Re: Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters
Frank, Good info. I have been using RG6 (Commscope F660BEF) for years for all my receive lines and the feedlines for 80M 4-sq. The critters don't seem to ever bother this slippery PE covering whether on the ground or buried. I use Belden compression F-connectors. Never had a failure with the connectors. About once a year I use my XG-3 set to 10M to check loss to see if anything changed dramatically. I do this will all of my coax. Twice I laid out non-PE jacketed, non-flooded RG6. It didn't last 24 hours before it was bitten in several places. 73, N2TK, Tony -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of donov...@starpower.net Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 2:58 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters I measured the difference in loss (dB per 100 ft) between solid copper (SC) center conductor RG-6 vs. copper clad steel (CCS) Quad-Core RG-6 coaxial cable. The difference is insignificant on 160 meters until cable length exceeds 350 feet. You can see the affect of the steel core and its thin copper plating at 7 MHz and below in this table The cables were manufactured by two different companies, but the relative loss measurements should be valid. A 1000 foot run of RG-6 with the more common CCS center conductor has 6 dB loss on 160 meters vs. 3 dB loss for the less common RG-6 with an SC center conductor. For most of us, the additional 3 dB loss in 1000 feet of CCS RG-6 will be insignificant. Solid Copper Cable length in Freq Copper Cladfeet for a 1 dB MHzLossLossloss difference 1.80.3 0.6 350 3.50.4 0.6 500 7.00.6 0.8 500 10 0.7 0.85 650 14 0.750.9 650 21 0.9 1.0 1000 28 1.0 1.1 1000 73 Frank W3LPL - Original Message - From: "Grant Saviers" <gran...@pacbell.net> To: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <r...@ippt.pan.pl>, topband@contesting.com Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 4:23:34 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Supporting Ladder line The shield is always the antenna element. The coax provides the signal return path when the direction is set with the far end as the feed point of the antenna. Since you likely will have a preamp for the large negative gain of a RBOG, a few db more from the coax won't matter except for a few db gain change when switching directions. Here is some RG174 measured loss data (1db/100') http://www.dxing.info/equipment/rg_174_coax_bryant.dx Much RG6 is Copper clad steel (CCS) so how much loss it has with copper that might be less than 1.8MHz skin depth is an interesting question. Any data out there? Solid Cu RG6 would be a safer bet. There are many RG6 variations and ones that are flooded might the best RBOG choice. Grant KZ1W On 1/10/2018 3:50 AM, Ryszard Tymkiewicz wrote: > > Hi Frank..I understand in the case of BOG we should use both > transformers T1 and T3 with > 4:1 impedance ratio... ? > I wonder if it is possible to use RG174 which unfortunately has quite > big attenuation even on 160m? > > 73 Rys > SP5EWY > > >> A reversible Beverage or BOG can be constructed out of a single run >> of RG-6, there's no need to form an open wire line out of two runs of >> RG-6, >> >> >> See ON4UN's Low Band DXing, Volume 5, page 7-88 and fig. 7-118 >> >> >> 73 >> Frank >> W3LPL >> >> > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters
AFAIK, the only reason they even make solid copper RG-6 at all is for applications that send DC over the coax to operate such things as preamps. DirecTV does that a lot. Rick N6RK On 1/10/2018 11:58 AM, donov...@starpower.net wrote: I measured the difference in loss (dB per 100 ft) between solid copper (SC) center conductor RG-6 vs. copper clad steel (CCS) Quad-Core RG-6 coaxial cable. The difference is insignificant on 160 meters until cable length exceeds 350 feet. You can see the affect of the steel core and its thin copper plating at 7 MHz and below in this table The cables were manufactured by two different companies, but the relative loss measurements should be valid. A 1000 foot run of RG-6 with the more common CCS center conductor has 6 dB loss on 160 meters vs. 3 dB loss for the less common RG-6 with an SC center conductor. For most of us, the additional 3 dB loss in 1000 feet of CCS RG-6 will be insignificant. Solid Copper Cable length in Freq Copper Cladfeet for a 1 dB MHzLossLossloss difference 1.80.3 0.6 350 3.50.4 0.6 500 7.00.6 0.8 500 10 0.7 0.85 650 14 0.750.9 650 21 0.9 1.0 1000 28 1.0 1.1 1000 73 Frank W3LPL - Original Message - From: "Grant Saviers"To: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" , topband@contesting.com Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 4:23:34 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Supporting Ladder line The shield is always the antenna element. The coax provides the signal return path when the direction is set with the far end as the feed point of the antenna. Since you likely will have a preamp for the large negative gain of a RBOG, a few db more from the coax won't matter except for a few db gain change when switching directions. Here is some RG174 measured loss data (1db/100') http://www.dxing.info/equipment/rg_174_coax_bryant.dx Much RG6 is Copper clad steel (CCS) so how much loss it has with copper that might be less than 1.8MHz skin depth is an interesting question. Any data out there? Solid Cu RG6 would be a safer bet. There are many RG6 variations and ones that are flooded might the best RBOG choice. Grant KZ1W On 1/10/2018 3:50 AM, Ryszard Tymkiewicz wrote: Hi Frank..I understand in the case of BOG we should use both transformers T1 and T3 with 4:1 impedance ratio... ? I wonder if it is possible to use RG174 which unfortunately has quite big attenuation even on 160m? 73 Rys SP5EWY A reversible Beverage or BOG can be constructed out of a single run of RG-6, there's no need to form an open wire line out of two runs of RG-6, See ON4UN's Low Band DXing, Volume 5, page 7-88 and fig. 7-118 73 Frank W3LPL _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters
I measured the difference in loss (dB per 100 ft) between solid copper (SC) center conductor RG-6 vs. copper clad steel (CCS) Quad-Core RG-6 coaxial cable. The difference is insignificant on 160 meters until cable length exceeds 350 feet. You can see the affect of the steel core and its thin copper plating at 7 MHz and below in this table The cables were manufactured by two different companies, but the relative loss measurements should be valid. A 1000 foot run of RG-6 with the more common CCS center conductor has 6 dB loss on 160 meters vs. 3 dB loss for the less common RG-6 with an SC center conductor. For most of us, the additional 3 dB loss in 1000 feet of CCS RG-6 will be insignificant. Solid Copper Cable length in Freq Copper Cladfeet for a 1 dB MHzLossLossloss difference 1.80.3 0.6 350 3.50.4 0.6 500 7.00.6 0.8 500 10 0.7 0.85 650 14 0.750.9 650 21 0.9 1.0 1000 28 1.0 1.1 1000 73 Frank W3LPL - Original Message - From: "Grant Saviers"To: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" , topband@contesting.com Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 4:23:34 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Supporting Ladder line The shield is always the antenna element. The coax provides the signal return path when the direction is set with the far end as the feed point of the antenna. Since you likely will have a preamp for the large negative gain of a RBOG, a few db more from the coax won't matter except for a few db gain change when switching directions. Here is some RG174 measured loss data (1db/100') http://www.dxing.info/equipment/rg_174_coax_bryant.dx Much RG6 is Copper clad steel (CCS) so how much loss it has with copper that might be less than 1.8MHz skin depth is an interesting question. Any data out there? Solid Cu RG6 would be a safer bet. There are many RG6 variations and ones that are flooded might the best RBOG choice. Grant KZ1W On 1/10/2018 3:50 AM, Ryszard Tymkiewicz wrote: > > Hi Frank..I understand in the case of BOG we should use both > transformers T1 and T3 with > 4:1 impedance ratio... ? > I wonder if it is possible to use RG174 which unfortunately has quite > big attenuation even on 160m? > > 73 Rys > SP5EWY > > >> A reversible Beverage or BOG can be constructed out of a single run >> of RG-6, there's no need to form an open wire line out of two runs >> of RG-6, >> >> >> See ON4UN's Low Band DXing, Volume 5, page 7-88 and fig. 7-118 >> >> >> 73 >> Frank >> W3LPL >> >> > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband