Skip to main content
risertools

DAS Link Budget Calculator

Quick estimate with standard assumptions

We assumed a few things:

FIG_01loss cascade by stage
Margin vs target

For planning purposes only. Not a substitute for licensed engineering review.

(IFC 2024 is current.) Many jurisdictions still adopt IFC 2018 or 2021; verify your local AHJ's current edition before committing this number in a submittal.

The link budget is a planning MODEL — the coax term is the vendor’s published formula and free-space loss is exact physics, but indoor propagation is a parametric estimate, and NO calculator demonstrates emergency-responder coverage compliance: that is grid-measured on the installed system per the adopted fire code, and the AHJ owns the verdict.

risertools references LMR but is not certified by, affiliated with, or endorsed by Times Microwave Systems.

Related calculators

LAYER 4 — BONDING CONDUCTOR (TBB)

Bonding Conductor (TBB)

Size the bonding backbone the BDA and surge protection land on.

Go to Bonding Conductor (TBB)

How to Work an In-Building DAS Link Budget (Before the Walk Test Works You)

The cascade, end to end

Every in-building distributed antenna system answers the same question: how much signal survives the trip from the source to the phone or portable radio at the worst corner of the floor? The answer is an accounting exercise called a link budget, and it runs in two halves. The wired half starts at the signal source — a bidirectional amplifier or remote unit — and subtracts everything the distribution network eats: coaxial cable loss, splitter division, connector and jumper losses. Add the antenna gain and you have EIRP, the effective isotropic radiated power actually leaving the antenna. The over-the-air half subtracts path loss between the antenna and the coverage edge. What remains is the edge signal, and the difference between that and your target is the margin — the single number this calculator exists to produce.

The discipline of the exercise is that every term must come from somewhere defensible. This model uses the coax vendor’s own published loss formula, pure mathematics for the splitter division, an explicit user-owned allowance for the miscellaneous losses, textbook physics for free space, and published planning exponents for indoor propagation.[3] Nothing in the cascade is a black box, which is exactly what makes the output arguable in front of an engineer — or an authority having jurisdiction.[1]

Coax loss: the vendor’s own formula

Coaxial cable loss is the best-documented term in the budget, because the manufacturer publishes it. Times Microwave’s public LMR Guide gives, for every cable in the family, an insertion-loss model of the form K1 times the square root of frequency plus K2 times frequency, per hundred feet or per hundred meters — with the explicit instruction to use the K column that matches your length unit.[3] This calculator computes that formula verbatim for LMR-400 and LMR-600, and the vendor’s own free online calculator provides the cross-check for any number this page produces.[4]

The square-root term is why frequency quietly dominates cable planning. A hundred feet of LMR-400 costs about 2.3 dB at 150 MHz, 3.9 dB at 900 MHz, and 5.9 dB at 1900 MHz. Stepping up to LMR-600 buys roughly a third of the loss back at every frequency — the classic trade of copper for decibels — and on long horizontal runs that trade decides whether the branch works at all. Loss scales linearly with length, so a 250-foot run is simply 2.5 times the hundred-foot figure; there is no shortcut and no rounding grace.

Splitters, miscellaneous losses, and EIRP

A splitter divides power, and the division itself is pure arithmetic: ten times the logarithm of the way count — 3.0 dB for a two-way, 6.0 dB for a four-way, 9.0 dB for an eight-way. Real splitters add a few tenths of a decibel of excess loss on top, and every connector pair and jumper in the chain adds its own small tax. This model deliberately does NOT seed vendor-specific excess values; instead the other-losses input carries them, defaulting to a 2 dB allowance you should replace with the sum from your actual bill of materials. That keeps the invented-data count in this calculator at exactly zero.

The sum of the wired half is EIRP, and it earns its place as a visible intermediate result twice over. First, it isolates the distribution design from the propagation guess — if EIRP is wrong, no path-loss model will save the branch. Second, EIRP is a regulated quantity: FCC equipment rules cap radiated power for signal boosters and DAS transmitters by band and service class, so the number this calculator reports beside the result is the one the authorization paperwork will eventually ask about.

Path loss: exact physics, then honest guesswork

Free-space path loss is exact: twenty times the logarithm of frequency plus twenty times the logarithm of distance, less the 27.55 constant when frequency is in megahertz and distance in meters. Every doubling of either frequency or distance costs six decibels. Indoors, the physics stops being exact and becomes statistics: walls, metal studs, glazing, and furniture steepen the distance exponent, and the log-distance model captures that with a single parameter — 2.0 in free space by definition, roughly 2.6 for open interiors, and about 3.3 for dense, partitioned construction, per the published propagation planning literature.

The honest way to read the environment selector is as a bracketing tool, not a measurement. Run the budget at the optimistic and pessimistic exponents and see whether the design survives both; if the margin only exists in the friendly case, the branch needs a closer antenna, a bigger cable, or a shallower split. Measured indoor exponents from below 2 in reflective corridors to above 4 in concrete cores all appear in the literature, which is why no responsible link budget skips the walk test — and why the code does not let ERRCS designs skip the measured acceptance grid regardless of any model.[1]

The ERRCS context — and what this model is not

For emergency responder coverage, the widely adopted floor is a −95 dBm signal at the coverage edge, with area-coverage percentages layered on top: the fire-code family requires the overwhelming majority of each floor to meet it, with the NFPA framework requiring 99 percent in areas the fire authority designates as critical and 90 percent in general areas.[1] The consolidated NFPA emergency-services communications standard carries the survivability, backup-power, monitoring, and testing provisions that turn a coverage system into an emergency responder communication enhancement system.[2] Jurisdictions adopt and amend these codes on their own schedules, so the edition in force — and its reading — belongs to the local authority having jurisdiction.

This calculator is a planning model, and the boundary matters enough to state twice. It will tell you early whether a proposed branch has a realistic chance of meeting the target, which is worth real money before conduit is run. It will not demonstrate compliance — compliance is measured, floor by floor, on the installed system, and accepted by the AHJ.[1] And it deliberately excludes donor-side engineering: rebroadcast agreements, donor antenna design, and per-carrier or per-agency signal data are proprietary to those operators and outside a public-data model’s remit. The cascade math here is the part of the problem that IS public — used inside that boundary, it is the fastest sanity check in the toolbag.

Worked example: one 700 MHz antenna branch

Consider a single antenna branch on a mid-power source: 30 dBm per channel at 700 MHz, feeding 100 feet of LMR-400 through a 2-way splitter with a 2 dB allowance for connectors and splitter excess, into a +3 dBi omni. The farthest coverage point is 75 feet away through dense, partitioned interior, and the target is the −95 dBm ERRCS-class floor. Working the cascade by hand reproduces the calculator output exactly.

Source (per channel)
30 dBm @ 700 MHz
Coax loss (100 ft LMR-400, K-formula)
−3.45 dB
Splitter (2-way, 10·log₁₀2)
−3.01 dB
Other losses (user allowance)
−2.00 dB
Antenna gain
+3.00 dBi
EIRP
24.54 dBm
Path loss (75 ft, dense indoor, n = 3.3)
−74.20 dB
Edge signal
−49.66 dBm
Margin vs −95 dBm
+45.34 dB

The branch clears the target with more than 45 dB in hand — which is the correct reading of a healthy single-antenna cell at 700 MHz, and also a demonstration of why the same branch dies when the numbers stretch: push the coverage distance toward 300 feet and the dense-indoor exponent claws back nearly 20 dB; move the service to 1900 MHz and coax plus path loss take roughly another 11; deepen the split to eight ways and 6 more disappear. Margins this size are spent quickly, and the budget shows exactly where.

These are planning figures. The installed system is verified by measurement — for emergency responder coverage, by the grid-based acceptance testing the code requires — and the authority having jurisdiction owns the verdict.

Frequently asked questions

What signal level do I need at the coverage edge?

For emergency responder radio coverage the widely adopted floor is −95 dBm, required by both the International Fire Code and the NFPA standards, with coverage percentages layered on top: the IFC requires roughly 95 percent of each floor, and the NFPA framework requires 99 percent in areas the fire authority designates as critical and 90 percent elsewhere. Commercial cellular DAS designs typically target stronger signals — −85 dBm or better for reliable data. This calculator defaults the target to −95 dBm and reports the margin above or below it; what your building actually needs is set by the code edition your jurisdiction adopted and, always, by the authority having jurisdiction.

Why does my margin collapse when I change the frequency band?

Both loss mechanisms in the cascade grow with frequency. Coax loss grows roughly with the square root of frequency — the published Times Microwave formula this calculator uses makes 150 feet of LMR-400 cost about 3.5 dB at 150 MHz but almost 8 dB at 1900 MHz. Free-space path loss grows with frequency squared: every doubling of frequency costs 6 dB before the signal has traveled a single extra foot. A branch that works comfortably at 700 MHz can fail outright at 1900 MHz with identical hardware, which is why multi-band systems are engineered at the highest band they must carry, not the most forgiving one.

What is EIRP and why does the calculator show it?

Effective isotropic radiated power is what actually leaves the antenna: the source power minus everything the distribution network eats — coax, splitters, connectors — plus the antenna gain. It is the honest scoreboard of the wired half of the system, and it is also a REGULATED quantity: FCC rules cap EIRP for signal boosters and DAS transmitters by service and band. This calculator reports EIRP as an intermediate result so you can sanity-check the distribution design separately from the propagation guess, and so the number is available when the equipment authorization paperwork asks for it.

How accurate is the indoor path-loss estimate?

It is a planning estimate, and indoor propagation is the least certain term in the whole budget. The calculator uses the standard log-distance model: free space loses signal with an exponent of 2.0, and the published planning exponents rise to roughly 2.6 for open interiors and 3.3 for dense, partitioned construction. Real buildings vary with wall materials, metal stud density, glazing, and furniture — measured exponents from 1.6 in corridors to over 4 in concrete cores all appear in the propagation literature. Use the estimate to size the design and place antennas, then verify with a walk test; for ERRCS the code requires grid-based acceptance measurement regardless of what any model predicted.

Can this calculator prove my building complies with ERRCS requirements?

No — and no calculator can. Emergency responder coverage compliance is demonstrated by measurement: the fire code requires grid-based signal-strength testing of the installed system, floor by floor, plus the survivability, backup-power, and monitoring requirements that come with an emergency responder communication enhancement system, and the authority having jurisdiction accepts or rejects the result. What this planning model does is tell you EARLY whether a proposed branch — this source, this cable, this split, this antenna, this distance — has a realistic chance of meeting the target, so the design conversation happens before conduit is run rather than after a failed acceptance test. Donor-side design against a specific carrier or the public-safety radio system requires that operator’s data and stays outside this model.

References

  1. NFPA 72 — National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (emergency responder radio coverage provisions)

    Establishes the fire-alarm-code framework under which in-building emergency responder radio coverage systems are required, monitored, and accepted — the −95 dBm-class minimum signal strength and 99%/90% area-coverage expectations this planning model targets are grid-verified under this framework by the AHJ. (paraphrase)

    Last verified: 2026-07-05. View on NFPA →

  2. NFPA 1225 — Standard for Emergency Services Communications (consolidating the former NFPA 1221 provisions for in-building emergency communications systems)

    The consolidated emergency-services communications standard carrying the in-building coverage, survivability, and testing provisions for emergency responder communication enhancement systems — the deeper code context behind the ERRCS targets discussed on this page. (paraphrase)

    Last verified: 2026-07-05. View on NFPA →

  3. Times Microwave Systems — LMR Guide (public PDF): insertion-loss model IL = (K1√f + K2·f) × length with per-cable K coefficients in dB/100 ft and dB/100 m

    The vendor’s own published insertion-loss formula and K coefficients for LMR-400 and LMR-600 — computed verbatim by this calculator’s coax term (guide instruction: use K values with the matching length unit). (paraphrase)

    Last verified: 2026-07-05. View LMR Guide (PDF) → · risertools is not affiliated with Times Microwave Systems.

  4. Times Microwave Systems — public online cable-loss calculator (cross-check surface for the coax term)

    The vendor’s own free calculator over the same published K-model — the recommended cross-check for any coax-loss figure this planning model produces. (paraphrase)

    Last verified: 2026-07-05. View Times calculator → · risertools is not affiliated with Times Microwave Systems.