Use it for what? Antennas come in whatever kind of casing the manufacturers put them in.
As a microwave oven is the only high power microwave power source we have access to, it worked really well.
@PeterHR 's suggestion is an excellent litmus test. It doesnât matter that itâs operating at a different frequency - if it absorbs RF at 2.45GHz, it will at 1.090GHz as well.
For building antennas using available materials .
1 Like
The OP was asking for recommendations for buying a replacement antenna. No one said anything in this thread about building one. And I wouldnât suggest that anyone to cut a piece from their FlightAware or Vinnant antennas and microwave it, would you? Anyway, it would be much easier to look up the dielectric constant of the material online rather than cooking a piece of it.
Identifying $randomplastic is somewhat easier said than done ⌠The microwave trick is a reasonable rule of thumb if you want to check a material before replacing a damaged antenna shell (as was suggested earlier)
Commercial antennas often use a fiberglass shell, not just a simple plastic.
3 Likes
hmmm ⌠actually I did.
You suggested the PCB co-linear and I replied with:
So @PeterHR was warning about avoiding unsuitable materials.
there are several things wrong with that approach.
you need to know exactly what your material is (including the additives)
the dielectric constant isnât the only property that will affect the RF characteristics.
Some plastics have additives explicitly so they can be RF welded (but they still look like the base material). UV stabilisers range from carbon black to complex polymers and are selected depending on the intended end-use. eg. PVC sewer pipe has different additive than pipe used for drinking water.
Similarly, mineral additives are used for for impact resistance, temperature stability, and weather resistance.
Unless you are buying from the manufacturer, the best you can do is test before use.
So I should throw away my antenna which is working perfectly because the plastic housing might be absorbing an infinitesimal amount of radio energy at 1.09GHz? I donât think so. 
The OP asked what others were using and I answered him. I didnât necessarily recommend that he buy one like mine, i just told him what I have and that itâs working fine.
1 Like
no, of course not.
Like most threads here, they do not stay 100% on topic - viable alternative antennas (and their short comings), waterproofing SMA connectors and electrocuting birds have all come up.
The OPâs antenna is damaged, but may be repairable. If a repair is attempted (as you suggested), an awareness of the caveats above my be helpful.
Actually, I was thinking about what to do at minimal cost to slip a new cover over the functional part of the old antenna short term - using something like a simple plastic tube.
There was no need for disparaging responses to the suggestion, though they may not have been seen as relevant to the original poster, thus is an open forum and may have helped someone else.
1 Like
I just didnât understand what the relevance was of talking about RF absorbtion by different types of plastic. Now I see how it fits in the thread, kind of.
1 Like
After doing a bit of research I have today installed a ADS-B 1090 MHz Antenna (1.2m, 8.5dBi) from Pimoroni ltd, superb reception so far and hopefully will work my way back up the rankings. Thanks for all the replies on this thread.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.