Lutenna - The antenna made of Sugar

casser

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
218
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Age
41
My Satellite Setup
Sugar antennas:)
My Location
Ilhéu das Formigas - Azores
Low Profile said:
The loss will be too high in those materials IMO.


In what materials your´re saying?

But i´m a bit affraid if the materials are very lossy, bigger spheres will have less efficiency, since the signal needs to pass throught a lot more material than in smaller versions..i dont know if this can happen..
 

Low Profile

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
364
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Age
55
My Satellite Setup
DM800HD, DM7000 80GB HD with Asus WL330 wifi + 2GB usb drive, Skystar2.3, 2.2m Kinhuge Dish with Inverto LNB and Invacom ADF-120 feedhorn. Pace 1.3.25 and 80cm for Sky.
My Location
Lot, Dordogne, Correze border.
casser said:
In what materials your´re saying?

Charcoal 1.2-1.81, Cement 1.5 - 2.1, Cement, Portland 2.5-2.6, Ash (Fly ) 1.7 - 2.0

I can reckon those materials will be very lossy (but admit that I haven't looked up their loss coeffs).

You may find that loss coeff changes with frequency (or maybe that should be with wavelength).

Going back to the lens suggestions, the BIG advantage of a true LL is that it doesn't need to be moved to catch different sats (the LNBs just need to be placed correctly). If you want to adapt the lens as you suggested then you will find that you can only efficiently receive one sat at a time, and you would have to move the lens to focus on any other sat.
 

casser

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
218
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Age
41
My Satellite Setup
Sugar antennas:)
My Location
Ilhéu das Formigas - Azores
Low Profile said:
Charcoal 1.2-1.81, Cement 1.5 - 2.1, Cement, Portland 2.5-2.6, Ash (Fly ) 1.7 - 2.0

I can reckon those materials will be very lossy (but admit that I haven't looked up their loss coeffs).

You may find that loss coeff changes with frequency (or maybe that should be with wavelength).

Going back to the lens suggestions, the BIG advantage of a true LL is that it doesn't need to be moved to catch different sats (the LNBs just need to be placed correctly). If you want to adapt the lens as you suggested then you will find that you can only efficiently receive one sat at a time, and you would have to move the lens to focus on any other sat.

I also think those material´s are very lossy, but is rare to get loss tangent values for each material, so the best way to confirm is to test the material.

There are tons of articles about sphere antennas, this one is about adding a second smaller sphere in the focal point of the biggest sphere:
_http://www.waset.org/pwaset/v37/v37-118.pdf


The Half-lens or Half-lens+conical is made for one sat only, maybe can receive different sat´s better than normal dish...but the multibeam capabilities is lost when the sphere is cutted in half.

Since i posted this antenna in a portuguese satellite forum, many people tried the antenna with different material´s, some homemade support´s for the LNB are very curious..:)i´ll try to upload some photos of the antennas that they made.
 

krithika

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
42
My Satellite Setup
16 feet dish, Humax, Yuri LNBF
My Location
India
Still waiting for the photos :)
 

casser

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
218
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Age
41
My Satellite Setup
Sugar antennas:)
My Location
Ilhéu das Formigas - Azores
krithika said:
Still waiting for the photos :)

Sorry for only replying now...but i´m in vacation:)

I´ll ask the author´s of the photos if i can upload their photos here in satellites.co.uk.

BUT..there is a major problem with using one material only, a 40cm version is working almost the same that a 25cm version (full lens or half-lens):-Nooo (tested with sugar and granulated polyestirene)

In theory (from simulations at university) it should work with only one material, but maybe the loss tangent is messing a lot more than i expected.
 

Grodsik

Member
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
48
My Satellite Setup
Drembox7000
My Location
Sweden
The Half-lens or Half-lens+conical is made for one sat only, maybe can receive different sat´s better than normal dish...but the multibeam capabilities is lost when the sphere is cutted in half.


A half lens on top of a metal plane has the same multisat capability as the full sphere.

I'm thinking of building one out of polypropylen (PP), DC = 2.3, and loss tangent = very, very low at most frequencies. Any experiences?
The actual material I'm considering is cheap PP rope, and either tie the rope in a large ball, or cut the rope in short pieces (fibres) and fill a half sphere container with it. Since the size of the fibres is much smaller than the wavelengts one can use the packing density of the fibres to control and lower the DC value by 20-30%....

Any thoughts if this is viable?


Thanks for a good thread!
 

Satcom1

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
217
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Age
52
My Satellite Setup
1 Meter Primestar Elliptical C/KU. Twinhan 1025 PCI(Linux), Coolsat 6000, Winegard 76 cm dish. 8' Unimesh, HCC9300 Receiver.
Diamond 9000 HD, 1m prime focus, 1.2 m prime focus, both on C Band.
My Location
Chicago
Casser- very interesting design.

Data on dielectric constants of gasses.

_http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0950-7671/43/3/313
 

Satcom1

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
217
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Age
52
My Satellite Setup
1 Meter Primestar Elliptical C/KU. Twinhan 1025 PCI(Linux), Coolsat 6000, Winegard 76 cm dish. 8' Unimesh, HCC9300 Receiver.
Diamond 9000 HD, 1m prime focus, 1.2 m prime focus, both on C Band.
My Location
Chicago
casser said:
This is not a dish..this is a dielectric spherical antenna, only the version with reflector have metal, all others doesnt have a bit of metal on it.

The shape of the Sphere is what makes the signal focal to a point, but the distance of the FC to the antenna is determined by the dielectric constant of the material, not by the size of the sphere
...

Casser-

Consider that that a sphereical dish lackes a well defined focal point and a parabolic dish has a well defined focal point. These things (antenna) are Lenses and maybe a parabolic shape rather then dome will give a good focus point on the LNBF. However, it seems you would not have a multi-satellite lens.
 

Attachments

  • SugarCoatedLens.jpg
    SugarCoatedLens.jpg
    30 KB · Views: 324

g_c

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
45
My Satellite Setup
60cm ku band
My Location
msia
Dear Casser, this is a very interesting topic. Can you post your pdf file here. I couldn't download it from Dragteam.info forum (and put more pics here, please, if possible).
 

rolfw

Believe it when I see it Admin.
Staff member
Joined
May 1, 1999
Messages
38,292
Reaction score
1,615
Points
113
My Satellite Setup
Technomate 5402 HD M2 Ci, DM7000s, Transparent 80cm Dish, Moteck SG2100 DiseqC motor, lots of legacy gear. Meters: Satlook Digital NIT, Promax HD Ranger+ spectrum analyser.
My Location
Berkshire

g_c

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
45
My Satellite Setup
60cm ku band
My Location
msia
use "Coke" instead of sugar?? Its dielectric constant is ranged from 1.1 to 2.2
 

casser

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
218
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Age
41
My Satellite Setup
Sugar antennas:)
My Location
Ilhéu das Formigas - Azores
Hi..

Unfortunately since April i stopped the project..but i hope that in August start working on it again.

Some people from Portugal and Brazil made the antenna with different materials, but nothing new, sugar and granulated Polystyrene are confirmed materials but nothing more. Also like i said before, bigger antenna versions using only one dielectric material doesnt perform any good..a 40cm version work like a 25/30cm.

Maybe the Loss Tangent is messing up in bigger versions, since the signal must pass throught a lot more material (remember that doubling the diameter of the antenna, you will not double the volume of the antenna..is a lot more!!).

The PDF file have some mistakes, but 90% of the information is here in this topic..i´ll try to make a new PDF.

@Satcom1, i think that these sphericall antennas have good FC..since is much more critical to find the FC in a sphere rather than in a Dish and since my version of 20cm can achieve 120% efficiency with a normal LNBF...maybe bigger versions need another type of Horn, with different aperture? But your idea is good to try, maybe in a simulation software first?:)

A Portuguese video of the antenna (made by Houls, user from Dragteam.info)
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8_LbCmZfLQ

New farragsat 40cm version
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auwm-yQWHQ8

1ºpicture-> a 25cm VS 40cm, same performance.
2ºpic-> 25cm version
3º My homemade half-ball, bad results
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    153.6 KB · Views: 333
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    53.5 KB · Views: 330
  • 3.jpg
    3.jpg
    88.1 KB · Views: 316

ldc

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
45
My Satellite Setup
100cm noname-dish (planning upgrade)
invacom TWH-031 LNB
My Location
Sweden / Linkoping
Really cool idea.. Have been reading about this for a few hours now.. One thing i came up on was that we also need to consider the Loss Tangent of the materials used.

So, what type of things are out there that have a low loss tangent at the needed frequencies and has a temperature-stable dielectric constant within the wanted range that's relatively cheap and is easy to obtain?

I'm thinking that a gas is probably the best and easiest since mixing 2 powders will most likely result in an uneven mixture in different areas of the globe, also we should see what types of different globes are out there since that will also affect the performance, but i suspect that the loss tangent is the most important for the globe since the sphere will be quite a low percentage of the whole system.

Maybe if someone is feeling up to he could create some graphs of the theoretical gain of different gasses with this?

Some interesting reading:
_http://books.google.se/books?id=P2cLPsLDHxcC&lpg=PA16&ots=yOjRArwY8X&dq=%22Loss%20Tangent%22%20%22dielectric%20constant%22&pg=PA22

Just a few crazy ideas for the contents:
- Fill the sphere with different types of balls with a low loss tangent but a bit higher dielectric constant. (Can we get the dc to the target range?)
- Pure CO2 has a DC of 1.6 but have not found any loss tangent for it.
- Any cheap noble gases with a low DC out there that we could use to mix a cheap high DC gas with? Probably need to keep the weight of the gases approximately the same.
- Can we maybe lower/raise the pressure in the sphere to lower raise the DC? Get a high DC gas and lower the pressure is probably the best way to go since that would reduce the loss tangent. But with this we would have to have a bit sturdier sphere.

Maybe the creator of the thread could create a table that we could fill up with information on DC/LT on the different materials?

Just some crazy ideas from a insomniac so don't take it word for word :)U-zzz:)
 

ldc

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
45
My Satellite Setup
100cm noname-dish (planning upgrade)
invacom TWH-031 LNB
My Location
Sweden / Linkoping
Did some more reading about this on another one of these sleepless nights...

Not shure about this, but from my understanding it seems like if you dont use multiple layers you will get a larger focal-point when increasing the size of the sphere and this might be the problems that where noticed initially when a larger sphere resulted in less performance. It could be possible to overcome this to some degree with having a lower DC for larger spheres ie increase the distance to the focalpoint but it might be tricker to get correct alignment of the LNB when doing that.

And just a thought about this, maybe someone that already has a large sphere could do a simple test with adding a simple horn to the LNB and see what that would do to the reception.. (some simple cardboard+aluminum foil design).

One idea i had about making a multi-layer thingy..
Get a number of bowls, place bowl and fill with styrofoam (mixed with some material that will change the DC of it), first layer done, get the next bowl and place over the first layer and fill up with the next layer and repeat (removing each bowl when going to the next layer).. Could be an easy way to do it... just gotta find out a way to make styrofoam at home

And as said before... crazy insomniac at work here :)
 

Trust

Specialist Contributor
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
1,127
Reaction score
1,617
Points
113
Age
77
My Satellite Setup
1.8 m CM at SMR 1224 + Elev. with 7 lnb changer Ku (lin - circ) - Ka (lin - circ) C (lin - circ)
My Location
Nijmegen Netherlands
Just a thought of me , what kind of feedhorn will perform the best ?
I think the one designed for a prime focus dish .
 

ldc

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
45
My Satellite Setup
100cm noname-dish (planning upgrade)
invacom TWH-031 LNB
My Location
Sweden / Linkoping
Trust1 said:
Just a thought of me , what kind of feedhorn will perform the best ?
I think the one designed for a prime focus dish .

That would depend on how large the focalpoint is so i think a basic horn-antenna (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horn_antenna) should suffice for the test..

About the focal-point... Think of it this way. When having center at DC 1.0 and outer layer at 2.0. When the radiowaves gets reflected at the outer-layer of the sphere it will bend correctly to get to a good focal-point, but when it goes closer to the center it will weer off a bit more than wanted and with a simple feedhorn you could try and get a bit more signal into the LNB.

A non-tuned feed-horn will probably not do much with this, but it would be nice to see if my theory about this is correct and in that case try and make a tuned feedhorn for it, but this is probably gonna increase the noice-levels. Might not be good for weaker signals out there but it could possibly help to have a larger sphere to compensate when raining or snowing.
 

normsky

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
My Satellite Setup
none
My Location
UK
Topper said:
Not really sure where this is heading, since I was under the impression that all dishes (with exception of a torroidal) were simply sections cut from part of a sphere. If they were not cut from part of a sphere they would not have a focal point, the focal point of which is determined by the original diameter of the sphere they were cut from.

Apart from the sugar what is new here?

Actually common satellite dishes are in the shape of a circular paraboloid. Which most certainly isn't what is produced by cutting a section from a sphere.

Only waves origininating at the center of the sphere would all be reflected to the same point. Pretty useless for focussing parallel waves from a distant source.

As far as the sugar is concerned I was very interested to read this. Shame I saw it so late in the day.
 

bostephen

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Age
56
My Satellite Setup
1.8 m C Band Dish on
PAS7_10 @ 68.5°E, 1.8 m Astra C Band Dish (for roaming) but now on Thaicom 2/5 @ 78.5, 90 cm (GTV) offset on Sirius 4; ALL FTA and Astravox VSR-400 Reciever, I Still have 2 analogue recievers...(4 what? noo one knows!!)
My Location
Africa, Uganda (Log. 32.8°E, Lat. 0.7° N)
Thanx ceasar for that long labour and patience to teach even the most scaptical! I'm wondering what the antenna can be used for? I am not technical enough to understand some of the words you guys are using about the functions of the thing. Does it work on ku or c band or both or on only one of them?
 

Vorg

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
61
My Satellite Setup
Motorized
My Location
US
The tables that list sugar show it has having DC=3, not 2. Reason?
 
Top