachment designs
(Wombat7). However the researchers study was helpful in determining the
specific effects of the resources tested. Further research should be done on
other antenna designs besides monopole antennas such as dipole, bowtie, or
helix antennas to determine the effect of the antennas directivity and individual
gain on a signal over distance. These other antenna designs are shaped to emit
specific wave patterns from an access point and may prove more effective in
increasing the strength received by a device.
Further research to improve on the designs used in this paper should
improve the collection of data by using more effective software than the InSSIDer
program. This software was limited because the data could only be recorded by
human estimation of the data, and could not be recorded into a real-time
spreadsheet. While the real-time graphs of the data were useful in determining

Kettler Laporte 27
the consistency of the power, the researchers were limited to only measuring
signals that were constant and did not have large variance. Testing with more
varied signals would provide the opportunity to collect individual data points and
use statistical tests to more effectively determine the significance of the different
signals. Other factors that should be considered for further research are different
materials used to reflect the signal of the router, different shapes to reflect the
signal, and different types of router antennas. All these factors should be
considered for further research to comprehensively understand the how reflective
shapes and materials affect the router signal strength.
Building and using directional antenna attachments to boost a signal
greater distances is extremely useful for expanding wireless access outdoors, in
large open buildings, and improving signal strength in households with poorly
positioned routers. By using antenna attachments that would utilize the need for
only one direction of the router signal to be improved, houses or large areas
could benefit from improved signal strength. An example would be if a router
was stuck next to a far wall in a house, a Windsurfer attachment or other
attachment could be used to aim the signal back towards to house while reducing
the amount of signal lost that would have been absorbed into the wall of the
building. Similarly an attachment could be used to allow a small router to aim into
a large area such as a backyard or small park and increase the signal strength
received in that specific area. Small improvements to the signal strength could
save money for people who are looking to boost signal power of their routers for
low cost and simple construction.

Kettler Laporte 28
Acknowledgements
The researchers would like to acknowledge certain people for their
assistance, guidance, and support throughout the research. Through them the
research in this paper was made possible.
Firstly, they thank Mr. McMillan for assisting in the technical details
regarding the research design, and assistance with structuring the experiment.
He was also appreciated for the careful proofreading of the scientific portions of
the research and advice in conceptual matters.
Secondly, the researchers thank Mrs. Cybulski for her assistance in the
statistical sections and in helping design a robust experiment. They would also
like to thank her for proofreading various sections of the paper and her critiques.
The researchers thank Mr. Baird, CTO at Atscale, for supporting the
researchers, providing information regarding router signal strength in relation to
distance, and other background knowledge essential for the experiment.
The researchers give special thanks to fellow peer, Andrew Damiani, for
his invaluable advice in the early stages of the research development, and to
friend Brian Chrzanowski for assistance in brainstorming material options and
certain design factors. To all the teachers at Macomb Mathematics for their
unwavering confidence in the researchers efforts and unyielding drive to bring
the best out of their work throughout the research. Acknowledgement should also
go out to the researchers fellow classmates for their insight and comments
throughout the completion of the work.

Kettler Laporte 29
Finally both authors would like to thank their families for their support
mentally, emotional, and on rare occasions financial for all they have done to
assist in making this research possible.

Kettler Laporte 30

Appendix A Windsurfer Attachment Design One

Materials:
Duct Tape
Aluminum Foil
Scissors
Elmers Glue

Windsurfer Template
Knife
Manila Folder

Procedure:
1. Print the template found in figure 9 from
http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/template2/index.html, enlarging to
the size of the back panel to seven inches.

Figure 9. Windsurfer Design Template

2. Glue the template onto the flat inside of a manila folder or hard stock
paper.
3. Glue Aluminum foil onto the other side of the manila folder. Keep the foil
as flat as possible.
4. Cut out the rectangular back panel (bottom) and the middle bracket piece
(top)

Kettler Laporte 31
5. Cut out the six slits of the back panel piece
6. Cut out the cross marks on the middle bracket.
7. Put the six tabs of the middle bracket into the cut out slits of the back
panel and tap them down smoothly
8. Put the Windsurfer over the antenna on the specific router through the
cross marks of the middle bracket.

Figure 10. Materials For Windsurfer Construction

Figure 10 shows all necessary materials for constructing the Windsurfer
design. An x acto knife can also be used for cutting out the inside slits of the
design.

Kettler Laporte 32

Appendix B Windsurfer Attachment Design Two

Materials:
Duct Tape
Aluminum Foil
Scissors
Glue

Windsurfer Template
Knife
Manila Folder

Procedure:
Note: The key difference between the two Windsurfer designs is the lack of
aluminum on the inner bracket piece for the second Windsurfer design. Besides
this, the two designs are identical.
1. Print the template found in Figure 11 from
http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/template2/index.html, enlarging to
the size of the back panel to seven inches.

Figure 11. Windsurfer Design Template

Kettler Laporte 33
2. Glue the template onto the flat inside of a manila folder or hard stock
paper.
3. Cut out inner bracket piece (top) and do not glue aluminum to it.
4. Glue Aluminum foil onto the other side of the manila folder with the flat
5.
6.
7.
8.

back piece on the other side. Keep the foil as flat as possible.
Cut out the rectangular back panel (bottom)
Cut out the six slits of the back panel piece
Cut out the cross marks on the middle bracket.
Put the six tabs of the middle bracket into the cut out slits of the back

panel and tap them down smoothly

9. Put the Windsurfer over the antenna on the specific router through the
cross marks of the middle bracket.

Kettler Laporte 34

Appendix C Parabolic Dish Focus

Materials:
(2) Lasers

Parabolic Dish

Procedure:
The focus of the parabolic dish must be found to put the router antenna
into the best possible position.
1. Set up two laser pointers parallel to each other approximately five inches
apart.
2. Aim the lasers at the dish so the lasers reflect and cross at the focus point
as shown in Figure 12.
3. Measure the distance from intersecting lasers to the center of the
parabolic dish. This distance to the focal point of the lasers represents the
focal distance, or the distance the antenna should be placed from the
center of the parabolic dish for the best reflection.

Figure 4. Finding the Focal Point

Kettler Laporte 35
Appendix D InSSIDer Home Program
This procedure is how to download and operate the InSSIDer Home program
Materials:
Toshiba Satellite Laptop

InSSIDer Home Program

Procedure:
1. Download the program InSSIDer 3.1.2.1 for Home from the website
http://www.techspot.com/downloads/5936-inssider.html
2. Open the program and go to the Network Tab
3. Identity the SSID for the router to be used. Star the Access Point so the
strength of the signal in dBm is highlighted on the graph.
4. When the power signal has stabilized within one dBm, record that data
point.
Trouble Shooting:

If the signal does not stabilize, estimate the average point that represents

the signal over time and record the variation in dBm.

There will occasionally be electrical spikes or drops of the signal
caused by the routers electrical source. These will usually five dBm or
more. These occurrences should be ignored when reading for a constant
signal of a design or when estimating an average dBm value for a signal.

Kettler Laporte 36

Figure 13. Sample Router Signal Setup

Figure 13 shows the setup of the inSSIDer program. The signal strength is
read next to the name of the network on the left side of the screen. Small spikes
can be seen on the graph to the right of the program.

Kettler Laporte 37

Appendix E Router Setup for Netis

Setting up the router:
1. Plug in router to the extension cord at the setup location.
2. Wait for the router to be recognized by the computer used to read for the
signal.
3. Record the power of the router per the procedures.

Kettler Laporte 38

Appendix F Calculations
Calculating dBm from Milli-Watt
dBm 10log 10 mW
dBm 10log 10 0.000006
dBm=52.218
Multiply the common log of the milli-watt value
Converting dBm to Percentage of Power:
1. Take the larger dBm value and the smaller dBm value and convert to bels
by dividing by 10.
Smaller dBm Value
10
2. Then convert the dBm value to milli-watts and divide the smaller value
over the larger value
Percent Increase of Power=

10Smaller dBmValue
100
10Larger dBm Value

3. If the difference between the values are .7 bels different. There will be an
almost 20% increase from the original value.
6.5

10
Percent Increase of Power= 5.8
10
Percent Increase of Power=19.95

Kettler Laporte 39

Works Cited
"Attenuation of Sound Waves." Attenuation of Sound Waves. NDT Resource Center,
n.d. Web. 05 Oct. 2014. <https://www.nde ed.org/EducationResources/
CommunityCollege/Ultrasonics/Physics/attenuation.htm>.
"Acceptable Wi-Fi Signal Strengths." MetaGeek Support. MetaGeek LLC, 09 May
2014. Web. 16 Nov. 2014. <https://support.metageek.net/hc/enus/articles/201955754-Acceptable-Wi-Fi-Signal-Strengths>.
Baird, Matthew. "School Project on How A Wireless Signal Can Be Effected." Message
to the author. 20 Nov. 2014. E-mail.
Erskine, M. "Ez-12 Parabolic Reflector Template."Http://www.freeantennas.com/. Free
Antennas, 2003. Web. 05 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/template/index.html>.
Fung, Chuck. "Basic Antenna Theory and Application." Basic Antenna Theory and
Application (n.d.): n. pag. Www.wpi.edu. WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC
INSTITUTE, 15 Mar. 2011. Web. 21 Sept. 2014. <https://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/Eproject/Available/E-project-042811-161838/unrestricted/ChuckFungFinalMQP
paper2.pdf>.
H., Mike. "How Do I Evaluate the Quality of My Wireless Connection?" (n.d.): n. pag.
21 July 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.
<http://groups.haas.berkeley.edu/HCS/howdoi/Wireless/wireless_quality_evaluati
on.pdf>.

Kettler Laporte 40
"How Signal Is Affected." Http://www.ci.cumberland.md.us/. City of Cumberland, n.d.
Web. 05 Oct. 2014. <https://www.google.com/url?
sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDUQFjAD&
url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ci.cumberland.md.us%2Fnew_site%2Findex.php
%2Fcontents%2Fview
%2F635&ei=PPoxVLnwE6nnsAShnIKIAw&usg=AFQjCNGxOTBiSPeQ5Vg_WJ6
NkpqMm5odQw&sig2=-9tc0EnEFNUiVzFRFb7_7w&bvm=bv.76802529,d.cWc>.
Lan/man Committee Of The IEEE Computer Society. "IEEE Standard for Information
Technology." IEEE Computer Society (2007): 0-1184.Escuela De Ingeniera
Electrnica. LAN/MAN Standards Committee, 12 June 2007. Web. 5 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.ie.itcr.ac.cr/marin/lic/el4515/antenas/802.11-2007.pdf>.
Lardinois, Frederic. "Study: 61% of U.S. Households Now Have WiFi." TechCrunch.
TechCrunch.com, 5 Apr. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2014.
<http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/05/study-61-of-u-s-households-now-have-wifi/>.
Networks, Juniper. Coverage or CapacityMaking the Best Use of 802.11n (n.d.): n.
pag. Juniper Networks, Inc, May 2011. Web. 16 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.adtechglobal.com/Data/Sites/1/marketing/juniperwhitepaperwlancov
erageorcapacity.pdf>.
"Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)
Specifications."Standards.ieee.org. LAN/MAN Standards Committee, 29 Mar.
2012. Web. 14 Nov. 2014. <http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/802/802.11.html>.

Kettler Laporte 41
Purdy, Kevin. "Why Is Wi-Fi Coverage So Bad in My House?" Lifehacker. N.p., 7 Oct.
2010. Web. 12 Nov. 2014. <http://lifehacker.com/5657613/why-is-wi-fi-coverageso-bad-in-my-house-and-how-can-i-fix-it>.
Rubin, Julian. "Michael Faraday: The Invention of Faraday Cage." Michael Faraday:
The Invention of Faraday Cage. Julian's Science Fair, n.d. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.juliantrubin.com/bigten/faradaycageexperiments.html>.
Voyager8. "The 8th Voyager." Web log post. Using InSSIDer and WiFi Analyzer to
Scan Wireless Networks around You. Http://voyager8.blogspot.com, 7 Aug. 2011.
Web. 06 Oct. 2014. <http://voyager8.blogspot.com/2011/08/using-inssider-andwifi-analyzer-to.html>.
"Wi-Fi and Bluetooth: Potential Sources of Wireless Interference." Apple Support.
Apple Inc., 29 May 2014. Web. Oct.2014.<http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1365>.
"Wireless LAN 802.11 Wi-Fi." - GHN: IEEE Global History Network. IEEE, 24 Nov.
2014. Web. 16 Nov. 2014
<http://www.ieeeghn.org/wiki/index.php/Wireless_LAN_802.11_Wi-Fi>.
Wombat7. "Usb Wifi Antenna." Web log post. Instructables.com. N.p., 2008. Web. 21
Sept. 2014. <http://www.instructables.com/id/usb-wifi-antenna/>.
Young, Michael. "DMystifying the DB (decibel)." Moonblink. Moonblink
Communications, 23 Aug. 2001. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.