Welcome to WIFI Antennas
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.
clanon
Members-
Content count
768 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by clanon
-
0.1 Brass sheet (can use ANYTHING you have)
-
1.5-2mm PES dielectric...RG316 low loss cable...
-
https://www.vinoth.org/rf-calculators/circular-patch-antenna-calculator trial and error but several curves for director reflectors are well known ...NEED to run several SIMULATIONS , tho
-
put the Feed lines close to reflector (2mm or less) and patches where they are and REACTIVITY and VSWR should get BETTER ! jomi
-
Think of each Patch as Resistances , since you have 4 patches for 5.8 and two patches for 2.4...(and YOU NEED to end up on 50 ohms) cutting in a half doesn't work for ALL patches...Filters add complexity (BUT adapt impedances to EACH BAND)
-
The final impedance resonance vswr s11 , have the WHOLE as target...imho
-
-
maybe gets better with thick copper wire and SMOOTH rounded Bends...they look to angled ...imho jeffrika7b.dxf
-
8 AWG = 10 mm2 Copper... Tube is PVC 3/4 with CLAMPS (shorts)
-
in Meters...?
-
a Mesh wire REFLECTOR would give at least 3 dbi more...and tailor the impedance...down to 75 ohms...MAYBE...
-
Already did , didn't like the changes...tried 2 versions , 2021-2022...went BACK...
-
-
Check efficiency , usually is poor for FR4...(it hurt RX) , if you are close to 90% it's good enough...imho
-
I can't open your cst (i'm using 2020)...
-
same size or smaller and close by...TRY SLOTS on the patchs , that works too
-
S11 (Return loss) is the energy absorbed or rejected and it relates to VSWR...from -10 to -20 you have under 2 VSWR, a GOOD antenna...and it should go from the lower frequency you need to the highest (bandwidth)
-
Adding parasitic patches (close by) would make a new s11 dip (higher or lower than the original) if those TWO dips are close by you'll widen the bandwidth ...(at some s11 expense , s11 goes up , less energy absorbed ) if you stay under -10 and efficiency is good...you are good to go...PS: efficiency is ALWAYS GOOD for me , cause i use STYROFOAM as dielectric...
-
ALL metal is WAY BETTER (no losses or dielectric shifts) , with 4 patches at 3.5 you'll end up close to 15 dbi (if EVERYTHING is ok) band width might end up to narrow...tho
-
3.5 ghz (from 3.4 to 3.6 ghz bandwidth) mimo (more than 20db isolation between ports) at least 12-15 dbi gain...imho (gonna have to put the modem with the antenna close by...short cables...) Opening and soldering NEW cables (low losses) would be better...
-
on this ALL METAL structures (if no mistakes have been made) results should be close to simulations(5% 7%) BUT if DIELECTRICS have been used...THINGS GO HAYWIRE FAST and BAD...in MY experience (change in dielectric constant from 1.1 to 1.075 HUGE dimensions and results difference at 2.4 ghz and PATCH ARRAY)
-
-
-
How does the FEED point looks...? it should be be wider band...
-
That's the COMPLICATED EXPENSIVE approach...BUT it achieves MODULAR SHIELDING of different sections (LNA , RECEIVERS , Local OSCILLATORS , Power supplies , Filters , Switches etc)