NetStumbler.com
Forums > Wireless
Forums > Hardware
> Post Your Homebrew Antennas Here

Pages (4): «
First ... «
2
3
[4] Go
to first unread post

Last
Thread   Next
Thread

Author

Thread

IL GIACO
Mini
Stumbler

Registered: May
2002
Location:
Posts: 11

quote:

Originally posted by gcrocker
Not that
appropriate for stumbling (it's 20" high and PVC), but I may
mount it on my crappy van for just that purpose:

http://www.guerrilla.net/reference/antennas/2ghz_collinear_omni_lowpwr/

First
one I built took 3-4 hours, and I think I can do them in an
hour now.

-glenn

I've build many of them and I can
made it in about 30 mins
However I've also build one with 5 elements
instead 4 (usings the same measures) and It work very
good.
For example with airtools from the same distance from
a AP the 4 elements antenna give me 10 of quality, with the 5
elements I can reach 17-18 of quality.
I would like to know
what a 6 elements could do.
PS: I've used rg174, it's the
only cable that I can find here.

__________________
Se puo' essere ferito, puo'
essere ucciso!

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 03:06
AM

fordem
Tropical
Stumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location:
Posts: 186

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic
i wonder if
it's ok the way i did the feed connections instead of using
rigid coax. performance seems ok but i don't know what my
setup does to VSWR...

I don't have access to the rigid coax
either, but after seeing the Trevor Marshall site which showed
one version built directly on the back of an N connector, I
decided to go ahead with it.

I just need to get a round
tuit - as soon as I find one of those

I also got a friend with one of them little
DBS dishes that she's not using, so maybe I'll even try it
with that.

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 04:29
AM

sparafina
yatta!

Registered: May
2002
Location: AUS/LAX/DCA
Posts: 168

Re: success!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by lincomatic

[B]ok, where best to get the answer than from the
horse's mouth. i fired off an e-mail to trevor, and he gave me
the answer quickly. my driven element & feed were all
wrong. in the pic above, i have the thing shorted together at
the middle and only 1 wire connecting. it's supposed to be
open at the middle w/ 1 side connected to the signal and one
to ground. works great now...about 3dB better than my comtelco
patch clone when both are rotated for best match of
polarization.[QUOTE]

Nice job! I also got it wrong, I
only connected the driven element. I also used a piece of
stiff thinnet, which is a bit floppy and a pain to work with
at 15 mm. I need to redo the driven element with just
wire.

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 12:33
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Re: Re:
success!

quote:

Originally posted by sparafina
Nice job! I also
got it wrong, I only connected the driven element. I also
used a piece of stiff thinnet, which is a bit floppy and a
pain to work with at 15 mm. I need to redo the driven
element with just wire. [/B]

it'll make a dramatic diff in the
performance when u hook it up the right way.

btw, i
asked trevor about the double 8 design:
http://patraswireless.00sf.com/antennas.html
and
he claims that 2 loops gives best performance.

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 02:40
PM

fordem
Tropical
Stumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location:
Posts: 186

Re: Re: Re:
success!

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic
btw, i asked
trevor about the double 8 design:
http://patraswireless.00sf.com/antennas.html
and
he claims that 2 loops gives best performance.

How are you counting loops? I'm thinking
that 2 loops would be a bi-quad.

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 02:51
PM

sparafina
yatta!

Registered: May
2002
Location: AUS/LAX/DCA
Posts: 168

Re: Re: Re:
success!

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic
he claims that
2 loops gives best performance.

I've also seen another design with all
the loops stacked in parallel, I'll post the url when I find
it again. It was based on a ham radio antenna design scaled to
2.4 gHz

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 02:59
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Re: Re: Re: Re:
success!

quote:

Originally posted by fordem

How are
you counting loops? I'm thinking that 2 loops would be a
bi-quad.

yes, i'm calling a biquad 2 loops. trevor
told me that the biquad is optimal...adding more loops doesn't
enhance performance. so where do these double 8 designs come
from?

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 03:31
PM

fordem
Tropical
Stumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location:
Posts: 186

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
success!

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic
so where do
these double 8 designs come from?

I wondered about that myself - I spent
some time researching quad, bi-quad and the good old cubical
quad and doodling on a scrap of paper and theory says the
voltage at the center point of a double 8 will be pretty much
zero at the resonant frequency.

It's possible that a 6
loop version might work reasonably well, but so far that's
only on paper.

quote:

Originally posted by sparafina
I've also seen
another design with all the loops stacked in parallel, I'll
post the url when I find it again. It was based on a ham
radio antenna design scaled to 2.4 gHz

Is this it?

The Frars guys had a very
brief snippet of information on their webpage about a
quad-bi-quad and had promised a writeup that never
materialised.

What I had envisioned was four bi-quads
mounted in a single plane equidistant from one long
rectangular reflector.

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 04:00
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

seattlewireless has posted a new version of the coffee
can waveguide calculator:

http://seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/DirectionalWaveguide

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 09:21
PM

sparafina
yatta!

Registered: May
2002
Location: AUS/LAX/DCA
Posts: 168

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic

seattlewireless has posted a new version of the
coffee can waveguide calculator:

http://seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/DirectionalWaveguide

The calculations seem to have changed
with respect to waveguide length, am I wrong?

They also
have links to Christoph Cattelain's antenna site below the
calculator. Ill try and visit him in September when I'm Liege.
I'm particularly interested in his slotted waveguide
experiments.

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-09-2002 09:48
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

quote:

Originally posted by sparafina

The
calculations seem to have changed with respect to waveguide
length, am I wrong?

if you put in channel 6, the numbers are
very similar to greg rehm's calcs (at least for 3.25"). i
looked into greg's calculator and he's using channel 6 (2437)
as the reference freq.

__________________
~lincomatic

Last edited by
lincomatic on 07-10-2002 at 09:33 AM

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-10-2002 08:58
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

as a
crosscheck, i decided to re-implement the cantenna calculator
based on formulae from the ARRL antenna book.
in case
anyone is interested, i've uploaded C++ source and Win32 EXE
at:

http://www.geocities.com/lincomatic/software.html#cantenna

seems
like the seattlewireless calculator is a little bit off. my
calcs are almost exactly identical to greg rehm's calculator
when you plug in channel 6.

found some interesting
stuff in running my program. w/ a 3.25" (82.55mm) dia
waveguide optimal probe position varies by a whopping 5.5mm
between channels 1-11! but with a 92mm dia guide, the diff is
down to 2.63mm. can't go much higher than 92mm because the
TM01 cutoff starts to get too low to do channel 11.

btw
the ARRL book recommends 2-3 guide wavelength for the
waveguide length, so the 3/4 guide wavelength value should be
treated as a minimum.

__________________
~lincomatic

Last edited by
lincomatic on 07-10-2002 at 11:47 AM

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-10-2002 11:44
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

cantenna finally beats the biquad

i've been
trying to hook up my brother who is a professor at a local
college into the campus wireless network. he lives in college
housing just down the hill from the campus. the IT department
has several antennas pointed at college buildings off campus,
but unfortunately, my brother's house is around the corner
from them. they were supposed to install another AP near my
brother's house, but haven't gotten around to it after a year
of waiting, so i've been trying to figure out how to get a
signal to him.

a couple of nites ago climbed up on his
roof and pointed my biquad at a yagi (which was pointed away
from me) a few hundred feet away which was behind a tree and
amazingly still got a 5dB SNR...marginal at best especially
because the tree may grow yet more foliage.

i built
another cantenna tonite using 3 3.25" cans...makes the length
about 1.75 waveguide wavelengths. the driven element is
30.75mm long and mounted the 64mm from the back of the can.
the conical collector is 7.25" in diameter on the big side, w/
a 30degree flare. this is just a quick prototype so i made the
collector out of 2 coat-hanger circles, separated w/ four 4"
long coat hanger supports covered in aluminum foil. the final
design will need to be more durable to stand up against wind
& hail. here are the SNR's i got across the street from my
AP.

orinoco built in: 26
2 cans w/o collector:
36
trevor marshall biquad: 39
3cans w/ collector: 43
(!)

this is the highest gain antenna i've built yet. i
hope it's good enough to get a clean signal at my bro's house.
can't wait to try it out.

dragged my jornada off a
table while connected to this %$* thing and it fell on the
floor. lucky the card & jornada are ok, but i broke off
the end of my pigtail
lincomatic has attached
this image:

__________________
~lincomatic

Last edited by
lincomatic on 07-11-2002 at 08:52 AM

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 03:45
AM

ew123
Mini
Stumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location:
Posts: 8

Hello
Lincomatic,

your new cantenna is surely impressive and
very usefull for sniffing with kismet but for the purpose of
connecting your brother to the campus it might be not
ideal.

The horn collects more energy and improves
reception for this antenna. However when used for sending, the
horn spreads the TX-signal over a larger area thus decreasing
the received power at the other end.

So you will
improve reception of the campus signals while simultaneously
decreasing reception of your brothers signal at the
campus.

Such an antenna is only usable for two way
communication when used on both ends. Then you have the
gain-gain (or how would you call improved gain? ;-) for
receiving as well as for transmitting.

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 04:52
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

quote:

Originally posted by ew123

The horn
collects more energy and improves reception for this
antenna. However when used for sending, the horn spreads the
TX-signal over a larger area thus decreasing the received
power at the other end.

thanks for the info. bmoore314
made the same observation with his wire mesh collector, but i
was hoping that by keeping mine smaller (his has a 11"
aperture and mine is 7.25")
that my Tx power would stay
high enough.

in case it doesn't work, what kind of
antenna would you recommend? i can't find any decent designs
w/ enough gain ... may resort to buying a parabolic grid
antenna if all else fails.

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 08:51
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

It works!

just got back
from my bro's. from the same place i got the 5dB SNR using the
biquad, i got 8dB w/ the 3-can & cone cantenna. i fired up
pocketIE and was able to get into hotmail with it and surf a
little. by moving to a different spot on the roof that wasn't
blocked by the tree, i got a 12dB SNR. i'm still amazed
because i'm pointing it at the Lucent yagi from about a 30-45
degree angle from the rear....didn't realize they radiated
that strongly to the rear.

my question is do i have
enough signal margin to operate this thing reliably? what's a
good minimum SNR for reliable communications? i don't want to
drop the connection every time the atmospheric conditions
change.

__________________
~lincomatic

Last edited by
lincomatic on 07-11-2002 at 02:59 PM

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 10:48
AM

Thorn
DooMed
Stumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Tír na nÓg
Posts: 384

Kewl.

lincomatic

12dB should be good. Just for grins
though, what are the actual figures for the noise level,
signal, SNR?

__________________
Thorn

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 10:59
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Re: Kewl.

quote:

Originally posted by Thorn

lincomatic

12dB should be good. Just for
grins though, what are the actual figures for the noise
level, signal, SNR?

thorn,
12dB was the most stable SNR
reading i got...the antenna pretty directional (though less so
than the bare cans)...hard to keep it steady holding the
bazooka & jornada in 1 hand and the stylus in the other
whilst balancing on a pitched roof! looking back into my MS
log, here are the peak values it recorded:

Signal+:
-85
Noise-: -103
SNR+: 14

i'm also trying to
allow for signal loss in the cabling & connectors to the
eventual location inside the house. how low do you think it
can let the SNR go at the connection to orinoco card in the
house and keep a stable connection? the AP is also an Agere
unit.

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 11:55
AM

Thorn
DooMed
Stumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Tír na nÓg
Posts: 384

You'll
probably loose 2-4dB from line losses, depending on size,
length, number of connectors, etc. But from the sounds of it,
you should be OK. Some people report running 7-8dB and still
making a good connection. I think the commercial WISPs like
about 10 as a minimum.

Sounds like fun.

__________________
Thorn

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 12:13
PM

rogerRabbit
Mini
Stumbler

Registered: Jun
2002
Location: Motueka
Posts: 19

Re: cantenna finally
beats the biquad

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic

orinoco
built in: 26
2 cans w/o collector: 36
trevor marshall
biquad: 39
3cans w/ collector: 43 (!)

Nice looking puppy!

Out of curiousity,
do you have a figure for 3 cans w/o collector?

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 02:29
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

quote:

Originally posted by Thorn
You'll probably
loose 2-4dB from line losses, depending on size, length,
number of connectors, etc. But from the sounds of it, you
should be OK. Some people report running 7-8dB and still
making a good connection. I think the commercial WISPs like
about 10 as a minimum.

Sounds like fun.

thanks thorn. i was going to use 10dB as
a baseline minimum, but due to the configuration of his house,
i might need a long cable run. also i wanted to factor in
stuff like the antenna getting knocked out of optimal
alignment during a rainstorm...don't want to get stuck
tweaking the thing every week.

i'm trying to keep the
budget down, but it's not looking pretty. i may end up having
to set up a repeater configuration to get the signal to the
target computer. anyway after it's all set up i'll post a
summary of the setup.

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 02:56
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Re: Re: cantenna
finally beats the biquad

quote:

Originally posted by rogerRabbit

Nice
looking puppy!

Out of curiousity, do you have a
figure for 3 cans w/o collector?

i think the SNR was about 37-38 dB

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 02:58
PM

sparafina
yatta!

Registered: May
2002
Location: AUS/LAX/DCA
Posts: 168

lincomatic,

have you recently looked at
Christoff Catelain's horn site, he's posted a calculator.
Might be an alternative to the bazooka cantenna.

Here's
the google translated url from seattle wireless:

http://216.239.37.120/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&langpair=fr%7Cen&u=http://seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/CardboardHorn&prev=/language_tools

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 03:17
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

quote:

Originally posted by sparafina

lincomatic,

have you recently looked at
Christoff Catelain's horn site, he's posted a calculator.
Might be an alternative to the bazooka
cantenna.

Here's the google translated url from
seattle wireless:

http://216.239.37.120/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&langpair=fr%7Cen&u=http://seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/CardboardHorn&prev=/language_tools

yeah i saw that stuff. pretty cool but
the cardboard's not going to hold up too well on my bro's
roof.

didn't see the calculator though, thanks for the
tip!

__________________
~lincomatic

Last edited by
lincomatic on 07-11-2002 at 03:59 PM

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 03:50
PM

sparafina
yatta!

Registered: May
2002
Location: AUS/LAX/DCA
Posts: 168

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic

yeah i
saw that stuff. pretty cool but the cardboard's not going to
hold up too well on my bro's roof.

didn't see the
calculator though, thanks for the tip!

I think the cardboard is just for
prototyping, I expect that you would need to get tin sheeting
for a operational antenna.

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 04:05
PM

Thunderforge
Net
Stumbler

Registered: Jun
2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 87

Re: Re: Kewl.

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic

Signal+:
-85
Noise-: -103
SNR+: 14

Ok, since it's listed here I'll ask. I'm
sure it's a standard RF thing but, why is the signal number a
negative number and in what instances would I get a positive
number (like I did at work today.)

__________________
Back to the
forge,
TF

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 04:07
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

i don't have
any big pieces of sheet metal laying around and it looks like
a lot of work to assemble one. maybe someone else can be the
guinea pig to try it out first (hint hint)

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 04:11
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Re: Re: Re:
Kewl.

quote:

Originally posted by Thunderforge

Ok,
since it's listed here I'll ask. I'm sure it's a standard RF
thing but, why is the signal number a negative number and in
what instances would I get a positive number (like I did at
work today.)

dBs are based on the log function. so if
you plug in 1 you get zero. fractions result in negative
numbers. positive #'s are when the get above the reference
level of 1 (could be 1W, 1 mW, etc.) in the signal power.
(sorry i'm a bit rusty on the exact formulae and don't have
any of my EE textbooks handy at the moment, so i can't give u
the exact equations...you must have had a pretty powerful
signal to get positive...i've never seen that.

i think
power in dB is 10log10(power in watts) and dB for voltages is
20log10(voltage)...someone correct me if i'm wrong...

__________________
~lincomatic

Last edited by
lincomatic on 07-11-2002 at 04:21 PM

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 04:14
PM

Haveck
Mini
Stumbler

Registered: Jul
2002
Location: Penn State
Posts: 10

that's
right

dB is an expression of gain

voltage and
current gain in decibels are 20*log10(abs(current or voltage
gain in v/v or i/i))

this is usful because a negative
voltage gain in v/v doesn't necessarily mean the signal is
lossy - just out of phase, but a negative voltage gain in
decibels does mean the signal is attenuating

log(1)=0,
so the gain v/v must be greater than 1 to get a possitive dB.
this means you must receive a stronger signal than was
transmitted, i believe - which could be done with an amp, but
is unlikely otherwise

also, power gaim in decibels is
10log(power gain)

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 09:05
PM

Thunderforge
Net
Stumbler

Registered: Jun
2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 87

Thanks, that
cleared it up for me.

__________________
Back to the
forge,
TF

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-11-2002 10:12
PM

mshimek
Ohio Net
Fumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Near Cleveland, Ohio
Posts:
26

Decibels

Or, db as we
all know is a REFERENCE value only. You have to reference it
to a known value such as watts, milliwatts or volts,
millivolts and microvolts. Now with that in
mind:

Transmitters, such as those used in commercial
microwave transmitters are referenced to 1 milliwatt,
therefore a transmitter of 1 watt would be a +30 dbm
transmitter, a 1/2 watt transmitter would be +27 dbm or a 0
dbm transmitter would be 1 milliwatt.

0 dbm= 1
milliwatt
10 dbm= 10 milliwatts
20 dbm= 100
milliwatts
30 dbm= 1000 milliwats or 1 watt

Received
signal strength reads negative numbers because of the free
space and path loss of the signal. The noise floor is the
signal strength of the background noise, which is caused by
man made devices and nature, such as the sun. Your signal to
noise ratio (SNR+) is how high your signal is above that noise
floor. So if your noise floor is -92 and your signal is -82,
they your SNR+ is 10.

Here are some typical specs on a
6.7 Ghz microwave path on a system I maintain:

Path
Length: 14.81 miles
Free Space Loss: 136.53
db
Transmission Line Loss: 3.54 db
Jumper loss: .2
db
Antenna Radome Loss: .5 db

Antenna Size: 8 ft
Dish
Antenna Gain: 42.3 db
Transmitter Power: 21.2
dbm
Total Gains 105.8 db

Unfaded RX level: -38.5 dbm
(+/- 2 db)
Required Level for 10-3 BER: -77 dbm
Flat
Fade Margin: 38.5 db
Percent Reliability:
99.99961%

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-12-2002 01:02
PM

fordem
Tropical
Stumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location:
Posts: 186

Bowtie
Antennas?

Anyone got
dimensional data on this type of stuff? Looks like it would be
fairly easy to construct.

Bowtie #1

Here's another link - to
the write up Webgear Aviator mods and the pics

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-2002 02:48
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Re: Bowtie
Antennas?

quote:

Originally posted by fordem
Anyone got
dimensional data on this type of stuff? Looks like it would
be fairly easy to construct.

Bowtie #1

Here's another link - to
the write up Webgear Aviator mods and the pics

interesting stuff. only link i could find
via google was this one:

http://www.qsl.net/vk1tkr/Pacific_Monolithics/Pacific_Monolithics.htm

which
is probably where u got your link from, right? maybe u could
send vk1tkr an email asking him for details?

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-2002 03:46
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Cheap Cables, Antenna
Links

in case
anyone is interested, found a goldmine of hardware links
on
seattlewireless.net:

http://www.seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/WirelessHardwareLinks#line28

they
also list a cheep source of cabling:

http://www.allcompc.com/index.htm

examples:

orinoco
24" pigtail: $11.67
6ft LMR400 w/ N-f+m:
$15.70

don't see any shopping cart on their
page...guess one needs to call it in.

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-2002 11:00
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

circular biquad &
dish

here is an
interesting biquad & dish design:

http://www.qsl.net/ik1hgi/atv/24-mhz.htm

very
kool.

it's in italian, so you might need to use
babelfish to translate:

http://babelfish.altavista.com/

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-2002 11:25
PM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

i know this
sounds a bit far fetched, but the bazooka cantenna picked up
an AP 4 miles away.

from my house, which is on a hill,
i can pick up a certain AP w/ SNR 8dB (signal ~-88db) pretty
consistently using the bazooka.
the biquad can find the AP
also, but w/ max SNR 4dB and it's very unstable...catches it
for only a second at a time.

well today, i was driving
on the freeway w/ my mobile mark clone sitting on my dash
inside the car, and picked up the same AP (same MAC addr &
channel). when i plugged the GPS coords from NS into MS
S&T, it measured 4 miles away from my house as the crow
flies. wonder what antenna they're using...from the SSID, it's
a local fire dept, and it's using Cisco hardware.

__________________
~lincomatic

Last edited by
lincomatic on 07-14-2002 at 01:06 AM

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-14-2002 12:52
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

guerrilla.net collinear
kit

brian
oblivion of guerrilla.net told me they've worked
with

http://www.aerialix.com/

to make kits
for their collinear design which come with prewound coils and
a fiberglass radome. there are also pre-assembled models.
also, they have surplus parabolic grids for $15-30
(!)

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-15-2002 09:38
AM

sparafina
yatta!

Registered: May
2002
Location: AUS/LAX/DCA
Posts: 168

Re: guerrilla.net
collinear kit

quote:

Originally posted by lincomatic
brian oblivion
of guerrilla.net told me they've worked with

http://www.aerialix.com/

to make
kits for their collinear design which come with prewound
coils and a fiberglass radome. there are also pre-assembled
models. also, they have surplus parabolic grids for $15-30
(!)

Way cool, I'm guessing the kits are for
the low power omni and not the coax based collinear?

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-15-2002 09:55
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

Re: Re: guerrilla.net
collinear kit

quote:

Originally posted by sparafina

Way
cool, I'm guessing the kits are for the low power omni and
not the coax based collinear?

i think so because:
1) he mentions
prewound coils
2) he told me about the aerialix when i
mentioned the link to the low power omni was dead.

but
i guess u can ask them to make sure. i'm thinking of getting
one of those parabolics to play with. would be nice to try
different feeds on them

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-15-2002 10:24
AM

lincomatic
UberNetbumbler

Registered: Apr
2002
Location: Venus
Posts: 880

collinear omni rocks

I finally
built the gnet low power collinear. Took forever, but it's
done, and it works great. full story:

http://www.geocities.com/lincomatic/collinear.html

I'm
going to try closing my sunroof onto it and stumbling with it
when i run some errands today.
lincomatic has attached
this image:

__________________
~lincomatic

Report
this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-22-2002 11:30
AM

All times are GMT -8 hours. The
time now is 11:31 AM.

Pages (4): «
First ... «
2
3
[4]

Last
Thread   Next
Thread

Show
Printable Version | Email
this Page | Subscribe
to this Thread

Forum Jump:
Please select one:
-------------------- Private Messages User
Control Panel Who's
Online Search Forums
Forums Home -------------------- NetStumbler Forums--
Windows Version--
MiniStumbler-- Help-- Suggestions/RequestsFAQ's--
NetStumbler--
MiniStumbler--
WiFi-- AntennasWireless Forums--
Hardware--
Buy/Sell/Trade/Share-- Stumbling
Setups-- AP
Information-- Unix-- Other StumblersMisc
Forums-- News-- Off-Topic

Rate This
Thread:
Select a rating... 5 ..
Best 4 3
.. Average 2 1 .. Worst

Forum Rules:

You may post new threads
You may
post replies
You may post
attachments
You may edit your posts

HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON

< Contact Us - netstumbler.com >

Powered by: vBulletin Version
2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

All messages
express the views of the author and are for entertainment purposes only.
Netstumbler.com cannot be held responsible for the authenticity of the content
or the actions of its members. By using this site and its services, you warrant
that you will not post any messages that are discriminating, obscene, hateful,
threatening, or otherwise violates any laws and you release Netstumbler.com from
any future claims of any kind whatsoever including, but not limited to,
addiction and loss of productivity. All forum messages, private messages and any
other content are properties of Netstumbler.com. Even if publicly available,
personal or copyrighted information are not to be posted without the consent of
the owner. Distribution of licensed and copyrighted materials in any way not
endorsed by the copyright owner is strictly prohibited. You may not use this
site and its resources to spam other sites or individuals or perform any action
that violates any law. Items sold or bought in the For Sale forum are sold as is
and no warranty or insurance of any kind is provided. Netstumbler.com cannot be
held responsible for the outcome of any transactions and no warranty of any kind
is provided, either express or implied. Vulgar words are not allowed in the
subject lines ; they may be used in the message body in any forum. The
Administrator, Super Moderators and Moderators of Netstumbler.com have the right
to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason and to reveal your
identity and other known information in the event of a complaint or legal action
arising from any message posted by you.