In outdoor wireless projects, large public squares are often far more difficult to cover than many clients initially expect. On drawings, they may appear to be open and simple spaces, but in actual deployment, they present a combination of challenges including long-distance open-area coverage, unstable crowd distribution, complex RF interference, difficult power access, weather exposure, roaming continuity, and sudden peak concurrency during events and evening traffic.
As a local wireless engineering contractor with years of practical deployment experience in South Korea, our team has delivered WiFi coverage and transmission projects across a wide range of scenarios, including hotels, commercial centers, public plazas, waterfront spaces, municipal areas, schools, and mixed-use outdoor environments. Through these projects, we have learned that a truly successful WiFi deployment is never defined only by how many access points are installed, but by whether the final network remains stable, usable, maintainable, and trustworthy under real on-site conditions.
For this outdoor WiFi project in a large public square in Busan, our goal was not simply to provide “signal coverage,” but to build a structured wireless system that could support daily public access, improve user experience across open areas, maintain stable operation during high-traffic periods, and solve remote transmission requirements for surveillance points with practical engineering methods.
1. Our Team Background and COMFAST Deployment Experience
We are a local wireless engineering contractor team based in Busan, South Korea, focusing on medium and large-scale WiFi coverage, outdoor bridge transmission, surveillance wireless backhaul, and integrated network deployment projects.
Over the years, we have delivered wireless projects for hotels, shopping streets, public squares, waterfront zones, school campuses, tourist parks, municipal service sites, and mixed-use commercial properties. Compared with standard indoor WiFi jobs, outdoor plaza wireless projects demand much more from an engineering team. The challenges are not limited to signal strength. The real test lies in understanding open-space propagation, anti-interference planning, pole-based installation, weatherproof cabling, roaming continuity, concurrent user capacity, and long-distance uplink stability.
In many of our previous projects, we have worked extensively with COMFAST equipment because their product line allows flexible combinations for both coverage and transmission scenarios. For outdoor deployments in particular, we have accumulated solid practical experience using COMFAST devices for:
- Open plaza and pedestrian street WiFi coverage
- Outdoor AP sector-based deployment
- Wireless bridge transmission for surveillance and remote zones
- Temporary event network support
- Integrated gateway and PoE switching for cost-controlled public projects
For this project in Busan, the client required a stable and practical outdoor WiFi system for a large public square with heavy evening traffic and frequent weekend events. Based on site conditions and long-term maintenance considerations, we selected the following COMFAST models:
- CF-WA971: Outdoor AP, 3600M, WiFi 7, dual-band
- CF-EW85: Outdoor AP, 1200M, dual-band
- CF-E113A V2: 5.8G wireless bridge for surveillance/backhaul transmission
- CF-AC101: Full gigabit core gateway
- CF-SF181P: 8-port Fast Ethernet PoE switch
This project was not simply about “installing APs.” It was a full engineering process involving repeated site inspection, interference judgment, power supply coordination, wiring route optimization, roaming testing, bridge debugging, and post-deployment performance adjustment.
2. Project Overview: A Large Public Plaza in Busan
Project Name
Busan Haneul Square Smart Outdoor WiFi Deployment Project
Project Type
Large outdoor public plaza wireless coverage project
Project Location
A large urban square in Busan, South Korea
Main Site Features
This square was a typical mixed-use public outdoor area, including:
- Central open gathering plaza
- Performance activity zone
- Surrounding pedestrian rest area
- Commercial kiosk edge zone
- Landscape corridor and seating zone
- Surveillance camera points around the perimeter
- Property management room on one side of the site
The square had a large daily visitor base, especially:
- Morning walkers and community activity groups
- Afternoon family and tourist traffic
- Night-time young user concentration
- Weekend event gatherings and temporary performances
The client wanted the site to provide stable public wireless access, basic support for property operation devices, and wireless transmission for several surveillance endpoints where trenching cable was difficult or too costly.
3. Client Pain Points and Initial Requirements
Before our team took over this project, the client had already attempted a low-cost outdoor WiFi installation through another installer. The result was poor and unstable. After our first site communication and inspection, we summarized the main problems as follows.
3.1. Large Coverage Area but No Real Signal Continuity
The previous deployment only considered “whether signal exists” but did not consider:
- weak edge coverage in open areas
- AP overlap dead zones
- signal drop around metal structures
- unstable roaming when users moved across the square
As a result, users often saw full bars in some places, but actual internet access was slow or disconnected while walking.
3.2. High User Density During Evenings and Events
This plaza had clear high-concurrency periods:
- 6:00 PM to 10:00 PM on weekdays
- weekend activity periods
- special event and performance hours
The old setup could not handle many simultaneous users. Once the crowd increased, latency rose sharply and users could connect but not browse normally.
3.3. Outdoor Interference Was More Serious Than Expected
Although the site looked open, the RF environment was actually complex. Nearby interference sources included:
- surrounding retail WiFi
- LED advertising screens
- roadside commercial networks
- temporary event audio/video control devices
- private hotspot sharing from visitors
- wireless links from nearby buildings
The previous installer had not done proper channel planning, resulting in severe overlap and unstable performance.
3.4. Some Surveillance Points Could Not Be Wired Easily
The client wanted some outer camera points connected quickly, but underground construction in the plaza was restricted. This meant traditional cabling to every endpoint was not practical.
3.5. Client Wanted Low Cost, but Also Wanted Long-Term Stability
This is one of the most common contradictions in public plaza projects. The client initially focused on budget, but the actual demand included:
- stable public internet
- basic operation and management access
- support for future event usage
- reduced maintenance calls
That meant the network could not be built only around the lowest equipment cost.
4. Our Engineering Assessment After Site Survey
After our team completed the first and second on-site surveys, we concluded that this project could not be solved by simply increasing AP quantity. The core issue was that the site needed a zoned outdoor wireless design.
We divided the square into the following logical wireless areas:
- Main crowd gathering zone
Needed stronger concurrent access capability and wider stable coverage. - Peripheral walkway and seating zone
Needed smooth signal continuity and reduced dead angles. - Commercial edge area
Needed more stable low-to-medium density coverage with better anti-interference adjustment. - Camera and remote endpoint zone
Needed wireless bridge transmission for places where cabling was difficult.
At the same time, we also discovered several real engineering difficulties:
- lamp poles available for AP mounting were not all in ideal positions
- some poles had unstable power access planning
- decorative steel structures caused reflected signal distortion in some angles
- tree canopies partially affected certain 5GHz paths
- management room location was acceptable for core convergence, but edge cable distances needed control
This confirmed that the project needed both high-performance main coverage APs and cost-effective supplementary outdoor APs, plus bridge transmission for surveillance links.
5. Equipment Selection and Why We Used Each Device
5.1. CF-WA971 as the Main Outdoor High-Capacity AP
We selected CF-WA971 as the core AP in the main plaza area because this part of the site had the highest density of simultaneous users.
Why it was suitable:
- WiFi 7 architecture gave better future readiness
- dual-band operation helped with user load distribution
- stronger outdoor deployment capability for open-space coverage
- more suitable for high-traffic hotspot zones
- better used in main plaza sectors where crowd concentration was predictable
In this project, CF-WA971 was mainly used in:
- central activity plaza
- event gathering zone
- main circulation area with the highest foot traffic
5.2. CF-EW85 as the Supplementary Outdoor Coverage AP
We used CF-EW85 in peripheral and lower-density outdoor areas.
Why it was suitable:
- more cost-effective for secondary coverage
- enough for standard outdoor access demand
- good for walkways, seating zones, and edge coverage extension
- helpful in filling coverage gaps around the square perimeter
In practice, not every plaza corner needs a high-capacity flagship AP. Mixing different AP levels is a more reasonable engineering approach.
5.3. CF-E113A V2 for Wireless Bridge Transmission
For the camera points and a remote edge location where cable trenching was difficult, we used CF-E113A V2 5.8G wireless bridge links.
Why it was suitable:
- reduced civil construction difficulty
- shortened deployment period
- good for line-of-sight or near-line-of-sight outdoor transmission
- practical for surveillance and remote network backhaul
This greatly improved the project’s implementability.
5.4. CF-AC101 as the Gigabit Core Gateway
We placed CF-AC101 in the property management room as the core gateway.
Why it was suitable:
- full gigabit architecture
- more appropriate than low-end routing for multi-AP outdoor projects
- handled access control and overall network export more reliably
- better matched the structure of a plaza with multiple APs and bridge devices
5.5. CF-SF181P as the PoE Access Switch
We used CF-SF181P as the PoE switch at edge convergence points.
Why it was selected:
- simplified outdoor AP power supply
- cost-effective for distributed access points
- suitable for several grouped AP and bridge nodes
However, this model is a 100M PoE switch, which later became the main imperfection of the project. It did not fully limit the project in daily public usage, but under high-density peak scenarios and when multiple higher-performance APs shared the same switching uplink path, it became an obvious bottleneck in some segments. This is something we will discuss honestly later.
6. Network Topology Advantages Before Deployment
Before showing the topology, it is important to explain why this structure worked well for a large Busan outdoor square.
This topology had several advantages:
- clear core-edge hierarchy, easier maintenance
- high-capacity APs placed only in truly necessary areas
- standard APs used for efficient edge fill coverage
- wireless bridges solved hard-to-wire surveillance points
- gateway, APs, and transmission links were easier to isolate during troubleshooting
- future expansion remained possible
The design was not based on “how many APs can be installed,” but on “how to make every area usable, stable, and maintainable.”
7. Project Network Topology Diagram
8. Detailed Area-by-Area Deployment Strategy
8.1. Central Plaza Main Coverage Area
This was the most important area of the project.
Challenges
- users stayed for long periods
- many people connected simultaneously
- open space meant signal spread was broad, but user distribution was uneven
- events could suddenly push concurrency higher
Our Solution
We used CF-WA971 units mounted on properly selected poles around the central zone, not in a single central point. We avoided the common mistake of trying to “cover everything from one strongest AP.”
Engineering principle:
- distributed hotspot coverage is more stable than one-point brute-force coverage
- AP overlap must exist, but it must be controllable
- mounting height should not be excessively high, otherwise near-field user experience worsens
We carefully controlled installation angle and pole height so the main user layer in the plaza received stable coverage rather than only far-field projection.
8.2. Event and Performance Zone
This area had temporary traffic spikes and more intense upload/download behavior when performances or community activities happened.
Problems Found
- temporary video sharing and live streaming increased burst traffic
- users gathered in a compressed area
- noise rose significantly when personal hotspots appeared
Our Strategy
We assigned another CF-WA971 to this zone, independent from the central area design logic. This avoided one AP being overloaded by both the central square and event crowd simultaneously.
We also kept this area’s RF adjustment more conservative, ensuring that the event zone remained independently usable even during busy weekends.
8.3. Walkways, Seating Areas, and Landscape Edge Zones
These areas had lower density, but they strongly influenced overall user perception. If people lose signal while walking or sitting at the edge, they will think the whole square WiFi is poor.
Problems Found
- previous deployment had many edge dead zones
- benches near steel decorative structures had unstable 5GHz performance
- some walkways had weak continuity because AP spacing was based on map distance, not actual usage path
Our Solution
We used CF-EW85 to cover these peripheral zones.
This was the right engineering choice because:
- these areas did not need flagship-class concurrency capacity
- standard outdoor APs were enough if positioned correctly
- lower-density edge coverage can be built more economically without sacrificing experience
We adjusted placement according to actual user movement paths rather than purely geometric symmetry.
8.4. Surveillance and Remote Edge Transmission Zone
The client required several remote camera points connected back to the core network, but trenching and long outdoor cabling were impractical.
Our Solution
We deployed CF-E113A V2 bridges to create a stable 5.8G point-to-point wireless link for remote camera backhaul.
Why This Was Important
In many outdoor plaza projects, cable construction becomes the hidden cost killer. Wireless bridge transmission can dramatically reduce:
- civil work complexity
- construction time
- cable damage risk
- maintenance workload in hard-to-access zones
Of course, bridges must not be installed casually. We carefully checked:
- line-of-sight path
- mounting rigidity
- interference risk
- alignment accuracy
- rain and wind impact tolerance
9. Problems We Encountered During Construction
This project was smooth only on paper. On site, we faced multiple real engineering difficulties.
9.1. Pole Position Was Not Equal to Ideal RF Position
Some poles looked good for mounting, but after testing we found:
- metal decorations affected side radiation
- certain positions produced strong reflections
- some benches fell into strange weak zones due to angle mismatch
We had to adjust several AP installation points after the first test.
9.2. Power Supply Coordination Was More Difficult Than Expected
Outdoor square projects often depend on municipal or property-managed power circuits. In this case:
- not every lighting pole had clean power access
- some reserved points were not suitable for continuous equipment load
- waterproof power box arrangement needed modification
This required close coordination with the property electrician team.
9.3. The Site Was Open, but RF Interference Was Not Low
This is a common misunderstanding. Large outdoor spaces are not necessarily “clean” wireless environments.
We detected interference from:
- nearby shop WiFi
- roadside retail routers
- user hotspot concentration
- stage event devices
- surrounding commercial building wireless spillover
Therefore, channel assignment and AP spacing were repeatedly adjusted instead of fixed in one pass.
9.4. Tree Foliage and Seasonal Changes Could Affect 5GHz Behavior
Some paths that looked open during planning were partially obstructed by tree canopy from certain angles. This especially mattered for peripheral AP continuity and some bridge path considerations.
We compensated through revised mounting angles and better path selection.
9.5. 100M PoE Switch Became the Most Obvious Limitation
This was the project’s real weakness.
The CF-SF181P helped control project cost and simplified PoE supply, but because it is a Fast Ethernet PoE switch, it introduced a clear uplink bottleneck risk in the following situations:
- when multiple APs aggregated user traffic simultaneously
- during event periods with many users
- when high-performance AP capability exceeded what the access switch could forward efficiently
- when future service load increased beyond the initial design expectation
In day-to-day public browsing scenarios, the network still performed acceptably. But from a professional engineering standpoint, if the client had allowed a better switch budget, a gigabit PoE edge switch would have made the entire system more balanced.
As engineers, we must be honest:
the AP side was stronger than part of the access switching side, and that meant the project was good, but not fully ideal.
10. Troubleshooting Process and Engineering Adjustments
After initial installation, our team conducted several rounds of optimization.
First Round: Coverage Verification
We checked:
- central plaza signal uniformity
- walking route continuity
- edge bench area availability
- event zone overlap relationship
At this stage, we found two peripheral weak spots and one overly strong overlap sector causing inefficient roaming behavior.
Second Round: Roaming and Access Stability Testing
We performed walking tests, idle hold tests, and active browsing tests.
We simulated:
- users walking across zones
- users standing in crowd-heavy areas
- multiple terminals switching AP association in overlap areas
We optimized:
- AP transmit balance
- overlap boundaries
- user association logic consistency
- band utilization tendency
Third Round: Bridge Stability and Camera Transmission Testing
For the bridge links, we validated:
- signal quality
- packet stability
- remote camera image continuity
- peak weather tolerance margin
We also reinforced mounting structure on one bridge node after discovering slight shake under strong wind conditions.
Fourth Round: Peak Concurrency Simulation
We used multiple terminal groups during a busier site period to assess performance under realistic crowd load.
This stage exposed the most obvious switch-side limitation. The network remained usable, but the 100M access switch uplink ceiling became easier to observe when several users concentrated around high-capacity AP areas.
That confirmed our final recommendation to the client:
the project met delivery requirements, but should be upgraded to gigabit edge PoE switching in a later optimization phase if the square planned more events or digital services.
11. Final Device Allocation Summary
A typical allocation in this type of plaza project was structured as follows:
Main Equipment Roles
- CF-AC101
Used as the central gateway in the management room for internet出口 control and network core management. - CF-WA971
Used in the main crowd zone and event area where higher user density and better performance reserve were required. - CF-EW85
Used in peripheral walkways, seating areas, edge commercial zones, and supplementary outdoor coverage points. - CF-E113A V2
Used for remote surveillance or edge transmission points where wired construction was difficult. - CF-SF181P
Used as the PoE access switch for local edge nodes, with the acknowledged limitation of Fast Ethernet bandwidth.
12. Project Delivery Results
After optimization and final acceptance, the project achieved the following results.
12.1. Public Square Coverage Became Complete and Usable
The client’s earlier problem was not “no signal,” but “signal that looked available but was not truly usable.”
After our deployment:
- main public zones had stable access
- walkways and seating zones had much better continuity
- edge dead spots were largely removed
- moving users experienced smoother transitions
12.2. Event Area Became Much More Reliable
During evening crowd periods, the site no longer suffered the previous severe access collapse seen in the old installation.
The network was not designed as a premium stadium-class system, but for a public plaza environment, it had already moved from unstable consumer-style deployment to professional engineered coverage.
12.3. Surveillance Transmission Was Simplified
The wireless bridge solution reduced construction difficulty and helped the client bring several remote camera points online faster without major civil work.
12.4. Maintenance Logic Became Clearer
The final structure made later troubleshooting easier because:
- core gateway was centralized
- AP areas were logically divided
- bridges were independently testable
- switch access nodes were clearly segmented
This is extremely important in public projects. Good maintenance logic saves more cost over time than many clients realize at the purchasing stage.
13. Customer and End-User Feedback After Acceptance
After the project went live and ran for a period of time, the client and on-site users gave largely positive feedback.
Client Feedback
The property management side told us that compared with the previous setup:
- complaints about unstable internet access dropped significantly
- the square’s digital service image improved
- event organizers found the network more dependable
- camera transmission in previously difficult points became much easier to manage
The client especially appreciated that our team did not simply install devices and leave. We repeatedly returned for testing, tuning, and explaining the real strengths and weaknesses of the system.
They also acknowledged our honesty regarding the 100M PoE switch issue. In fact, this transparency increased their trust. Instead of pretending the project was perfect, we clearly stated:
- the current system was acceptable for present public usage
- the AP design was solid
- but the edge switch layer had become the weakest part of the architecture
- future expansion should prioritize upgrading this layer
End-User Feedback
From ordinary users and site staff, typical feedback included:
- “The square WiFi is much easier to use now.”
- “Walking around no longer drops the connection as often.”
- “At night there are still many people online, but browsing is more stable.”
- “The benches and rest areas now also have usable signal.”
- “During public activities, the network feels more reliable than before.”
These comments may sound simple, but for a public plaza project, they are the most meaningful acceptance indicators.
14. Project Imperfections and Our Honest Engineering Review
A professional project review should not hide flaws.
The biggest shortcoming of this project was the use of CF-SF181P Fast Ethernet PoE switches in an architecture where some AP performance reserves were higher than the edge switch forwarding capacity.
This created a mismatch:
- wireless side capability was relatively strong
- edge switching side was relatively limited
In light and medium daily usage, this was not fatal.
But in heavier concurrency periods, it reduced the full performance potential of the AP layer.
If we were to improve this project in a second phase, our first recommendation would be:
- replace edge Fast Ethernet PoE switching with gigabit PoE switching
- preserve the core AP and bridge framework
- further optimize event-period traffic distribution
That would make the whole network far more balanced.
15. Advice for Other WiFi Contractors Doing Large Plaza Projects
From this Busan large square deployment, our advice to同行 engineers is very direct:
15.1. Do Not Judge an Outdoor Plaza by Area Size Alone
A large open site is not automatically easy to cover.
What matters is:
- user gathering pattern
- metal structure reflection
- usable mounting positions
- interference sources
- walking path continuity
15.2. Do Not Use Only “Strongest AP” Thinking
A better project is not built by installing the most powerful AP everywhere.
It is built by:
- dividing hotspot and non-hotspot zones
- matching equipment level to actual demand
- controlling overlap and access behavior
15.3. Outdoor Projects Must Treat Construction as Part of Network Design
If power supply, waterproofing, pole position, bridge sightline, and maintenance route are ignored, even a theoretically good network will fail in actual delivery.
15.4. Be Honest About Bottlenecks
Clients trust engineers more when we explain where the weak point really is.
In this project, the weak point was not the gateway, not the AP layout, not the bridge design.
It was the 100M PoE switch layer. Saying this clearly is part of professional responsibility.
15.5. Acceptance Is Not Just About “Internet Works”
A true acceptance standard for a public square should include:
- coverage continuity
- concurrency stability
- roaming experience
- remote node reliability
- maintainability
- realistic peak-period performance
16. Conclusion: A Practical and Professional Outdoor Plaza WiFi Deployment
In this outdoor WiFi coverage project for a large public square in Busan, South Korea, we adopted:
- CF-WA971 for main high-density outdoor coverage
- CF-EW85 for peripheral and supplementary plaza coverage
- CF-E113A V2 for remote surveillance and difficult-to-wire transmission links
- CF-AC101 as the gigabit core gateway
- CF-SF181P as the distributed PoE access switch
In the end, we successfully upgraded the square’s wireless network from a loose and unstable outdoor setup into a structured, engineered, and maintainable public WiFi system.
This project once again proved that large plaza WiFi deployment is not simply about equipment installation. It tests an engineer’s ability to assess the site, judge interference, control topology, solve construction constraints, balance budget and performance, and speak honestly about system limitations.
