Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+RG\-174\s+power\s+handling\s+capacity\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+RG\-174\s+power\s+handling\s+capacity\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] RG-174 power handling capacity (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 06:32:26 -0500; I need some small-diameter coax for rewiring the input side RF connections in my SB-220. Is RG-174 adequate for the power levels encountered (125w max, <50% duty cycle) or would I be better off to go; /archives//html/Amps/2002-04/msg00140.html (7,204 bytes)
2. [Amps] RG-174 power handling capacity (score: 1): Author: g8gsq@qsl.net (Steve Thompson); Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 13:14:44 +0000; Suhner rates 174 good for 250W cw at 30MHz, 20 deg. C. That presumably gets it up to rated max. temp. of 70 deg. C so you can work out the temp. rise for your conditions. Steve; /archives//html/Amps/2002-04/msg00141.html (7,393 bytes)
3. [Amps] RG-174 power handling capacity (score: 1): Author: realex@flash.net (Bob Alexander); Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 06:10:00 -0800; Pete, RG-174 is rated @ 170 Watts @ 10 MHz, 72 Watts @ 50 MHz. Loss is 3.8 dB/100Ft at 10 MHz and 6.5 dB/100Ft at 50 MHz. Capacity is 30.8 pF/ Ft. Bob, W5AH --Original Message-- I need some small-dia; /archives//html/Amps/2002-04/msg00142.html (7,410 bytes)
4. [Amps] RG-174 power handling capacity (score: 1): Author: Peter.Chadwick@zarlink.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 13:12:02 +0100; According to the Suhner catalogue, RG174 is good for 150 watts at 30MHz when matched, with a loss of 15dB/100metres at that frequency. Power handling goes up as a straight line on a log frequency/lin; /archives//html/Amps/2002-04/msg00143.html (7,634 bytes)
5. [Amps] RG-174 power handling capacity (score: 1): Author: kkanakas@cisco.com (krish); Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:29:57 -0500; Pete, Here is the data for it from the web pages of RF connection. May be your question is much more technical in nature. Anyway, here is the link. http://www.therfc.com/powerrat.htm#RG174 thanks kri; /archives//html/Amps/2002-04/msg00146.html (7,762 bytes)
6. [Amps] RG-174 power handling capacity (score: 1): Author: g8gsq@qsl.net (Steve Thompson); Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 13:55:11 +0000; I think you looked at curve A6a, not A6b for the power rating. Steve; /archives//html/Amps/2002-04/msg00147.html (7,368 bytes)
7. [Amps] RG-174 power handling capacity (score: 1): Author: stevek@jmr.com (Steve Katz); Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 09:54:47 -0800; All the comments relating to RG174's power handling ability seem silly to me. The real weakness in the application is that the cable is so fragile that merely soldering to its center conductor can ov; /archives//html/Amps/2002-04/msg00156.html (8,585 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]