On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:51:46 -0700, Jim Lux
wrote:

Baron wrote:
Richard Clark Inscribed thus:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 21:54:17 -0500, tom wrote:

On 7/12/2010 9:46 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
The only thing that remains a mystery, for me if for no one else
here,
is the literal specification of the antenna. Google (gasp) fails
me.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
And that does seem to be the crux of the matter. What is the antenna?
And what does it interact with that's not, be it part of the phone or
part of the user?
Hi Tom,

The antenna is reported as being the metal trim that surrounds the
perimeter of the phone. As that is much too large for the frequencies
involved to be taken literally, there is more to the story that
remains clouded. Maybe I'm wrong....

I think you're right. "Design Flaw" Someone messed up testing big time.

If the loop (or dipole) is suitably matched, it doesn't give much
polarization diversity. Perhaps no phone does anyway.

In my older phone, razor(sp?)I think the antenna is a spiral.


Aren't cell stations vertically polarised. The one near me is, and one
of the IF's is smack on 144.005 Mhz.

Time to go legal limit on CW with a big EME array:-)) such as 4, or
6,8, or 12, 28-30 element long johns.


Insofar as being "part of the user," we well know the EM of HTs and
the hand/body contribution. If such were the case, then this would be
an agnostic problem that users of all mobile phones would complain of
(which mildly refutes what the gadget blogs dismissed). On the other
hand, the über-hip, whose complaints are more vocal for their "pain,"
would be outraged at the notion of their simply enjoying the identical
experience of techno-trash. Amazing what a 10 fold cost differential
brings to your perception of quality of service.

Except for the eyes, those phones couldn't heat water with the power
they run.


73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

From a casual look at the phone the metal band seems to be a continuous
loop.

it's two segmented loops that appeared to be around the bottom left
corner, right where it fits in the palm of your left hand.

Its unlikely that there is a physical coupling between it and the
RX/TX, so any tuner or coupling is going to be affected by the hand
grasping it. Since suggestions have been made to hold the phone in a
different place, I would guess that the coupling method is suseptible

Yup, design flaw, and I hear there is now a recall coming up.

to adsorbtion effects and that the hot parts are near the base of the
phone.

FWIW Every mobile phone I've played with has the antenna and coupling
circuitry near the top behind the display.


Not any more.. recent phones (last several years) put the antenna at the
bottom to reduce the SAR number, since the top of the phone is next to
your head, and the bottom isn't. There's a really good explanation from

On mine the top is against your ear and the bottom against your cheek
or upper jaw bone and I'm keeping it until it dies, but those kind of
gadgets have a rather limited life around me. I just want a phone with
voice mail. I have a camera thank you, and it doesn't have a tiny
crappy lens that makes anything much over 1 megapixel nothing more
than bragging rights. I don't want texting, The only thing I need is
the ability to call and be called. I don't need a PDA either.

Even in the old days when we had to use the day planners and even go
to school on them, after the class I dumped everything out of it
including the calendar and picked up a new interior from the stock
room. Threw out every thing I didn't need and used it for a note book
at meetings. To me a day planner would be about as useless and my
profession was a computer systems project manager up until I retired.
It's also my degreed field.

73

Roger (K8RI)


a guy who does, oddly, wireless device antenna design consulting..
http://www.antennasys.com/
specifically
http://www.antennasys.com/antennasys...-antennas.html


http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/t...one-4-review/2 has some
information

Roger Inscribed thus:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:51:46 -0700, Jim Lux
wrote:

Baron wrote:
Richard Clark Inscribed thus:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 21:54:17 -0500, tom
wrote:

On 7/12/2010 9:46 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
The only thing that remains a mystery, for me if for no one else
here, is the literal specification of the antenna. Google (gasp)
fails me.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
And that does seem to be the crux of the matter. What is the
antenna? And what does it interact with that's not, be it part of
the phone or part of the user?
Hi Tom,

The antenna is reported as being the metal trim that surrounds the
perimeter of the phone. As that is much too large for the
frequencies involved to be taken literally, there is more to the
story that remains clouded. Maybe I'm wrong....

I think you're right. "Design Flaw" Someone messed up testing big
time.

If the loop (or dipole) is suitably matched, it doesn't give much
polarization diversity. Perhaps no phone does anyway.

In my older phone, razor(sp?)I think the antenna is a spiral.


Aren't cell stations vertically polarised. The one near me is, and
one of the IF's is smack on 144.005 Mhz.

Time to go legal limit on CW with a big EME array:-)) such as 4, or
6,8, or 12, 28-30 element long johns.


I had 16 x 19 element Tigers up there on a big H frame. I could run a
full gallon from a Tempo 2000. So yes I suppose I could have flattened
the cell station IF...


Insofar as being "part of the user," we well know the EM of HTs and
the hand/body contribution. If such were the case, then this would
be an agnostic problem that users of all mobile phones would
complain of
(which mildly refutes what the gadget blogs dismissed). On the
other hand, the über-hip, whose complaints are more vocal for their
"pain," would be outraged at the notion of their simply enjoying
the identical
experience of techno-trash. Amazing what a 10 fold cost
differential brings to your perception of quality of service.

Except for the eyes, those phones couldn't heat water with the power
they run.


73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

From a casual look at the phone the metal band seems to be a
continuous loop.

it's two segmented loops that appeared to be around the bottom left
corner, right where it fits in the palm of your left hand.

Its unlikely that there is a physical coupling between it and the
RX/TX, so any tuner or coupling is going to be affected by the hand
grasping it. Since suggestions have been made to hold the phone in
a different place, I would guess that the coupling method is
suseptible

Yup, design flaw, and I hear there is now a recall coming up.

After forking out the sort of money they want for the things, I'd be
asking for my brass back !

to adsorbtion effects and that the hot parts are near the base of
the phone.

FWIW Every mobile phone I've played with has the antenna and
coupling circuitry near the top behind the display.


Not any more.. recent phones (last several years) put the antenna at
the bottom to reduce the SAR number, since the top of the phone is
next to your head, and the bottom isn't. There's a really good
explanation from

On mine the top is against your ear and the bottom against your cheek
or upper jaw bone and I'm keeping it until it dies, but those kind of
gadgets have a rather limited life around me. I just want a phone with
voice mail. I have a camera thank you, and it doesn't have a tiny
crappy lens that makes anything much over 1 megapixel nothing more
than bragging rights. I don't want texting, The only thing I need is
the ability to call and be called. I don't need a PDA either.

Agreed !

Even in the old days when we had to use the day planners and even go
to school on them, after the class I dumped everything out of it
including the calendar and picked up a new interior from the stock
room. Threw out every thing I didn't need and used it for a note book
at meetings. To me a day planner would be about as useless and my
profession was a computer systems project manager up until I retired.
It's also my degreed field.

73

Roger (K8RI)


a guy who does, oddly, wireless device antenna design consulting..
http://www.antennasys.com/
specifically
http://www.antennasys.com/antennasys...-antennas.html


http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/t...one-4-review/2 has some
information

--
Best Regards:
Baron.