> Wouldn't this then be something like RG-58? The whole point of RG-8X, as
> I
> understand it, is that the dielectric is foamed, and, so lower loss,
> particularly at high frequencies.
>
> ::Yeah, at HF and even VHF the dielectric losses are too low to measure,
> so the loss is mostly from the center conductor: The fatter, the better.
> But RG8X "sized" cable with a solid dielectric would still be better than
> RG58/U, because it would still be fatter cable: .047" fatter, to be exact.
> Regular RG8X uses a #16AWG center conductor with a foamed dielectric.
> "Solid dielectric" RG8X would need to go to about #18 gauge, so for sure
> losses would be higher. But still not as high as RG58/U. Might be a
> reasonable compromise if strength is more important than loss. Then, in
> those cases, I use Teflon coax, myself...-WB2WIK/6
>
>
>
>
> The impedance of a coaxial line is proportional to 1/epsilon
> *ln(Router/Rinner)
>
> The dominant loss in HF coax is resistive, and primarily from the center
> conductor, so you'd want to have a bigger center conductor. This would
> make Router/Rinner a smaller number (and hence, the ln of the ratio
> smaller). To keep the same impedance, you'd want to make 1/epsilon
> bigger,
> which means reducing the dielectric constant (epsilon). RG-8X does this
> by
> foaming the dielectric (so the overall epsilon is part air(gas) part
> plastic).
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|