If for no other reason I would avoid the wood because it stays Wet longer
even if painted

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 8:49 PM Christopher Gray <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I've been looking into the MikroTik mAnt sectors they just released, it
> seems they are one of the most simple / shallow sectors that could be flush
> mounted (disguised / less noticeable). Any ideas for other sectors / panels
> with relatively flat front surfaces? I've discussed replacing building
> components with custom pieces, and they are not interested.
>
>
> Thanks for the help, I'll my testing and see what I can actually do within
> the proposed constraints.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Try to get a minimum of 2 wavelengths away and better up to 10.  Past 10
>> you will have pattern distortion but the impedance and gain will be
>> unaffected.  Or, get as far as you can.  If under 2 wavelengths expect
>> weird behavior.
>>
>> *From:* Christopher Gray <[email protected]>
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 14, 2016 10:43 PM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Antennas Behind Wood or Glass in Old Building?
>>
>> Chuck,
>>
>> How far back should an antenna be from an obstruction (if the obstruction
>> is mandatory and space is limited)?
>>
>> I found a nice paper with information about empirical RF loss testing
>> through various materials. The main drawback is the tests are for 0.5-2 GHz
>> and 3-8 GHz (skipping 2-3 GHz). Found here:
>> http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build97/art123.html
>>
>> Glass test results starting page 141, and wood on page 147. Based on the
>> published results, it seems I might expect signal loss in the 3 dB range
>> when moving from behind glass to behind 1" boards, but I'm not sure I can
>> be as far back as in their testing (1 m from the horn to the specimen).
>>
>> -Chris
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> hmm... looks like bacon is the way to go, if you can't use glass or ABS
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, glass, silicon dioxide is a good dielectric.  And dielectric
>>>> materials can make RF lenses.  So if it is flat, it will not refract the
>>>> signal and should faithfully transmit it with low loss.
>>>>
>>>> The amount of loss, assuming you are out of the reactive near field
>>>> range, is related to a factor called the loss tangent or dissipation
>>>> factor.  It is dependent on frequency.
>>>>
>>>> Air =0  (depends on weather and atmospheric parameters)
>>>>
>>>> Glass = .02  (decreases with higher frequency)
>>>> ABS plastic I use for radomes = .01
>>>>
>>>> Wood = as much as .4   Commonly in the .02 range @ 3 GHz if dry.
>>>> Walnut wood =   1.4 @ 10  MHz
>>>> Water = .157
>>>>
>>>> Bacon (smoked) = .05
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Christopher Gray <[email protected]>
>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, February 20, 2016 4:00 PM
>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Antennas Behind Wood or Glass in Old Building?
>>>>
>>>> The building is 200+ years old, so most of the glass is old enough.
>>>> I've requested to replace some panes with acrylic sheets, but I don't think
>>>> they will let me.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the feedback. It sounds like mounting behind glass is much
>>>> preferred over wood. I have not found good loss estimates yet, but I
>>>> haven't dug into it too far.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Eric Kuhnke <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Old windows are not so bad RF transparency wise. It's even possible to
>>>>> use 80 GHz through glass in high rise office buildings that predate 1982 
>>>>> or
>>>>> so, when metallic coatings and special IR/UV coatings on windows started 
>>>>> to
>>>>> become possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the *new* windows you have to worry about.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Christopher Gray <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I may have an opportunity to install some radios inside a steeple
>>>>>> with some very specific requirements. I'm currently considering 5 GHz and
>>>>>> 3.65 GHz radios for this location. I'd like to do some PTP and PMP links,
>>>>>> but I cannot afford to lose too much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have the option between mounting behind 1" thick solid boards, 2x
>>>>>> 1" thick solid boards, or behind original windows. Are locations with 
>>>>>> such
>>>>>> barriers even worth entertaining? If so, would it be best to ask for
>>>>>> locations behind wood or glass?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks you, Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Reply via email to