Re: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Shayne Lebrun]

https://xkcd.com/927/

 

From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Colin Stanners
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 4:57 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
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Daniel White]

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 <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 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 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

Re: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Bill Prince]

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  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  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
>   - 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.
>
>
> [image: 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  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
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.a

Re: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Tim Hardy]

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  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
> 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.  
> 
>   
> 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  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 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
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> 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

Re: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Daniel White]

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 <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
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Mark Radabaugh]

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  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
> 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

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Chuck McCown]

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
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

[AFMUG] Why hasn't there been a radio-antenna waveguide standard?

[Colin Stanners]

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
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com