How can I make Bluetooth (2.4 GHz) reception area narrow and controllable?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












There are some Bluetooth modules available on the market, like the cheap HC-05 for 3 or 4 USD delivered.



This one mentioned has an internal PCB antenna which I guess has a toroid-like radiation pattern (omnidirectional):



Enter image description here



However I need this module to be receivable in the narrow area only. Like 5-10 square meters area between the module and the ground.



What can I do to make this possible?



  1. Put some metal case around?

  2. Cut off the internal antenna, and connect an external directional antenna?

Any other thoughts?










share|improve this question























  • you want directional, you should probably go with something directional; like infrared
    – Matija Nalis
    3 hours ago















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












There are some Bluetooth modules available on the market, like the cheap HC-05 for 3 or 4 USD delivered.



This one mentioned has an internal PCB antenna which I guess has a toroid-like radiation pattern (omnidirectional):



Enter image description here



However I need this module to be receivable in the narrow area only. Like 5-10 square meters area between the module and the ground.



What can I do to make this possible?



  1. Put some metal case around?

  2. Cut off the internal antenna, and connect an external directional antenna?

Any other thoughts?










share|improve this question























  • you want directional, you should probably go with something directional; like infrared
    – Matija Nalis
    3 hours ago













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











There are some Bluetooth modules available on the market, like the cheap HC-05 for 3 or 4 USD delivered.



This one mentioned has an internal PCB antenna which I guess has a toroid-like radiation pattern (omnidirectional):



Enter image description here



However I need this module to be receivable in the narrow area only. Like 5-10 square meters area between the module and the ground.



What can I do to make this possible?



  1. Put some metal case around?

  2. Cut off the internal antenna, and connect an external directional antenna?

Any other thoughts?










share|improve this question















There are some Bluetooth modules available on the market, like the cheap HC-05 for 3 or 4 USD delivered.



This one mentioned has an internal PCB antenna which I guess has a toroid-like radiation pattern (omnidirectional):



Enter image description here



However I need this module to be receivable in the narrow area only. Like 5-10 square meters area between the module and the ground.



What can I do to make this possible?



  1. Put some metal case around?

  2. Cut off the internal antenna, and connect an external directional antenna?

Any other thoughts?







antenna bluetooth pcb-antenna






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 9 mins ago









Peter Mortensen

1,58131422




1,58131422










asked 8 hours ago









Roman Matveev

1,07111331




1,07111331











  • you want directional, you should probably go with something directional; like infrared
    – Matija Nalis
    3 hours ago

















  • you want directional, you should probably go with something directional; like infrared
    – Matija Nalis
    3 hours ago
















you want directional, you should probably go with something directional; like infrared
– Matija Nalis
3 hours ago





you want directional, you should probably go with something directional; like infrared
– Matija Nalis
3 hours ago











3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
8
down vote













Neither will work.



If you build a metal case with a narrow opening, you'll have an even wider beam; the smaller the aperture, the larger the beam.



It's practically impossible in this form factor to controlledly cut off the existing antenna, and still have something to attach an external antenna to.



But even so: at 2.4 GHz, the ground you mention will work as an OK reflector, and hence, things will still work in the area "indirectly" illuminated by ground reflection.



2.4 GHz devices (such as Bluetooth devices) have to be designed to work with multiple reflections, so it being impossible to limit the area if you're illuminating a wall or a piece of ground is a feature your device has to have.



You could try to add so much attenuation to the antenna that the signal is really really weak, but since a reflection might have relatively little loss compared to the first couple of meters of free space loss, this won't work out, either.



Long story short: you can't.






share|improve this answer



























    up vote
    4
    down vote













    RF reception is rarely "narrow and controllable" unless you create a hard obstacle for the RF signal.



    By a hard obstacle I mean, a metal box (Faraday cage) out of steel plates or fine metal wire mesh (like the is in the door of a microwave oven). Only that can completely block the reception.



    Putting a case around the transmitter will prevent it from working (if done correctly) or make reception bad (if there are some holes left).



    You'd think that a directional antenna would do the job, that's true if there are no reflections which there will always be unless you're in free space. In the real world you cannot avoid a connection over the reflected signals unless you apply RF absorbers to all the walls in the room.



    So in practice: this will never work as well as you want it to.






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      3
      down vote













      This is very likely, impossible.



      Even if you would attenuate the signal, it would all depend of the sensitivity and power of the other pair.



      While you might be able to reduce your signal and on a particular device it would be only visible for a certain distance, it would totally change with another device.



      If you do so for security reason, it would only take someone to have a sensitive bluetooth device, or directional antenna to get the signal.



      Also RF signal is quite unpredictable, it can be reflected off objects, absorbed or go through.



      The only plausible way to have a RF signal locked to a certain area would be to have a Faraday cage, for example covering the walls, windows, floors with a conductive paint, or some sort of conductive shielding.



      Alternatively, you could build a sort of small Faraday cage enclosure where you can control the signal, have the transmitter inside at lowest level.



      It wouldn't be perfect, in which the person would have to put his device in order to get the signal.



      Something like that (don't laugh at the image, you get the point :P).



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer






















      • That looks like a very peculiar toilet.
        – Lightness Races in Orbit
        6 hours ago










      • @LightnessRacesinOrbit you know it is, right? It's a cat litter tray
        – Chris H
        6 hours ago










      • @ChrisH Hah, perfect
        – Lightness Races in Orbit
        6 hours ago










      • This wouldn't work either. 2.4 GHz signal would leak right out of any hand-sized hole. You'd need some very serious engineering with anechoic linings and shields to keep the source from "seeing" the opening to make something like that which actually worked.
        – Chris Stratton
        1 min ago











      Your Answer




      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
      );
      );
      , "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
      return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
      StackExchange.schematics.init();
      );
      , "cicuitlab");

      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "135"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: false,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f401864%2fhow-can-i-make-bluetooth-2-4-ghz-reception-area-narrow-and-controllable%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest






























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      8
      down vote













      Neither will work.



      If you build a metal case with a narrow opening, you'll have an even wider beam; the smaller the aperture, the larger the beam.



      It's practically impossible in this form factor to controlledly cut off the existing antenna, and still have something to attach an external antenna to.



      But even so: at 2.4 GHz, the ground you mention will work as an OK reflector, and hence, things will still work in the area "indirectly" illuminated by ground reflection.



      2.4 GHz devices (such as Bluetooth devices) have to be designed to work with multiple reflections, so it being impossible to limit the area if you're illuminating a wall or a piece of ground is a feature your device has to have.



      You could try to add so much attenuation to the antenna that the signal is really really weak, but since a reflection might have relatively little loss compared to the first couple of meters of free space loss, this won't work out, either.



      Long story short: you can't.






      share|improve this answer
























        up vote
        8
        down vote













        Neither will work.



        If you build a metal case with a narrow opening, you'll have an even wider beam; the smaller the aperture, the larger the beam.



        It's practically impossible in this form factor to controlledly cut off the existing antenna, and still have something to attach an external antenna to.



        But even so: at 2.4 GHz, the ground you mention will work as an OK reflector, and hence, things will still work in the area "indirectly" illuminated by ground reflection.



        2.4 GHz devices (such as Bluetooth devices) have to be designed to work with multiple reflections, so it being impossible to limit the area if you're illuminating a wall or a piece of ground is a feature your device has to have.



        You could try to add so much attenuation to the antenna that the signal is really really weak, but since a reflection might have relatively little loss compared to the first couple of meters of free space loss, this won't work out, either.



        Long story short: you can't.






        share|improve this answer






















          up vote
          8
          down vote










          up vote
          8
          down vote









          Neither will work.



          If you build a metal case with a narrow opening, you'll have an even wider beam; the smaller the aperture, the larger the beam.



          It's practically impossible in this form factor to controlledly cut off the existing antenna, and still have something to attach an external antenna to.



          But even so: at 2.4 GHz, the ground you mention will work as an OK reflector, and hence, things will still work in the area "indirectly" illuminated by ground reflection.



          2.4 GHz devices (such as Bluetooth devices) have to be designed to work with multiple reflections, so it being impossible to limit the area if you're illuminating a wall or a piece of ground is a feature your device has to have.



          You could try to add so much attenuation to the antenna that the signal is really really weak, but since a reflection might have relatively little loss compared to the first couple of meters of free space loss, this won't work out, either.



          Long story short: you can't.






          share|improve this answer












          Neither will work.



          If you build a metal case with a narrow opening, you'll have an even wider beam; the smaller the aperture, the larger the beam.



          It's practically impossible in this form factor to controlledly cut off the existing antenna, and still have something to attach an external antenna to.



          But even so: at 2.4 GHz, the ground you mention will work as an OK reflector, and hence, things will still work in the area "indirectly" illuminated by ground reflection.



          2.4 GHz devices (such as Bluetooth devices) have to be designed to work with multiple reflections, so it being impossible to limit the area if you're illuminating a wall or a piece of ground is a feature your device has to have.



          You could try to add so much attenuation to the antenna that the signal is really really weak, but since a reflection might have relatively little loss compared to the first couple of meters of free space loss, this won't work out, either.



          Long story short: you can't.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 8 hours ago









          Marcus Müller

          28.9k35389




          28.9k35389






















              up vote
              4
              down vote













              RF reception is rarely "narrow and controllable" unless you create a hard obstacle for the RF signal.



              By a hard obstacle I mean, a metal box (Faraday cage) out of steel plates or fine metal wire mesh (like the is in the door of a microwave oven). Only that can completely block the reception.



              Putting a case around the transmitter will prevent it from working (if done correctly) or make reception bad (if there are some holes left).



              You'd think that a directional antenna would do the job, that's true if there are no reflections which there will always be unless you're in free space. In the real world you cannot avoid a connection over the reflected signals unless you apply RF absorbers to all the walls in the room.



              So in practice: this will never work as well as you want it to.






              share|improve this answer
























                up vote
                4
                down vote













                RF reception is rarely "narrow and controllable" unless you create a hard obstacle for the RF signal.



                By a hard obstacle I mean, a metal box (Faraday cage) out of steel plates or fine metal wire mesh (like the is in the door of a microwave oven). Only that can completely block the reception.



                Putting a case around the transmitter will prevent it from working (if done correctly) or make reception bad (if there are some holes left).



                You'd think that a directional antenna would do the job, that's true if there are no reflections which there will always be unless you're in free space. In the real world you cannot avoid a connection over the reflected signals unless you apply RF absorbers to all the walls in the room.



                So in practice: this will never work as well as you want it to.






                share|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote









                  RF reception is rarely "narrow and controllable" unless you create a hard obstacle for the RF signal.



                  By a hard obstacle I mean, a metal box (Faraday cage) out of steel plates or fine metal wire mesh (like the is in the door of a microwave oven). Only that can completely block the reception.



                  Putting a case around the transmitter will prevent it from working (if done correctly) or make reception bad (if there are some holes left).



                  You'd think that a directional antenna would do the job, that's true if there are no reflections which there will always be unless you're in free space. In the real world you cannot avoid a connection over the reflected signals unless you apply RF absorbers to all the walls in the room.



                  So in practice: this will never work as well as you want it to.






                  share|improve this answer












                  RF reception is rarely "narrow and controllable" unless you create a hard obstacle for the RF signal.



                  By a hard obstacle I mean, a metal box (Faraday cage) out of steel plates or fine metal wire mesh (like the is in the door of a microwave oven). Only that can completely block the reception.



                  Putting a case around the transmitter will prevent it from working (if done correctly) or make reception bad (if there are some holes left).



                  You'd think that a directional antenna would do the job, that's true if there are no reflections which there will always be unless you're in free space. In the real world you cannot avoid a connection over the reflected signals unless you apply RF absorbers to all the walls in the room.



                  So in practice: this will never work as well as you want it to.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 8 hours ago









                  Bimpelrekkie

                  44.2k23997




                  44.2k23997




















                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote













                      This is very likely, impossible.



                      Even if you would attenuate the signal, it would all depend of the sensitivity and power of the other pair.



                      While you might be able to reduce your signal and on a particular device it would be only visible for a certain distance, it would totally change with another device.



                      If you do so for security reason, it would only take someone to have a sensitive bluetooth device, or directional antenna to get the signal.



                      Also RF signal is quite unpredictable, it can be reflected off objects, absorbed or go through.



                      The only plausible way to have a RF signal locked to a certain area would be to have a Faraday cage, for example covering the walls, windows, floors with a conductive paint, or some sort of conductive shielding.



                      Alternatively, you could build a sort of small Faraday cage enclosure where you can control the signal, have the transmitter inside at lowest level.



                      It wouldn't be perfect, in which the person would have to put his device in order to get the signal.



                      Something like that (don't laugh at the image, you get the point :P).



                      enter image description here






                      share|improve this answer






















                      • That looks like a very peculiar toilet.
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • @LightnessRacesinOrbit you know it is, right? It's a cat litter tray
                        – Chris H
                        6 hours ago










                      • @ChrisH Hah, perfect
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • This wouldn't work either. 2.4 GHz signal would leak right out of any hand-sized hole. You'd need some very serious engineering with anechoic linings and shields to keep the source from "seeing" the opening to make something like that which actually worked.
                        – Chris Stratton
                        1 min ago















                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote













                      This is very likely, impossible.



                      Even if you would attenuate the signal, it would all depend of the sensitivity and power of the other pair.



                      While you might be able to reduce your signal and on a particular device it would be only visible for a certain distance, it would totally change with another device.



                      If you do so for security reason, it would only take someone to have a sensitive bluetooth device, or directional antenna to get the signal.



                      Also RF signal is quite unpredictable, it can be reflected off objects, absorbed or go through.



                      The only plausible way to have a RF signal locked to a certain area would be to have a Faraday cage, for example covering the walls, windows, floors with a conductive paint, or some sort of conductive shielding.



                      Alternatively, you could build a sort of small Faraday cage enclosure where you can control the signal, have the transmitter inside at lowest level.



                      It wouldn't be perfect, in which the person would have to put his device in order to get the signal.



                      Something like that (don't laugh at the image, you get the point :P).



                      enter image description here






                      share|improve this answer






















                      • That looks like a very peculiar toilet.
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • @LightnessRacesinOrbit you know it is, right? It's a cat litter tray
                        – Chris H
                        6 hours ago










                      • @ChrisH Hah, perfect
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • This wouldn't work either. 2.4 GHz signal would leak right out of any hand-sized hole. You'd need some very serious engineering with anechoic linings and shields to keep the source from "seeing" the opening to make something like that which actually worked.
                        – Chris Stratton
                        1 min ago













                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote









                      This is very likely, impossible.



                      Even if you would attenuate the signal, it would all depend of the sensitivity and power of the other pair.



                      While you might be able to reduce your signal and on a particular device it would be only visible for a certain distance, it would totally change with another device.



                      If you do so for security reason, it would only take someone to have a sensitive bluetooth device, or directional antenna to get the signal.



                      Also RF signal is quite unpredictable, it can be reflected off objects, absorbed or go through.



                      The only plausible way to have a RF signal locked to a certain area would be to have a Faraday cage, for example covering the walls, windows, floors with a conductive paint, or some sort of conductive shielding.



                      Alternatively, you could build a sort of small Faraday cage enclosure where you can control the signal, have the transmitter inside at lowest level.



                      It wouldn't be perfect, in which the person would have to put his device in order to get the signal.



                      Something like that (don't laugh at the image, you get the point :P).



                      enter image description here






                      share|improve this answer














                      This is very likely, impossible.



                      Even if you would attenuate the signal, it would all depend of the sensitivity and power of the other pair.



                      While you might be able to reduce your signal and on a particular device it would be only visible for a certain distance, it would totally change with another device.



                      If you do so for security reason, it would only take someone to have a sensitive bluetooth device, or directional antenna to get the signal.



                      Also RF signal is quite unpredictable, it can be reflected off objects, absorbed or go through.



                      The only plausible way to have a RF signal locked to a certain area would be to have a Faraday cage, for example covering the walls, windows, floors with a conductive paint, or some sort of conductive shielding.



                      Alternatively, you could build a sort of small Faraday cage enclosure where you can control the signal, have the transmitter inside at lowest level.



                      It wouldn't be perfect, in which the person would have to put his device in order to get the signal.



                      Something like that (don't laugh at the image, you get the point :P).



                      enter image description here







                      share|improve this answer














                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer








                      edited 7 hours ago

























                      answered 8 hours ago









                      Damien

                      1,026112




                      1,026112











                      • That looks like a very peculiar toilet.
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • @LightnessRacesinOrbit you know it is, right? It's a cat litter tray
                        – Chris H
                        6 hours ago










                      • @ChrisH Hah, perfect
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • This wouldn't work either. 2.4 GHz signal would leak right out of any hand-sized hole. You'd need some very serious engineering with anechoic linings and shields to keep the source from "seeing" the opening to make something like that which actually worked.
                        – Chris Stratton
                        1 min ago

















                      • That looks like a very peculiar toilet.
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • @LightnessRacesinOrbit you know it is, right? It's a cat litter tray
                        – Chris H
                        6 hours ago










                      • @ChrisH Hah, perfect
                        – Lightness Races in Orbit
                        6 hours ago










                      • This wouldn't work either. 2.4 GHz signal would leak right out of any hand-sized hole. You'd need some very serious engineering with anechoic linings and shields to keep the source from "seeing" the opening to make something like that which actually worked.
                        – Chris Stratton
                        1 min ago
















                      That looks like a very peculiar toilet.
                      – Lightness Races in Orbit
                      6 hours ago




                      That looks like a very peculiar toilet.
                      – Lightness Races in Orbit
                      6 hours ago












                      @LightnessRacesinOrbit you know it is, right? It's a cat litter tray
                      – Chris H
                      6 hours ago




                      @LightnessRacesinOrbit you know it is, right? It's a cat litter tray
                      – Chris H
                      6 hours ago












                      @ChrisH Hah, perfect
                      – Lightness Races in Orbit
                      6 hours ago




                      @ChrisH Hah, perfect
                      – Lightness Races in Orbit
                      6 hours ago












                      This wouldn't work either. 2.4 GHz signal would leak right out of any hand-sized hole. You'd need some very serious engineering with anechoic linings and shields to keep the source from "seeing" the opening to make something like that which actually worked.
                      – Chris Stratton
                      1 min ago





                      This wouldn't work either. 2.4 GHz signal would leak right out of any hand-sized hole. You'd need some very serious engineering with anechoic linings and shields to keep the source from "seeing" the opening to make something like that which actually worked.
                      – Chris Stratton
                      1 min ago


















                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded















































                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f401864%2fhow-can-i-make-bluetooth-2-4-ghz-reception-area-narrow-and-controllable%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest













































































                      Popular posts from this blog

                      How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                      Displaying single band from multi-band raster using QGIS

                      How many registers does an x86_64 CPU actually have?