I ended up building two wi-fi parabolic antenna. the first a 300 mm
screen-wire dipper (used for frying bananas) measured 300 mm in
diameter and about 90 mm deep. Later built a second dish using a 430
mm aluminum "wok" about 100 mm deep.

The first antenna gave a better signal then the adapter but the second
antenna gave, using the instruments available to me, approximately 3
times the signal that the bare wi-fi "adapter" had.

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

In article ,
Bruce wrote:

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

My question is what makes you think that these two "dishes" are
Parabolas, and not just dish shaped? I would bet that the TV dish will
work significantly better than any dish shaped reflector, simply because
it will have the correct mathematical shape, and the Focal Point will be
defined properly by the designers.

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 09:16:26 -0800, Bruce in alaska
wrote:

In article ,
Bruce wrote:

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

My question is what makes you think that these two "dishes" are
Parabolas, and not just dish shaped? I would bet that the TV dish will
work significantly better than any dish shaped reflector, simply because
it will have the correct mathematical shape, and the Focal Point will be
defined properly by the designers.


I don't particularly think that the cooking dishes have a correct
parabolic shape. I was attempting to solve a problem with what I could
get my hands on. The discovery of the "cable TV dish" came shortly
after I had completed the 17" wok.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

As I stated Bruce, the TV antenna is a good plan. It will be a true parabola and the gain over what you have will be significant.
Don't forget about the 30 degree included angle that is built in. You will have to move the detector up to the center for your
application.
Steve

"Bruce" wrote in message ...

I ended up building two wi-fi parabolic antenna. the first a 300 mm
screen-wire dipper (used for frying bananas) measured 300 mm in
diameter and about 90 mm deep. Later built a second dish using a 430
mm aluminum "wok" about 100 mm deep.

The first antenna gave a better signal then the adapter but the second
antenna gave, using the instruments available to me, approximately 3
times the signal that the bare wi-fi "adapter" had.

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 22:28:25 +0200, "Steve Lusardi"
wrote:

As I stated Bruce, the TV antenna is a good plan. It will be a true parabola and the gain over what you have will be significant.
Don't forget about the 30 degree included angle that is built in. You will have to move the detector up to the center for your
application.
Steve


No worry about misalignment a there is no "horn" on it. Just a dish
:-)
It is currently being used as a "roof" for a well pump and I have some
20 ltr. pails that, with a notch cut in one side to clear the piping
will work even better so I reckon a trade can be made... once I and
them get back to Phuket.

"Bruce" wrote in message ...

I ended up building two wi-fi parabolic antenna. the first a 300 mm
screen-wire dipper (used for frying bananas) measured 300 mm in
diameter and about 90 mm deep. Later built a second dish using a 430
mm aluminum "wok" about 100 mm deep.

The first antenna gave a better signal then the adapter but the second
antenna gave, using the instruments available to me, approximately 3
times the signal that the bare wi-fi "adapter" had.

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Bruce wrote in
:


I ended up building two wi-fi parabolic antenna. the first a 300 mm
screen-wire dipper (used for frying bananas) measured 300 mm in
diameter and about 90 mm deep. Later built a second dish using a 430
mm aluminum "wok" about 100 mm deep.

The first antenna gave a better signal then the adapter but the second
antenna gave, using the instruments available to me, approximately 3
times the signal that the bare wi-fi "adapter" had.

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)


http://www.turnpoint.net/wireless/has.html

http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/448

http://binarywolf.com/249/pringles_cantenna.htm

http://www.netscum.com/~clapp/wireless.html

http://www.seattlewireless.net/PringlesCantenna

We get about 1.5 miles range from my 200mw hotspot with a 6db antenna 15
meters up in a tree. The whole hotspot is built into an inverted
plastic bucket. The pringle's can antennas are very directional and
great for point to point work like you're doing.....and can be built and
rebuilt for nothing.



--
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

Bruce wrote in
:

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.


http://www.kismetwireless.net/
Kismet is the program for Linux

http://www.netstumbler.com/
Network STumbler for Windows is better and if you hook a GPS receiver to
the PC it will even log the position of every signal it finds that
couples directly to Google EArth! Way cool scanner for wifi at home or
riding around in a vehicle.





http://apradar.sourceforge.net/

http://sectools.org/



--
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

Bruce,
I assume you know how to find the parabola's focal point. I won't bore you with a plan if you already know. Let me know if my
assumption is incorrect.
Steve

"Bruce" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 22:28:25 +0200, "Steve Lusardi"
wrote:

As I stated Bruce, the TV antenna is a good plan. It will be a true parabola and the gain over what you have will be
significant.
Don't forget about the 30 degree included angle that is built in. You will have to move the detector up to the center for your
application.
Steve


No worry about misalignment a there is no "horn" on it. Just a dish
:-)
It is currently being used as a "roof" for a well pump and I have some
20 ltr. pails that, with a notch cut in one side to clear the piping
will work even better so I reckon a trade can be made... once I and
them get back to Phuket.

"Bruce" wrote in message ...

I ended up building two wi-fi parabolic antenna. the first a 300 mm
screen-wire dipper (used for frying bananas) measured 300 mm in
diameter and about 90 mm deep. Later built a second dish using a 430
mm aluminum "wok" about 100 mm deep.

The first antenna gave a better signal then the adapter but the second
antenna gave, using the instruments available to me, approximately 3
times the signal that the bare wi-fi "adapter" had.

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:49:55 +0000, Larry wrote:

Bruce wrote in
:

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.


http://www.kismetwireless.net/
Kismet is the program for Linux

Thanks for that. I had a couple of others but more is better.

http://www.netstumbler.com/
Network STumbler for Windows is better and if you hook a GPS receiver to
the PC it will even log the position of every signal it finds that
couples directly to Google EArth! Way cool scanner for wifi at home or
riding around in a vehicle.

Net Stumbles has a problem in that it only works with certain specific
Wireless chip sets. Unfortunately not the ones I have.

http://apradar.sourceforge.net/

http://sectools.org/
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:07:53 +0200, "Steve Lusardi"
wrote:

Bruce,
I assume you know how to find the parabola's focal point. I won't bore you with a plan if you already know. Let me know if my
assumption is incorrect.
Steve


Yes, have the formula and know about the reflected sunlight method,
although that never seemed to work for me as when I put out a piece of
paper to measure the reflection it shaded the dish and the reflected
beam was too weak to see :-) I'll have to get a special piece of
something transparent to use.


"Bruce" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 22:28:25 +0200, "Steve Lusardi"
wrote:

As I stated Bruce, the TV antenna is a good plan. It will be a true parabola and the gain over what you have will be
significant.
Don't forget about the 30 degree included angle that is built in. You will have to move the detector up to the center for your
application.
Steve


No worry about misalignment a there is no "horn" on it. Just a dish
:-)
It is currently being used as a "roof" for a well pump and I have some
20 ltr. pails that, with a notch cut in one side to clear the piping
will work even better so I reckon a trade can be made... once I and
them get back to Phuket.

"Bruce" wrote in message ...

I ended up building two wi-fi parabolic antenna. the first a 300 mm
screen-wire dipper (used for frying bananas) measured 300 mm in
diameter and about 90 mm deep. Later built a second dish using a 430
mm aluminum "wok" about 100 mm deep.

The first antenna gave a better signal then the adapter but the second
antenna gave, using the instruments available to me, approximately 3
times the signal that the bare wi-fi "adapter" had.

As I previously mentioned I do not have a signal strength meter and
used the standard Linux utility "iwconfig" to produce some sort of
data. It gave a reading of 6 for signal strength using the bare
adapter and as high as 23 with the wok I can only assume that whatever
the value of the increments that the ratio is accurate.

As luck would have it, I found an abandoned TV "cable" antenna - as
used here "cable" is received on a 3 foot dia. parabolic antenna and I
will probably try that at some later date.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)