How about this, just change the dimensions for the frequency you wish to
cover?
http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/
Seems like decent gain for a simple design...
Regards,
John

wrote in message
oups.com...
Thought I would start here for this question. I would like to build a
passive antenna for my cell phone that has no port. I know it goes
into the 1100 MHZ range if that helps. I would like to use this for
using in my house and for car use. Unless you know of a good link to a
site that sells such a thing. It seems like every new cell phone I get
over the years never has the range that is needed to pick up the towers
in my home (upstairs) or in my car over country roads (drops calls).

Thanks

I don't think I can build this. Are the parts avail on that site? I
did find a interesting item I ordered on ....

http://www.cell-phone-accessories.com/link.html. Motorola c650.

if it works I will report back or if it does not for that matter.

You are joking, right? puzzled-look-on-face

Regards,
John

Well this does seem better so far, but could be better. I went to
Menards and went to the long metal pipe section and had full bars
there. Makes me just want to find a portable long antenna that is
colaspable since I can't drive around with a long metal pipe in
my car.

Ahhh, I can see this question is out of my league, I am a newbie--the
old-timers can probably put ya straight wink

Regards,
John

John Smith wrote:
"I can see this question is out of my league."

Or, out of his parallel universe.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

I would like to build my own, I just need to figure out where to get
the parts from. Again I did not see any thing on that site so far.
The one I bought so far does not seem to make too big a dif so far.
And all the cust service responses from various cell phone antenna
sites say there is not much for 900,1000, 1100 mhz which is what the
specs say on the phone. And yes I am a layman for this but willing to
learn what I can if only for the knowledge.

Vile 5 wrote:
"And all the cust service responses from various cell phone antenna
sites say there is not much for 900, 1000, 1100 mhz which is what the
specs say on the phone."

That`s reasonable. Cell phones communicate with whichever base station
works best in a wide network. This is almost the ultimate space and
frequency diversity system. Antennas are low which limits range. No
problem as contact is lost it is immediately re-established
automatically with another station, the new best choice.

As azimuths between phones and bases are constantly changing,
concentrating phone energy at a articular azimuth does not make sense if
the phone is moving.

Efficiency makes sense. Concentrating energy along the horizontal makes
sense for most users.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

"Richard Harrison" wrote in message
...
As azimuths between phones and bases are constantly changing,
concentrating phone energy at a articular azimuth does not make sense if
the phone is moving.

There's a lot of research going on for 'smart' antennas that effectively are
just electronically phased arrays that continuously re-tune themselves to
'lock on' to a base station. Neat idea, with the usual benefits of
potentially less power for a given range, better range for a given power,
etc., but I don't know whether or not any commercial phones employ the idea
yet.

Joel Kolestad wrote:
"There`s a lot of research going on for "smart" antennas that
effectively are just electronically enhanced arrays that continuously
retune themselves to "lock on" a base atation."

I became aware of that sort of adaptation by reading a notice from the
IEEE Houston Section of an appearance that Cecil`s old professor at
Arizona, Balinas (sp?) was going to make here to clue the locals in on
the latest developments in adaptive antennas. Unfortunately, I didn`t
go. I`ll have to learn elsewhere.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI