Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] Carbon film or metal oxide film resistors for low-power RF ci

To: Alex Eban <alexeban@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] Carbon film or metal oxide film resistors for low-power RF circuits?
From: Jim Barber <audioguy@charter.net>
Reply-to: audioguy@charter.net
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 12:46:26 -0700
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
It's not the solder itself that makes the mess. I use solder that 
apparently has a lot of rosin flux and it leaves a mess on the board. I 
know there's flux strippers available, but haven't yet tried any.

Thanks,
Jim, N7CXI

Alex Eban wrote:
> ..soldering them is not so hard. Just get yourself a liquid flux pen- mine
> is from Farnell, as it happens- put a small drop on both ends. Hold the part
> with real fine points tweezers, solder one end with a very small amount of
> solder, then the other end. Revisit the first end and touch up.
> Remember, what's holding SMT parts in place is the solder that has wicked
> under the part, not the blob visible at the end.
> Alex  4Z5KS
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amps-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of Jim Barber
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:11 PM
> To: Pete Lancashire
> Cc: amps@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] Carbon film or metal oxide film resistors for low-power
> RF circuits?
> 
> Very interesting responses, thanks.
> 
> DigiKey stocks some Stackpole RNC and "RNCS", which Stackpole claims are 
> "Ideal replacement for costly Tantalum Nitride resistors" .
> 
> I wasn't able to quickly find stock on the Vishay-Dale parts in the 
> usual places, but the data sheet looks good.
> 
> Now if I could only learn to solder surface-mount components without 
> making such a mess.
> 
> Thanks and 73,
> Jim, N7CXI
> 
> Pete Lancashire wrote:
>> Not to push on company over another, I found some of this to be helpful
>>
>> http://www.vishay.com/resistors-discrete/list/product-31025/
>>
>> For those oldtimers, Vishey bought Dale.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi Jim,
>>>   I'd suggest using mil type RLR or if you realllly want long term
>>> reliabilty use type RNC.
>>>
>>>   Either one will last near forever.  No comparison to carbon comp or
> even
>>> film.
>>>
>>> 73 & Good morning,
>>>   Marv WC6W
>>>
>>> http://wc6w.50webs.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Jim Barber <audioguy@charter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Jim Barber <audioguy@charter.net>
>>>> Subject: [Amps] Carbon film or metal oxide film resistors for low-power
>>>> RF circuits?
>>>> To: "AMPS" <amps@contesting.com>
>>>> Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 1:06 PM
>>>> If you wanted a precision RF
>>>> instrument to last a long time without
>>>> significant component drift, would you use carbon film or
>>>> metal oxide
>>>> resistors?
>>>>
>>>> Assumptions:
>>>> (1) Little to no RF power dissipated in the resistors
>>>> themselves
>>>> (2) Frequency less than 60mhz
>>>> (3) There would be room for physically larger 1-watt
>>>> metal-oxide
>>>> (4) Cost isn't an issue (repair quantities, mostly)
>>>>
>>>> Looking for opinions, of course. I find myself replacing
>>>> carbon
>>>> composition units all the time, and was wondering if
>>>> metal-oxide would
>>>> be "better" than carbon-film for these purposes.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Jim, N7CXI
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Amps mailing list
>>>> Amps@contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Amps mailing list
>>> Amps@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amps mailing list
>> Amps@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>