|
My cell phone can be great … when it works. There are too many times when its operation is problematic, however, and its spotty operation at our (new-to-us) summer cottage recently spurred me into action. I decided to find out if there was anything I could do to improve its performance. Our cottage, in the town of Buckhorn, Ont., situated about 120 km northeast of Toronto, lies within the area nominally covered by our carrier. But the map on its Web site adds an important detail: "Approximate coverage. May not be exactly as shown." Sometimes my phone gets picked up in the nearby towns of Bobcaygeon and Peterborough, and sometimes it isn’t picked up by any tower. It happens that my cell phone is a Nokia 6185 — the one with the little stub of an antenna. My first thought was that a better antenna should improve service. I reasoned that the right antenna would make enough of a difference that we would not need a land phone line. I had very little luck when I searched for an external cell phone antenna in local retail stores. I visited six, found one external antenna, but did not get any useful information. It was time to consult the Web. There is no dearth of information about cell phone antennas on the Web — searching for "external cell phone antenna" produced 11,000 hits. The challenge is to make sense of the available information and to develop a practical action plan. Antennas come in a variety of sizes, shapes and prices, but bigger and more powerful isn’t necessarily better. The antenna must be tuned to the frequency used by the cell phone. The older analog and digital cellular service uses an 800MHz signal. The newer digital service runs at 1,850MHz. My phone will work in both frequency ranges, and I wanted an antenna that was tuned to both. Among the antennas tuned to accept both frequencies, I concluded, why not go with the one promising the highest gain? The problem is that the reception pattern changes. A 0dB gain antenna works best when the tower is close, but above you; a 7dB gain antenna is best when the tower is more distant, but level with you. Many sources recommend experimenting first with a 3dB gain antenna. There are several of important limitations with this approach. For starters, the antenna must have the right connector for your phone. The cable can’t be too long. And antennas designed for a car work best when placed on a metal surface. That said, my (limited) experience with a small external 3dB antenna has been positive. It only cost US$25, shipping included. It’s greatly improved my recpetion of 800 MHz signals. But I have not experimented enough to determine if reception of higher frequency digital signals are also improved. If you must contend with iffy cellular reception, does it make sense for you to experiment with an external antenna? When the problem is corrected by the simple act of getting out of your car, an external antenna is likely to help. If there is a signal, but it’s weak, then an antenna may help. There are much higher gain antennas than the 3dB model I tried. They increase all signals, but most signals are "noise" and must be filtered out by your cell phone. A loud, noisy signal may not do any good. If you need to drive several miles up the nearest hill, then it’s unlikely that an extra antenna will be useful. In my Web searches, I found several offers of almost magical "as seen on TV" passive antennas that you stick on your phone or automobile windshield. The best comment I found was, "We have seen very little improvement (if any) with this type of antenna." Makes sense. There is also a massive amount of information about the radiation dangers of cell phone use. It’s known that up to 60 per cent of the radiated energy from an active cell phone will pass through the user’s head. It’s almost impossible to prove that long term cell phone use is totally harmless. However, the radiated energy level from cell phones is relatively low. It may be enough to heat the brain, but only by a fraction of one degree. Any observed temperature change is well within the normal brain temperature range. reprinted from |
