Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Coax Seal yea or nay?

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Coax Seal yea or nay?
From: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 11:52:08 -0700
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On 5/19/13 11:03 AM, Larry Loen wrote:
Rescue Tape is recommended here in Arizona, but I have so far had trouble
getting it to seal as well.

It self-seals very nicely.  The problem is sealing to (e.g.) the coax
itself or whatever other surface is of interest.  Also difficult IME is the
very top of the connector.

I still use coax seal (albeit sparingly) in some situations.  For instance,
a small coating of it just outside of my junction box so that there's no
leak through the coax cable and grommet that goes into the box (in this
case, the cable does not enter from the bottom).






So, I realize that we all have boxes of PL259s and SO-239 barrels to connect with, but why not just use a waterproof connector like N or DIN 7-16, and use no tape/seal/what-have-you?

Just ballparking, looking at the wireman site, PL259s are about $4 each (for middle of the line). N seems to be about $2 more. DIN are pretty pricey ($20+ it seems)

I can see the concerns about the tiny center pin on an N at high powers, but it's not that much smaller than the old PL-259, and both are larger than the center conductor in 0.405" coax like RG-8/RG-213.

0.157" for PL-259 pin vs 0.120" for N center pin vs RG-8/RG-213 AWG13 center conductor at 0.072". The N has a stepped center pin: the skinnier center pin is more of a locator, the actual center conductor is 0.120" all the way through, and if properly mated, very little current will flow in the center pin (skin effect and all that).

And, yes, installing an N is a big trickier than a UHF, especially if you want it to be waterproof. And, it's easier to screw up the interface parts on the N, so it won't give you a nice match to 18 GHz or whatever, but I think even hosed up, it's probably better than the UHF.

And if you're not worried about impedance matching (which UHF connectors aren't), then a waterproof NEMA twist lock might actually be better bet. The connector isn't all that long, so how much of a bump in VSWR are you really going to get? (you would want to avoid a plug/receptacle configuration that is intermateable with any AC power at your location).

(of course, actual tests I've seen on the web of UHF connectors on a VNA show not so wonderful performance at 400 MHz, but pretty decent down at 30 MHz (as in RL better than -20dB)

In any case, you've got non-coaxial paths as soon as you get to the physical antenna, and nobody is going to claim that the two wires coming out of any of a variety of baluns used at the feed of a yagi are some sort of constant impedance line (esp since the Yagi probably has a feedpoint impedance MUCH lower than any practical parallel line). As with the PL-259, or using an AC plug, or binding posts, the length of the discontinuity is a very tiny fraction of a wavelength.





_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

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