Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Conductivity\s+of\s+stainless\s+steel\s+hardware\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: Charles Stackhouse <cstack14478@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 06:54:21 -0800 (PST)
I have been building antenna hardware such as transmitting chokes, Beverage transformers, etc. in various plastic boxes. The electrical connections have been to solder lugs fastened inside the boxes
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00267.html (7,314 bytes)

2. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: George Dubovsky <n4ua.va@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 10:05:50 -0500
Hi Charlie, This is one area where practice overrules theory. Yes, SS is not the conductor that copper is, but it's not bad, and since you're posting on the lowband forum, I presume you're interested
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00268.html (9,084 bytes)

3. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: Bill Wichers <billw@waveform.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 15:42:52 +0000
I've used stainless plenty of times and haven't ever really noticed any problems, but I've never tried to make measurements either. My new vertical matching network I'm building using silicon bronze
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00269.html (8,653 bytes)

4. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 11:26:17 -0500
Some of the longest most drawn-out debates (and fights) come from dealing with how much is good, how much is OK, or how much is bad. It goes on and on with everything until our heads spin. <<< A very
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00270.html (9,808 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 12:02:39 -0500
Amen! Charlie, K4OTV Some of the longest most drawn-out debates (and fights) come from dealing with how much is good, how much is OK, or how much is bad. It goes on and on with everything until our h
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00271.html (10,555 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 10:00:32 -0800
This post is one of the finest examples of technical writing I've seen in years. It strikes to the heart of those know almost nothing, and put on their tin hats to protect themselves from bad advice
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00273.html (8,176 bytes)

7. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: Richard Karlquist <richard@karlquist.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 12:44:27 -0800
A very tech savvy friend (microwaves, public safety radio) says this is no good. Due to the poor conductivity of stainless steel, RF connections should not be through Charlie, W2GN If your friend wa
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00275.html (8,446 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 16:20:11 -0500
The primary additive in stainless steel is chromium - not nickel. There are some stainless steels that do not contain nickel at all and there are non-magnetic stainless steels. Another common additiv
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00276.html (9,868 bytes)

9. Re: Topband: Conductivity of stainless steel hardware (score: 1)
Author: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 16:32:00 -0500
I expect that most of the offending nickel at VHF/UHF sites is nickel plating on less expensive connectors where it is used in place of more expensive silver alloys. Ch;arlie, K4OTV The primary addit
/archives//html/Topband/2014-01/msg00277.html (10,594 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu