On rectangular waveguide, almost everyone conforms to the inside dimensions of 
the waveguide for the frequency.  However for some frequencies there are up to 
three different waveguide sizes that will work.  Lots of overlap in the 
bandwidths of wavelengths.

But for dual pol antennas, the feeds all have a circular waveguide and those 
are much less common and not standardized.  So they pick a diameter that fits 
the center of their bandwidth.  .750”, .777” .780” are all common sizes used 
for 11 GHz.  And really you can mate them with each other with almost no return 
loss issues.  

My transgender / interspecies adapter products generally use the exact diameter 
the antenna it mates with uses.  

Now, that is the inside of the waveguide.  The outside of the waveguide, the 
“nose” of the antenna, that is a variety of inventions by the various radio 
manufacturers.  The Remec design is most common.  A handful of radio vendors 
used that form factor.  It is a bit larger than it needs to be with the 
exception of 6 GHz rectangular.  That just barely fits in a Remec and would not 
fit in a Dragonwave.  

Exalt is so close to Remec it is laughable.  I really wish they would have just 
used the same dimensions, but everybody has to be different.  I think they may 
have believe that if they had their own standard, it would increase brand 
loyalty as nobody wants to change antennas.  But in reality, I can make any 
radio work with any antenna if the frequencies are similar.  

From: Colin Stanners 
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2019 2:56 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

Probably more a question for Chuck then anyone else.

There's (ignoring frequency-related size) at least a dozen waveguide connector 
standards to interface radios with antennas... when buying a licensed backhaul 
radio, pretty much every physical and software interface on the unit conforms 
to a standard, except the antenna interface. But it seems that a physical-only 
interface like that would be the easiest to standardize. Any idea why that has 
never happened in the industry?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to