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
131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Recent Profile Visitors
440 profile views
-
Conveniently, the dipole parasitic elements have a node (point of zero RF voltage) at their centre, so they can be attached to a conductive metal support at that point without need of insulation, without disturbing their electrical operation The driven element is fed at centre so its two halves must be insulated where the boom supports them.
-
planning on REBUILD muy FA20 WITHOUT screws to reflector...this patches work better (lower VSWR) floating and NOT grounded! "Years later I had the chance to buy an Agilent Fieldfox Network/Spectrum Analyzer for my job, I quickly measured the VSWR and the result is stunning 1.2 VSRW from channel 1 to 11, it kind of confirm the simulation results https://vswr1.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/fooling-around-with-design-of-the-antenna-fa20/
-
Doing the fine tunning , now... very happy with the results , stability and Gain...! W7 showing 10 db more than linux on every Ap...(damn drivers for sure)
-
15 cms long @ 30 degrees w"wings"...
-
IF these are ok...is poor ISP service...also try http://Fast.com with all settings on...to compare...
-
using 3mm Polystyrene foam (1.2) , and a capacitive disc to neutralize the antenna being too INDUCTIVE... Not bad for a 180 by 240 cms...
-
It's "extending" the 50 ohms over the feed line...it's on the gnd ring... ?
-
5.8 ghz and 2.4...?
-
It looks like 4 Folded Dipoles around...?
-
BULLSHIT!
-
yup , never see more than 15 or 16 dbis on 4 patchs on AIR and BOX ...Thiss is on a dielectric and flat , maybe i'm missing something...it's even PUBLISHED on IEEE...https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7219647/
-
19 ORIGINAL.cst
-
19 ORIGINAL.cst
-
my "GUESS"...: BUT MAYBE I GOT WRONG THE Z ADAPTATIONS
-