Fwd: Re: [TowerTalk] N connectors
Jim Lux
jimlux at earthlink.net
Tue Sep 9 11:48:29 EDT 2003
At 11:44 AM 9/9/2003 -0500, Jim Rhodes wrote:
>Ok, Strike #1 off of your list if you use these. They are no more weather
>proof than a UHF connector.
Nonsense... N connectors have gaskets (if properly assembled) and are
weatherproof. For that matter, they pass hermeticity tests for vacuum
chambers. We use them at work all the time as bulkhead feedthroughs into
vacuum chambers. As to whether the cable to connector interface is
weatherproof is more a matter of proper assembly. Check out the datasheet
on Amphenol's site. That's not just idle puffery, it's a real spec, and
gets tested exhaustively.
No gasket on UHF connectors... not to say that both types can't be
assembled and field potted (i.e. wrapped with stuff) to make them weatherproof.
>Also, has anybody tested these to see what the impedance really is?
a - That's part of the spec, which says, < 0.15dB loss and VSWR<1.3 from
0-11 GHz
b - In practice, they're a heck of a lot better, if not mistreated. I've
measured them numerous times on a calibrated network analyzer. They really
are 50 ohms and flat to at least 14 GHz. I've built high precision systems
for which changes in loss of 0.01 dB can be detected and they use Type N
connectors. (The mate/remate consistency of N connectors isn't all that
hot.. You could expect a couple tenths of a dB change each time you mate
them, at microwave frequencies, at least, unlike a precision connector such
as a APC-7)
I note that the special versions made for corrugated coax (hardline) spec
out at 33 dB return loss .. that's about 1.05 VSWR
But, as has been pointed out more times than not, the impedance problem
with a UHF connector is probably insignificant at HF frequencies. (just how
tightly controlled is the impedance of that coax, anyway.... Belden cites a
typical spec of 4% for solid conductor and solid dielectric, and a VSWR for
the run of the mill cable of 1.1:1 (due to manufacturing variability in
dielectric, etc.)
I did a casual search for any actual measured impedance data for a UHF
connector and couldn't find it. Maybe I'll have to scrounge up a suitable
network analyzer and try it someday at lunch time.
>Not that I haven't used them for jumpers in the shack. But I really
>wouldn't consider them that much superior to a UHF connector except for
>impedance (and like I said I wouldn't swear to that without confirmation).
Another advantage of N connectors is that they produce the specified
performance when tightened finger tight (re: the discussion a week or so
ago about using pliers on UHF connectors) and are available with safety
wire holes to keep them fastened in the face of vibration and temperature
cycling.
>At 02:03 AM 9/9/03, Dino Darling wrote:
>>I finally found a picture of the ANDROS N Connector....
>>http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/parts/4505.html
>>
>>>Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:52:40 -0700
>>>To: towertalk at contesting.com
>>>From: Dino Darling <k6rix at arrl.net>
>>>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] N connectors
>>>
>>>There sure is a lot of speculation out here when it comes to
>>>N-Connectors! Its almost embarrassing!
>>>
>>>N-Connectors are SUPERIOR to the UHF connector for many reasons...
>>>1- Weather proof
>>>2- Constant impedance to 11 Ghz
>>>3- Constant impedance.
>>>4- Able to withstand HIGHER voltages! (1500 volts peak)
>>>http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/typen.asp
More information about the TowerTalk
mailing list