Right. My point was more to why you had to by the antenna from the
radio distributor instead of buying from just say a Commscope
distributor (or RFS or Radiowaves or...).
Logo <https://atheral.com/>
Daniel White
Co-Founder - Business Development & Operations
phone: +1 (702) 470-2770
direct: +1 (702) 470-2766
Bill Prince wrote on 2/8/19 18:03:
Plus antenna vendors wanted to sell antennas & not adapters. We ended
up buying new radios from a radio vendor in order to avoid swapping
antennas. We wouldn't have necessarily picked the radio(s) we did if
we could have upgraded the link with a simple radio+adapter.
--
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 4:35 PM Tim Hardy <thardy...@gmail.com
<mailto:thardy...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I can backup the third bullet point as I saw it from an antenna
vendor’s viewpoint. The radios vendors forbid the antenna vendor
from selling the interface plate.
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 8, 2019, at 6:55 PM, Daniel White <dwh...@atheral.com
<mailto:dwh...@atheral.com>> wrote:
So on the why... a few things I can add:
* Many manufacturers believed their direct connect interface
was special, or proprietary... and would not openly provide
specifications (I seem to recall a former employer zealous
lawyers threatening to sue someone on this list... :-)
* There was no advantage, on the manufacturer side, to standardize
o it would also inevitably prevent manufacturers from
making other changes they may see as beneficial
* Manufacturers want to sell antennas, and by creating a
special interface they control the supply chain of new
antennas (since the antenna manufacturers sign agreements to
prevent it)
* The market didn't push back hard enough on proprietary
interfaces.
Logo <https://atheral.com/>
Daniel White
Co-Founder - Business Development & Operations
phone: +1 (702) 470-2770
direct: +1 (702) 470-2766
Mark Radabaugh wrote on 2/8/19 16:00:
To add to what Chuck said -
The manufacturers don’t make the antenna’s specific to the
various manufacturers other than adding an adapter plate. You
can remove the radio mount from a Andrew / Commscope antenna and
replace it with the adapter kit for the radio brand. The
adapter kits can be ordered individually as needed - the hard
part is finding the part numbers. Radiowaves is the same. We
have changed a number of antenna’s from Dragonwave, PTP800, and
SAF to PTP820 or SAF over the years.
If anyone wants Andrew Remec (PTP800) adapters we have a pile of
them.
Mark
On Feb 8, 2019, at 5:25 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
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
<http://grante.hu/products/passives/ordering.html> 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
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
