2.4 GHz Ve 5 GHz Monopol Antenlerin Farklı Duvar Parametreleri İçin Kapsama Alanlarının İncelenmesi

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 1 - 12, 30.04.2024

Hüseyin Tarık Niş , Mehmet Barış Tabakcıoğlu

https://doi.org/10.46387/bjesr.1339193

Öz

Çalışma frekansının farklı olduğu bu Wi-Fi modullerinin kapsama alanları bir evin içerisindeki konumu ve odaların duvarlarının özellikleri çeşitli parametrelere bağlı olarak değişmektedir. Kapsama alanlarının üzerinde bu parametrelerin etkisinin araştırılması için bir ev tasarlanmış ve ev içerisindeki 3 farklı konum için odalara 2.4 GHz ve 5 GHz yayın yapan antenler içeren modemler yerleştirilmiştir. Ayrıca duvarların kalınlığı ve duvarın yapıldığı malzemenin kapsama alanına etkisi incelenmiştir. Analizler gerçekleştirilmeden önce 2.4 GHz ve 5 GHz frekansındaki monopol antenler için uzak alan ışıması elde edilmiş ve sonrasında elde edilen uzak alan ışıma verileriyle konut içerisindeki ışıma analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yapılan analizler ve kıyaslamalar sonucunda 2.4 GHz modemin 5 GHz modeme göre daha fazla kapsama alanı sağladığı tespit edilmiş ve ayrıca, ahşap özellikli duvarın en iyi kapsama alanını sağladığı gözlemlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

CEM, Monopol Anten, Uzak Alan Işıması, Elektromanyetik Alan, Kapsama Alanı

INVESTIGATION OF COVERAGE AREAS OF 2.4 GHz AND 5 GHz MONOPOL ANTENNAS FOR DIFFERENT WALL PARAMETERS

Öz

The coverage areas of these Wi-Fi modules, where the operating frequency is different, vary depending on location in a house and the characteristics of the walls of the rooms. To investigate the effect of these parameters on the coverage areas, a house was designed, and modems containing 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz antennas were placed in the rooms for three different locations in the house. In addition, the thickness of the walls and the effect of the material of which the wall is made on the coverage area were examined. Before the analyzes were carried out, far-field radiation was obtained for monopole antennas at 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz frequencies. Then radiation analysis was carried out inside the house with the obtained far-field radiation data. As a result of the analyzes and comparisons made, it was determined that the 2.4 GHz modem provided more coverage than the 5 GHz modem, and it was also observed that the wooden feature wall provided the best coverage.

Anahtar Kelimeler

CEM, Monopole Antenna, Far Field Radiation, Electromagnetic Field, Coverage Area

Kaynakça

• P. Shanmugaapriyan, H. Chitra, E. Aiswarya, V. Balasubramanian, and S. Ashok Kumar, “A pragmatic approach for effective indoor localization using IEEE 802.11 n”, Ad-hoc Networks and Wireless: ADHOC-NOW 2014 International Workshops, ETSD, MARSS, MWaoN, SecAN, SSPA, and WiSARN, pp. 203-216, Benidorm, 2014.
• A. Belay, L. Yen, S. Renu, H. P. Lin, and S. S. Jeng, “Indoor localization at 5GHz using Dynamic machine learning approach (DMLA)”, International Conference on Applied System Innovation, pp. 1763-1766, 2017.
• Y. Kaplan, and C. Göçen, “A Dual-Band Antenna Design for 2.4 and 5 GHz Wi-Fi Applications”, Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, vol. 34, pp. 685-688, 2022.
• Ł. Chruszczyk, A. Zając, and D. Grzechca, “Comparison of 2.4 and 5 GHz WLAN network for purpose of indoor and outdoor location”, International Journal of Electronics and Telecommunications, vol. 62, 2016.
• M. Sibley, “Introduction to electromagnetism”, Elsevier., 1995.
• G. Verhoeven, “The reflection of two fields: electromagnetic radiation and its role in (aerial) imaging”, AARGnews, vol. 55, pp. 13-18, 2017.
• A.M. Abdelgader, and W. Lenan, “The physical layer of the IEEE 802.11 p WAVE communication standard: The specifications and challenges”, World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 2, pp. 22-24, 2014.
• I. Alimi, A. Shahpari, A. Sousa, R. Ferreira, P. Monteiro, and A. Teixeira, “Challenges and opportunities of optical wireless communication technologies”, Optical Communication Technology, vol. 10, 2017.
• E. Anderson, C. Phillips, D. Sicker, and D.Grunwald, ”Modeling environmental effects on directionality in wireless networks”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 53, pp. 2078-2092, 2011.
• J. McLean, R. Sutton, and R. Hoffman, “Interpreting Antenna Performance Parameters for EMC Applications: Part 2: Radiation Pattern, Gain, and Directivity”, TDK RF Solutions Inc.
• L.A. Dorado, and V. Trainotti, “Simplified calculation of ground losses in low-and medium-frequency antenna systems”, IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, vol. 48, pp. 70-81, 2006.
• K. Pahlavan, and P. Krishnamurthy, "Evolution and impact of Wi-Fi technology and applications: A historical perspective", International Journal of Wireless Information Networks,vol. 28, pp. 3-19, 2021.
• S. Lepaja, , A. Maraj, and S. Berzati, “WLAN planning and performance evaluation for commercial applications”, Data-Centric Business and Applications: Evolvements in Business Information Processing and Management, vol. 1, pp. 53-69, 2019.
• J. Wieart, “Radio-Frequency Human Exposure Assessment. From deterministic to Stohastic Methods”, John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
• U. Sorgucu, and I. Develi, “Measurement and analysis of electromagnetic pollution generated by GSM-900 mobile phone networks in Erciyes University, Turkey”, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 404-415, 2012.
• I. Prlić, J. Šiško, V.M. Varnai, L. Pavelić, J. Macan, S. Kobešćak, and S.C. Avdagić, “Wi-Fi technology and human health impact: a brief review of current knowledge”, Archives of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 94-106, 2022.