Testing AvaLAN's Wireless Video Surveillance

By John Honovich, Published on Jan 23, 2010

Wireless IP video surveillance has plenty of hype (claims of 300 Mb/s city wide meshes) and also significant challenges (repeated deployment nightmares). Recently, we helped an integrator friend of ours who needed to deploy a wireless link. He has many years of experience deploying both analog and IP wireless. As such, he knows too well the risks and problems that wireless video surveillance brings.

This report shares test results from the AvaLAN AW5800HTP-PAIR [link no longer available]. This is a kit with built in antennas that offers a tightly integrated solution though with modest bandwidth.

Our key findings include:

  • Wireless connection was "plug n play" without any configuration, however some poorly documented steps should be taken for optimization
  • The system offers limited advanced features 
  • We achieved consistent 3.5 - 4 Mb/s IP video throughput
  • In our setup, with HD/megapixel cameras, using MJPEG was more stable than H.264

The AvaLAN AW5800HTP-PAIR [link no longer available] consists of 2 wireless radios, running in the 5 Ghz range with integrated 23 dBi antennas. The system is sold as a kit - pre-configured to run together. AvaLAN sells their products direct on-line. The AW5800HTP-PAIR [link no longer available] costs $2,800 from their website.

5 Mhz Channels

AvaLAN's use of 5 MHz RF channels is an important and somewhat controversial/different design decision. Most unlicensed IP wireless systems use 20 MHz RF channels (like your home WiFi connection) and newer 802.11n / MIMO systems are using 40 MHz RF channels (needed to achieve higher bit rates). A tradeoff of using wide RF channels is that limited unlicensed spectrum is available for both 2.4 and 5 GHz systems (usually between 60 MHz and 100 Mhz). 

Using 5 MHz channels ensures lower maximum theoretical bandwidth. While AvaLAN provides configuration options for data rates up to 13.5 Mb/s, they recommend using 6 Mb/s as the data rate. Using this, we achieved IP video throughput of 3.5 Mb/s to 4.0 Mb/s.

AvaLAN claims that the use of smaller RF channels allows the system to be more robust to interference and to achieve longer distances (because the RF power is more concentrated in a narrow area). We cannot test nor judge this. We do believe that these smaller RF channels would allow using multiple links in the same physical area (since, unlike more common 20 MHz links, each 5 MHz uses a much smaller portion of the overall spectrum). 

Only Point to Point

The AvaLAN AW5800HTP-PAIR [link no longer available] only supports point to point wireless links. The kit cannot be modified for point to multi-point or for mesh. As such, it's primarily useful for a single camera or for closely located cameras to be transmitted back to a main building/headend.

Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News
Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News

Distance

AvaLAN claims the system can achieve up to 15 miles wireless links. Since our test was over a 100 meter link across two adjacent buildings, we cannot comment on distances achievable. However, multiple mile links almost always require expert planning as the narrow beamwidth of these antennas, the curvature of the Earth, etc. make antenna alignment non-trivial.

Physical Overview

In the screencast below, the key point to emphasize is:

  • No physical adjustments can be made to the radios. The built in antenna cannot be removed nor can replacement antennas be added. It's a sealed unit meant to use the built in 23 dBi antenna.

Configuration and Optimization

As we mentioned in the summary findings, the system did not require configuration to establish a connection and transmit video. However, there are some important points to keep in mind:

 

  • The default data rate is set to auto. However, according to AvaLAN's technical support that is not recommend for optimal use - 6 Mb/s is. Furthermore, any other data rate setting but 6 Mb/s (like 3 Mb/s, 6 Mb/s, 12 Mb/s, etc.) acts as auto mode. Finally, the the traffic generator tool only works with 6 Mb/s. For all these reasons, the radios should be switched to 6 Mb/s.
  • The IP address of the units are hard coded at 192.168.1.66/67. If this is being deployed in an existing network, the IP addresses will need to be changed.
  • The system does not offer any QoS optimizations.

 

Bandwidth Consumption Analysis

With the data rate set at 6 Mb/s, we achieved 3.5 to 4 Mb/s IP video throughput (unidirectional). We tested the AvaLAN system using 3 cameras - 2 megapixel and 1 standard definition connected to Exacq's video management software.

Not surprising, in our tests of a standard definition camera at 1 to 2 Mb/s, we had no issues.

Challenges arose when we switched to 1 or more megapixel cameras and, surprisingly, when we used H.264 encoding.

The screencast below demonstrates that using MJPEG, frames gracefully dropped but the connection remained and full quality video was recorded over AvaLAN at a slow frame rate. However, when using H.264, the camera's connections to Exacq disconnected. With 1 megapixel camera at H.264, the camera disconnected intermittently. However, with 2 megapixel cameras at H.264, both connections dropped and we were unable to re-establish the connection.

IP Camera Use and Load Recommendations

IP video surveillance regularly exhibits strange problems with insufficient bandwidth is available. However, different IP cameras and VMS software respond differently to shortages (some drop connections, some display macro-blocking, some display green 'slime', some drop frames, etc., etc.).

While it is not possible to accurately predict what will happen with various combinations of cameras and VMS systems, we can provide guidelines of what to consider when faced with the limited bandwidth of a wireless system like AvaLAN:

 

  • Test exactly how much throughput the system can deliver in your setup. For instance, while we achieved 3.5 - 4 Mb/s, a longer link or one with more interference could deliver significantly less. We recognize that this is logistically difficult to do (as it requires testing on site), however, we think it's risker to assume manufacturer claimed throughputs.
  • Test the bit rate of the IP cameras you plan to use at both low light and high motion. In wired systems, manufacturer 'rough' estimates of bandwidth consumption are generally not a problem. However, in wireless, if the manufacturer estimates 1 Mb/s but you find that at high motion or low light, consumption is 2.5 Mb/s, you may have a serious problem with your wireless system. We see such significant variations in our IP camera tests repeatedly.
  • Test the specific combination of IP cameras and VMS system you plan to use. This will help you understand how the combination degrades with insufficient bandwidth.
  • Favor the use of constant bit rate over variable bit rate streams. While variable bit rates stream may reduce storage use, a spike in the bit stream could break the connection.
  • Choose lower frame rates. Lower frame rates (10 fps vs 30 fps) do not significantly reduce usability of surveillance video but can dramatically reduce bandwidth consumption.
  • Plan to use less bandwidth than available. Wireless links throughput can degrade over time (new systems create interference, vegetation growth obstructs link, antenna alignment shifts, etc.) 
For this AvaLAN system, I would not use IP camera streams over 3 Mb/s. I would also limit frame rate to no more than 10 fps (though I think 5 would be even better). I would not do more than 2 standard definition cameras at 4 CIF or 1 megapixel camera at 720p (1080p consumes significantly more bandwidth with little video quality improvement).

 

Application Recommendations

We think the big constraints on the system are (1) limited bandwidth and (2) lack of advanced features. However, the biggest advantage is that it is simple to setup. We could see traditional security integrators installing these, pointing them at each other and establishing a solid connection with minimal RF expertise.

The most common application is likely to connect a single camera back to a building. We could also see using this to connect building but the link could not realistically handle more than 2 or 3 cameras (even at lower quality settings).

Comments : Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports

Remote Network Access for Video Surveillance Guide on Jul 27, 2020
Remotely accessing surveillance systems is key in 2020, with more and more...
Bandwidth Fundamentals For Video Surveillance on Jan 13, 2020
Bandwidth is the most fundamental element of computer networking for video...
Wireless / WiFi Access Lock Guide on Nov 12, 2019
For some access openings, running wires can add thousands in cost, and...
Converged vs Dedicated Networks For Surveillance Tutorial on Feb 12, 2020
Use the existing network or deploy a new one? This is a critical choice in...
Video Surveillance Cameras 101 on Feb 25, 2020
Cameras come in many shapes, sizes and specifications. This 101 examines the...
NetApp Presents Hybrid Cloud Video Archive on May 11, 2020
NetApp presented its hybrid S3 cloud video archive at the April 2020 IPVM New...
Milestone Presents XProtect On AWS on May 04, 2020
Milestone presented its XProtect on AWS offering at the April 2020 IPVM New...
2020 Video Surveillance Cameras State Of The Market on Jan 03, 2020
Each year, IPVM explains the main advances and changes for video surveillance...
Access Control and Video Integration Statistics 2020 on Oct 08, 2020
Video Surveillance and Access Control are two of the most common security...
Video Surveillance History on May 06, 2020
The video surveillance market has changed significantly since 2000, going...
IP Networking Course Fall 2020 - Last Chance - Register Now on Sep 23, 2020
Today is the last chance to register for the only IP networking course...
The 2020 Video Surveillance Industry Guide on Dec 20, 2019
The 300-page, 2020 Video Surveillance Industry Guide covers the key events...
Aiphone Video Intercom Tested (IX Series 2) on Nov 05, 2019
Aiphone was one of integrator's favorite intercom manufacturers but how well...
Cisco Video Surveillance Is Dead, Long Live Cisco Meraki Video Surveillance on Feb 11, 2020
A dozen years ago much of the industry thought that Cisco was destined to...
Axis Door Station A8207-VE Tested on Aug 07, 2019
Axis newest door station, the A8207-VE, claims to deliver "video...

Recent Reports

Deceptive Meridian Temperature Tablets Endanger Public Safety on Oct 21, 2020
IPVM's testing of and investigation into Meridian Kiosk's temperature...
Honeywell 30 Series and Vivotek NVR Test on Oct 21, 2020
The NDAA ban has driven many users to look for low-cost NVRs not made by...
Ubiquiti Access Control Tested on Oct 21, 2020
Ubiquiti has become one of the most widely used wireless and switch providers...
Mexico Video Surveillance Market Overview 2020 on Oct 20, 2020
Despite being neighbors, there are key differences between the U.S. and...
Dahua Revenue Grows But Profits Down, Cause Unclear on Oct 20, 2020
While Dahua's overall revenue was up more than 12% in Q3 2020, a significant...
Illegal Hikvision Fever Screening Touted In Australia, Government Investigating, Temperature References Deleted on Oct 20, 2020
The Australian government told IPVM that they are investigating a Hikvision...
Panasonic Presents i-PRO Cameras and Video Analytics on Oct 19, 2020
Panasonic i-PRO presented its X-Series cameras and AI video analytics at the...
Augmented Reality (AR) Cameras From Hikvision and Dahua Examined on Oct 19, 2020
Hikvision, Dahua, and other China companies are marketing augmented reality...
18 TB Video Surveillance Drives (WD and Seagate) on Oct 19, 2020
Both Seagate and Western Digital recently announced 18TB hard drives...
Watrix Gait Recognition Profile on Oct 16, 2020
Watrix is the world's only gait recognition surveillance provider IPVM has...
Intel Presents Edge-to-Cloud Ecosystem for Video Analytics on Oct 16, 2020
Intel presented its processors and software toolkit for computer vision at...
Best Manufacturer Technical Support 2020 on Oct 16, 2020
5 manufacturers stood out as providing the best technical support to ~200...
Microsoft Azure Presents Live Video Analytics on Oct 15, 2020
Microsoft Azure presented its Live Video Analytics offering at the September...
Worst Manufacturer Technical Support 2020 on Oct 15, 2020
4 manufacturers stood out as providing the worst technical support to ~200...