Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
I haven't been following this too closely but... In a Zo matched system, e.g. network analyzer, reflected power is burned up in the instrument. So "mismatch loss" is real loss and shows up in s21. Think of measuring a crystal filter. The crystals can be very low loss but the insertion loss is high out of the passband because the filter is a huge mismatch. I agree however with the conclusion. On 2/16/2018 12:46 PM, alorona wrote: Hi, Okay, I thought your measurements were like S21 and could be considered a transmission (thru) loss. The other measurements I referred to were -- in other words, I don't believe they were measurements of 'mismatch loss'. The Times Microwave loss figure was definitely a transmission loss. I think it's clear that UHF connectors, at HF, are virtually lossless. Good weekend, Al W6LX __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
Hi, Okay, I thought your measurements were like S21 and could be considered a transmission (thru) loss. The other measurements I referred to were -- in other words, I don't believe they were measurements of 'mismatch loss'. The Times Microwave loss figure was definitely a transmission loss. I think it's clear that UHF connectors, at HF, are virtually lossless. Good weekend, Al W6LX -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/ __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
In fact my N-connector at my in-line Bird Meter element does get warm enough at 1500w at 144-MHz to "barely" discern by touch. Since room temp (70F) is 17c the connector may be at about 25c (nothing to write home about). When I first began operation of my 2m-8877 above 1kW it did burn up a N-connector which probably had poor connection. It was an old run of RG213 which should have been replaced for running that level. I replaced the two sections of coax with a single 20-foot run of LMR-600 which dissipates 0.216 dB which at 1500w is 73w power loss). LMR-600 at 150-MHz is rated at 1.08 dB loss/100-foot. So I run the amp with 1400w indicated by power meter which implies the amp is outputing 1500w (nom.). Most of the time I run 1300w which allows for 5% calib. error in the Bird indication. In the effort to achieve best NF at 1296, I actually measured connector loss in an N-elbow. It was below my measurement resolution of 0.02 dB. How I measured loss was by reading thermal noise from a 50-ohm termination with my SDR-IQ with sw set or 0.02-dB/DIV display. I only began to see some loss when I connected N-elbow + N-relay + N/sma adapter. That measured 0.15 dB at 1296-MHz. Interestingly 0.1 dB was contributed by just the N/sma adapter. For use below 50-MHz connector loss is negligible. Cable loss is way more significant but only above 50-MHz. Of course that is for NEW cable. That 25-year old run of RG8 might be loosing 2-3 dB at 20m. Cables do not last forever! Hint: measure them to know. 73, Ed - KL7UW From: Jim Brown <j...@audiosystemsgroup.com> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor] Thanks for this excellent post, Alan! IMO, "mismatch loss" is a figment of the imagination of those who never get outside the lab. Transmission lines was one of my favorite EE courses, and I never heard of it until I heard it referenced in online discussions a few years ago. And the purported losses in connectors are an urban legend with almost basis in fact. Several years ago, W8JI poetically observed that if the 1 dB loss falsely attributed to UHF connectors was true, each would be burning 35 W carrying a legal limit signal, and be starting fires! Keeping track of losses in systems is, of course, a great thing. Our FD group runs (and has won several times) FD 1A QRP Battery. Every piece of coax in our station is low loss RG8 or RG11. 73, Jim K9YC 73, Ed - KL7UW http://www.kl7uw.com Dubus-NA Business mail: dubus...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
I concur with Jim's comments on loss. I view one should always look at
the component which contributes the greatest loss in the system, that
is most often the feedline. One should strive to improve the condition
by using a line type of less loss. {i.e. better quality feed line} and
eliminate excessive feed line lengths. Factors influencing line
losses are; type of line, age of the line, length of line, frequency and
reflected power. Manufactures produce charts and tables showing loss of
a specific type of line taking into consideration of length and
frequency. These numbers are for new or known good line and not likely
"hamfest" bargain line.
A second component which often contributes significant loss is the all
famous "antenna tuner". Recent tests show some tuners, under some
load conditions can contribute up to 25% of added loss or more. And
while at the same time, the loss in the feedline remains the same.
This brings me to the point where I view many hams obsess over SWR
values. Unless the transmitter is folding back power, as many
un-necessarily do, then the use of the ATU may benefit making the
transmitter happy, but at the sacrifice of added loss to the system. To
that end, there are several brands and models of radios, past and
present, that do not fold back power with reasonable SWR values. I find
it not at all uncommon to operate with a 3:1 SWR without issues. In
this configuration, adding the ATU makes the SWR to the radio look
better, but adds loss induced by the tuner and does not change the loss
in the feed line.
There is an interesting compilation of data on various match boxes i.e.
ATU's and their performance found on the following link. The compiled
information and data is from various sources and presented in XLS format.
http://www.dj0ip.de/antenna-matchboxes/matchbox-shoot-out/
73
Bob, K4TAX
On 2/11/2018 10:25 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
Thanks for this excellent post, Alan! IMO, "mismatch loss" is a
figment of the imagination of those who never get outside the lab.
Transmission lines was one of my favorite EE courses, and I never
heard of it until I heard it referenced in online discussions a few
years ago. And the purported losses in connectors are an urban legend
with almost basis in fact. Several years ago, W8JI poetically observed
that if the 1 dB loss falsely attributed to UHF connectors was true,
each would be burning 35 W carrying a legal limit signal, and be
starting fires!
Keeping track of losses in systems is, of course, a great thing. Our
FD group runs (and has won several times) FD 1A QRP Battery. Every
piece of coax in our station is low loss RG8 or RG11.
73, Jim K9YC
On 2/11/2018 8:03 PM, Alan wrote:
Hi Al,
Yes, but don't forget that the connector "loss" is a mismatch loss,
not absorptive power loss. In other words, it affects the SWR
slightly but does not actually absorb any power.
If you are using any kind of antenna tuner and tuning for 1:1 SWR,
mismatch "losses" have no effect. Even if you aren't doing that, the
antenna is probably not a perfect 50-ohm resistive load anyway, so
the connectors' mismatches are about as likely to make the SWR better
as worse, depending on the phase and magnitude.
But the general point is sound. Power loss is even more important
for QRP than for QRO even though the number of watts of loss is
less. When the other station can barely hear you, every dB counts!
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to rmcg...@blomand.net
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
Thanks for this excellent post, Alan! IMO, "mismatch loss" is a figment of the imagination of those who never get outside the lab. Transmission lines was one of my favorite EE courses, and I never heard of it until I heard it referenced in online discussions a few years ago. And the purported losses in connectors are an urban legend with almost basis in fact. Several years ago, W8JI poetically observed that if the 1 dB loss falsely attributed to UHF connectors was true, each would be burning 35 W carrying a legal limit signal, and be starting fires! Keeping track of losses in systems is, of course, a great thing. Our FD group runs (and has won several times) FD 1A QRP Battery. Every piece of coax in our station is low loss RG8 or RG11. 73, Jim K9YC On 2/11/2018 8:03 PM, Alan wrote: Hi Al, Yes, but don't forget that the connector "loss" is a mismatch loss, not absorptive power loss. In other words, it affects the SWR slightly but does not actually absorb any power. If you are using any kind of antenna tuner and tuning for 1:1 SWR, mismatch "losses" have no effect. Even if you aren't doing that, the antenna is probably not a perfect 50-ohm resistive load anyway, so the connectors' mismatches are about as likely to make the SWR better as worse, depending on the phase and magnitude. But the general point is sound. Power loss is even more important for QRP than for QRO even though the number of watts of loss is less. When the other station can barely hear you, every dB counts! __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
Hi Al, Yes, but don't forget that the connector "loss" is a mismatch loss, not absorptive power loss. In other words, it affects the SWR slightly but does not actually absorb any power. If you are using any kind of antenna tuner and tuning for 1:1 SWR, mismatch "losses" have no effect. Even if you aren't doing that, the antenna is probably not a perfect 50-ohm resistive load anyway, so the connectors' mismatches are about as likely to make the SWR better as worse, depending on the phase and magnitude. But the general point is sound. Power loss is even more important for QRP than for QRO even though the number of watts of loss is less. When the other station can barely hear you, every dB counts! Alan On 02/11/2018 11:49 AM, Al Lorona wrote: Excellent. Thank you, Alan. Data for this particular measurement are very difficult to find on the web -- of course it took an ex-HP guy to do it! Times Microwave (a manufacturer of coaxial cable) says 0.01 dB per UHF connector pair (PL-259-to-SO-239) at HF; I have seen other private measurements that estimate 0.02 dB; and now this data from N1AL. I usually take the greater of these, 0.02 dB, as a worst-case number. But Alan's measurements pretty much show that the loss at HF is almost too small to measure-- even if he had performed a full two-port cal. Even so, you might be surprised to see how quickly it can add up. Beginning at the transmitter output (or receiver input) it is not uncommon to find 20 or more UHF connections in the path to the antenna. Using the 0.02 dB worst-case figure, that's at least 0.4 dB, or 9% of your power. I wouldn't worry about that but I know there are folks on here that would be bothered by that. This, of course, is not counting loss in cables, filters, lightning arrestors, power meters, bulkheads, switches, antenna tuners, baluns, amplifier through-paths, transmission lines, etc. These can add another dB or more to the total and far outweigh any loss in UHF connectors. If you want to minimize losses, UHF connectors are the last thing you should worry about. I encourage you to do an analysis to determine your system efficiency. I recently did so and discovered that I have a worst-case loss (to the feedpoint up at the antenna) of 1 dB, which is 21% of my power. Gone. Forever. Whoosh! Al W6LX __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
The losses pile up for those running QRP or QRPP. I have frequently thought that a QRP system which has the final amplifier at the feed point of the antenna would be very attractive. A crude way of accomplishing a feed point amp would be to take a radio like the Rockmite and place it at the feed point. If you run the Rockmite with a 9V battery, all you just need wires for the paddle and the headphones. The big problem as I see it is weight at the feed point. In theory, you could handle the whole operation with a RG-174 feed line. Run DC power on the feed line, and have the feedpoint electronics switch between transmit and receive depending on the signal level on the coax. But this is just another of the projects lined up to fill the time when I'm not operating. 73 Bill AE6JV On 2/11/18 at 11:49 AM, alor...@sbcglobal.net (Al Lorona) wrote: I encourage you to do an analysis to determine your system efficiency. I recently did so and discovered that I have a worst-case loss (to the feedpoint up at the antenna) of 1 dB, which is 21% of my power. Gone. Forever. Whoosh! --- Bill Frantz| Re: Computer reliability, performance, and security: 408-356-8506 | The guy who *is* wearing a parachute is *not* the www.pwpconsult.com | first to reach the ground. - Terence Kelly __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
Excellent. Thank you, Alan. Data for this particular measurement are very difficult to find on the web -- of course it took an ex-HP guy to do it! Times Microwave (a manufacturer of coaxial cable) says 0.01 dB per UHF connector pair (PL-259-to-SO-239) at HF; I have seen other private measurements that estimate 0.02 dB; and now this data from N1AL. I usually take the greater of these, 0.02 dB, as a worst-case number. But Alan's measurements pretty much show that the loss at HF is almost too small to measure-- even if he had performed a full two-port cal. Even so, you might be surprised to see how quickly it can add up. Beginning at the transmitter output (or receiver input) it is not uncommon to find 20 or more UHF connections in the path to the antenna. Using the 0.02 dB worst-case figure, that's at least 0.4 dB, or 9% of your power. I wouldn't worry about that but I know there are folks on here that would be bothered by that. This, of course, is not counting loss in cables, filters, lightning arrestors, power meters, bulkheads, switches, antenna tuners, baluns, amplifier through-paths, transmission lines, etc. These can add another dB or more to the total and far outweigh any loss in UHF connectors. If you want to minimize losses, UHF connectors are the last thing you should worry about. I encourage you to do an analysis to determine your system efficiency. I recently did so and discovered that I have a worst-case loss (to the feedpoint up at the antenna) of 1 dB, which is 21% of my power. Gone. Forever. Whoosh! Al W6LX ___ - Type N -- UHF -- FREQ (MHz) TOTAL LOSS PER CONNECTOR TOTAL LOSS PER CONNECTOR 1.8 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB 30 0 00 0 __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor]
It's important to remember that when the "UHF" (239 series) connectors were developed, UHF meant 28 MHz! Almost no work was being done at over 100 MHz and the FCC did not even care what one did over 300 MHz: My 1941 ARRL handbook shows that Hams could do whatever they wanted at such absurdly high frequencies, nor does the handbook show how to produce RF above the 112 MHz band (112 became 144 MHz when the FCC reorganized the early TV channel allocations.) That changed very quickly during WWII. Wars do have a habit of spurring technological development. But the name "UHF" stuck with the SO and PL 239 connectors. As Alan points out, they are quite useful up into what we call VHF and possibly low UHF today. 73, Ron AC7AC -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Alan Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 3:18 PM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: [Elecraft] UHF connectors [was: Array Solutions Lightning Arrestor] On 01/23/2018 11:05 AM, Jim Brown wrote: > On 1/23/2018 10:29 AM, Walter Underwood wrote: ... >> But I mostly like them better because they are engineered instead of >> a historical accident.:-) > > The technical superiority of N-connectors for use at HF is a wild > exaggeration, to the extent of being an urban myth. Yes, there is a > SMALL impedance difference at a junction, but it simply doesn't matter > at 6M and below, both because the difference in Zo is relatively > small, because the length is small as a fraction of a wavelength, and > because as frequency increases, small mismatches are reduced by the > loss in the feedline (and NOT loss due to mismatch). > > There is, of course, a FICTIONAL loss called "mismatch loss," which > shows up in the lab with test equipment that is carefully engineered > to have 50 ohm output Z. ... Yup. Here is a posting I made 25 years ago that has actual data: From: ... (Alan Bloom) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1992 23:03:13 GMT Subject: The Truth about UHF Connectors Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc Ya gotta feel sorry for UHF connectors. Recent strings on this notes group lambasted them as worthless at VHF and above, and barely tolerable at HF. One poster called them "5 dB attenuators", and many agreed that there must be some sort of conspiracy among ham equipment manufacturers to inflict such garbage connectors on the amateur community. Today I finally remembered to bring some UHF adapters from home so I could do some relative measurements of UHF versus type-N. As expected, the type-N showed lower insertion loss at high frequencies, but the UHF connectors were hardly "5 dB attenuators." For the test I connected an HP8753 RF network analyzer through two short BNC cables into the following arrangement: _________ | | | BNC female | | N female- | | N male to | | | __| 10 dB |__| to N male |__| N female |__| BNC female |__| 10 dB |__ | Atten.| | adapter| | adapter | | adapter| | Atten.| |___| || |___| || |___| Then I repeated the measurement with the N adapters replaced with UHF. I normalized the measurements by replacing the 3 adapters with a BNC double-female. (That is, this was assumed to have 0 dB loss.) Since two N or UHF adapters were used, I assume the loss per connector is half the total. The vertical scale was .1 dB/division, so I estimated the insertion loss to the nearest .01 dB or so: - Type N -- UHF -- FREQ (MHz) TOTAL LOSS PER CONNECTOR TOTAL LOSS PER CONNECTOR 1.8 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB 30 0 00 0 100 0 00 0 150 0 00.02 0.01 200 0 00.03 0.015 450 0 00.18 0.09 600 0 00.26 0.13 900 0 00.66 0.33 10000.05 0.0250.80.4 13000.10.05 0.86 0.43 16000.05 0.0250.50.25 20000.05 0.0250.02 0.01 Insertion loss increases until about 1300 MHz, and then starts to decrease until it is almost zero for the UHF connector at 2 GHz! At that frequency, the connectors are about 1/4 wave long (1 inch, assuming .66 velocity factor), so I assume that the two adapters are providing a conjugate match to each other. This confirms my assumption that the insertion loss is due to reflections (impedance mismatch), not absorption (true power loss). Bottom line: UHF connectors work fine through the VHF range, and are not too bad even on the 420 MHz band if you can stand about .1 dB mismatch loss per
Re: [Elecraft] uhf connectors
On Sun, 18 May 2014 09:10:00 -0700 (PDT) kd7gc kd...@q.com wrote: For what ever it might be worth, I use 7/16 DIN connectors instead of either UHF or type N connectors. Once I have connected a jumper to the back of a rig, I then use only 7/16 DINs all the way to my SteppIr. My DB36 also uses a 7/16 DIN as I use a custom balun from Array Solutions. I had Jay make my balun with a female 7/16 DIN, just as I had him build my PMII couplers with male and female 7/16 DINs. Alan/KD7GC Alan R. Downing Phoenix, AZ snip Hi Alan, What is a good source of the 7/16 DIN connectors in the US? Thanks, Tom KG7CFC -- Nobody grows old by merely living a number of years. People grow old only by deserting their ideals. - Douglas MacArthur ^^ --... ...-- / -.- --. --... -.-. ..-. -.-. Tom Taylor KG7CFC openSUSE 13.1 (64-bit), Kernel 3.11.6-4-default, KDE 4.11.2, AMD Phenom X4 955, GeForce GTX 550 Ti (Nvidia 325.15) 16GB RAM -- 3x1.5TB sata2 -- 128GB-SSD FF 27.0, claws-mail 3.9.2 registered linux user 263467 __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] uhf connectors
I found DIN 7/16 connectors at $80 per box of 25 on EBay a couple of years back. Worth checking EBay regularly for these and other connectors. I mostly use UHF - Amphenol silver plated types only. Max frequency in use here is 54MHz so no need to go to Ns etc. YMMV 73 David WJ6O G3WGN - 73 Dave G3WGN WJ6O -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/uhf-connectors-tp7589236p7589280.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] uhf connectors
For what ever it might be worth, I use 7/16 DIN connectors instead of either UHF or type N connectors. Once I have connected a jumper to the back of a rig, I then use only 7/16 DINs all the way to my SteppIr. My DB36 also uses a 7/16 DIN as I use a custom balun from Array Solutions. I had Jay make my balun with a female 7/16 DIN, just as I had him build my PMII couplers with male and female 7/16 DINs. Alan/KD7GC Alan R. Downing Phoenix, AZ From: riese-k3djc [via Elecraft] [mailto:ml-node+s365791n758923...@n2.nabble.com] Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 7:58 AM To: kd7gc Subject: uhf connectors Ummm you may want to review this space http://www.wa1mba.org/UHFconn.htm before making statements about UHF connectors Bob K3DJC On Sat, 17 May 2014 20:25:52 -0700 Walter Underwood [hidden email] writes: And we're still using RS-232 instead of USB. And UHF connectors, which have been obsolete since the 1940's (when the N connector was developed). It is all kind of embarrassing. wunder K6WRU __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] _ If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/uhf-connectors-tp7589236.html To unsubscribe from Elecraft, click here http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubsc ribe_by_codenode=365791code=a2Q3Z2NAcS5jb218MzY1NzkxfDE3MzQ0NDk4ODY= . http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_v iewerid=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.namlbase=nabble.naml.namespaces.Basi cNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template .NodeNamespacebreadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_ emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml NAML -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/uhf-connectors-tp7589236p7589240.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] uhf connectors
On 5/18/2014 9:10 AM, kd7gc wrote: For what ever it might be worth, I use 7/16 DIN connectors instead of either UHF or type N connectors. Once I have connected a jumper to the back of a rig, I then use only 7/16 DINs all the way to my SteppIr. My DB36 also uses a 7/16 DIN as I use a custom balun from Array Solutions. A and his money are easily separated. In many respects, UHF connectors are superior to Type N -- certainly with respect to power handling, and the well known Type N issue with creep as the cable stretches. 7/16-in connectors are certainly a fine connector, but they are not cheap, and the UHF-series is entirely satisfactory for use below 100 MHz in PRACTICAL systems. (caps added for emphasis). 73, Jim K9YC __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS
Folks, this thread has already been closed. Please take further discussion off list inthe interest of keeping posting traffic under control. Eric List Noderator elecraft.com On 4/28/2013 7:53 PM, Jim Brown wrote: This discussion is getting VERY far afield from the topic of connectors used on HF equipment. However, the analysis in this tome is rather flawed, which renders the conclusion the author draws misleading at best. T __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS
In response to the Dick Knadle (K2RIW) article concerning UHF connector losses at VHF/UHF frequencies, local Fauquier Amateur Radio Association club member John Huggins, KX4O wrote: I challenge it because I did make the measurements... http://www.hamradio.me/connectors/uhf-connector-test-results.html John's test results and graphics make for even more interesting reading on the topic of UHF connectors. 73, Rich - K1HTV = = = On 4/27/2013 8:10 AM, riese-k3...@juno.com wrote: http://www.wa1mba.org/UHFconn.htm This is an excellent piece of work, Bob. Very solid science and very good practical application of it. Many thanks for posting it. 73, Jim K9YC __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS
This discussion is getting VERY far afield from the topic of connectors used on HF equipment. However, the analysis in this tome is rather flawed, which renders the conclusion the author draws misleading at best. The flaw is that the author measures the impedance bump at the connector, computes a quantity called mismatch loss that is fictional in most ham antenna systems, and decides that there is massive power loss in the system. Most of us who do anything serious on 2M and above use BNCs and Ns at those frequencies. But I've visited several big contesting stations built by very good engineers, and UHFconnectors are the weapon of choice. 73, Jim K9YC On 4/28/2013 2:31 PM, Rich - K1HTV wrote: In response to the Dick Knadle (K2RIW) article concerning UHF connector losses at VHF/UHF frequencies, local Fauquier Amateur Radio Association club member John Huggins, KX4O wrote: I challenge it because I did make the measurements... http://www.hamradio.me/connectors/uhf-connector-test-results.html John's test results and graphics make for even more interesting reading on the topic of UHF connectors. __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS
Perhaps many Hams today do not realize that when the UHF connectors were developed (in the late 1930's IIRC) 30 MHz was UHF! 73 Ron AC7AC -Original Message- This discussion is getting VERY far afield from the topic of connectors used on HF equipment. However, the analysis in this tome is rather flawed, which renders the conclusion the author draws misleading at best. The flaw is that the author measures the impedance bump at the connector, computes a quantity called mismatch loss that is fictional in most ham antenna systems, and decides that there is massive power loss in the system. Most of us who do anything serious on 2M and above use BNCs and Ns at those frequencies. But I've visited several big contesting stations built by very good engineers, and UHFconnectors are the weapon of choice. 73, Jim K9YC __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Jim Brown j...@audiosystemsgroup.comwrote: the analysis in this tome is rather flawed... == Agreed, Jim. Nonetheless, the measurements therein confirm that a UHF connector is as good as any other at frequencies of 144 or less. This started out as a discussion of the new Elecraft 100W amp, which operates only up to 50 mhz, a range where there is nothing to be gained by replacing UHF connectors with something else. By now it should be clear that if you are looking for a way to improve your signal by 1/4 db, there are probably other places in your shack or antenna system that are more likely to be fruitful than changing all your connectors. Tony KT0NY -- http://www.isb.edu/faculty/facultydir.aspx?ddlFaculty=352 __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS
On 4/27/2013 8:10 AM, riese-k3...@juno.com wrote: http://www.wa1mba.org/UHFconn.htm This is an excellent piece of work, Bob. Very solid science and very good practical application of it. Many thanks for posting it. 73, Jim K9YC __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS
More on his other page http://www.wa1mba.org/rfconn.htm Joe KK5NA -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jim Brown Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2013 11:33 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] UHF CONNECTORS On 4/27/2013 8:10 AM, riese-k3...@juno.com wrote: http://www.wa1mba.org/UHFconn.htm This is an excellent piece of work, Bob. Very solid science and very good practical application of it. Many thanks for posting it. 73, Jim K9YC __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
