Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Pete,
If you have to choose only one antenna impedance input, the high one would probably be more useful, particularly for users of real long wires like beverage antennas. However those like myself with an inverted-L which uses a matching transformer and coax lead would appreciate the 50-ohm input. Is there a reason why you are considering only a BNC connector for the low impedance input? How about a PC board mounted female F-connector which can be adapted by the users to their antenna lead wire. Any idea on when the MW receiver may hit the market? Pete KE9OA wrote: I am finishing up the MW receiver..............anyway, I have a high impedance antenna input in addition to the 50 ohm input. With this type of receiver is the high impedance input enough, or would interested parties rather have both inputs. The reason I am asking this is because my employer would like to have all jacks mounted to the main PC board. The only thing I have been able to find so far has been a right angle BNC connector for the 50 ohm input. Opinions welcomed! Pete ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
starman wrote:
Hi Pete, If you have to choose only one antenna impedance input, the high one would probably be more useful, particularly for users of real long wires like beverage antennas. However those like myself with an inverted-L which uses a matching transformer and coax lead would appreciate the 50-ohm input. Is there a reason why you are considering only a BNC connector for the low impedance input? How about a PC board mounted female F-connector which can be adapted by the users to their antenna lead wire. The "F" connectors are 75 ohm impedance. -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I have decided to include the SO-239 connector.
Pete "Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message ... starman wrote: Hi Pete, If you have to choose only one antenna impedance input, the high one would probably be more useful, particularly for users of real long wires like beverage antennas. However those like myself with an inverted-L which uses a matching transformer and coax lead would appreciate the 50-ohm input. Is there a reason why you are considering only a BNC connector for the low impedance input? How about a PC board mounted female F-connector which can be adapted by the users to their antenna lead wire. The "F" connectors are 75 ohm impedance. -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
starman wrote: Hi Pete, If you have to choose only one antenna impedance input, the high one would probably be more useful, particularly for users of real long wires like beverage antennas. However those like myself with an inverted-L which uses a matching transformer and coax lead would appreciate the 50-ohm input. Is there a reason why you are considering only a BNC connector for the low impedance input? How about a PC board mounted female F-connector which can be adapted by the users to their antenna lead wire. The "F" connectors are 75 ohm impedance. Technically true for VHF and UHF but not that important for MW or HF reception. I use R6U coax (75-ohm) for my HF antenna lead. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
starman wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: The "F" connectors are 75 ohm impedance. Technically true for VHF and UHF but not that important for MW or HF reception. I use R6U coax (75-ohm) for my HF antenna lead. Having worked in TV broadcast and with critical telemetry video, it does matter in a lot of applications at these frequencies. Use what you want, but I prefer to use the proper connectors for the application, and "F" connectors are not known for high reliability. When I ran the repair facility for United Video one of my jobs was to test sample connectors. A high percentage of "F" connectors didn't pass the basic tests. They were flimsy, had bad swages between the parts and poor plating. LIke some beautiful samples we got. They passed every test except plating. They were un-plated brass that corroded just from body oils. -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"starman" wrote in message
... "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: The "F" connectors are 75 ohm impedance. Technically true for VHF and UHF but not that important for MW or HF reception. I use R6U coax (75-ohm) for my HF antenna lead. I agree - the supposed impedance mismatch is a non-issue at these frequencies, connectorised CATV cable is available everywhere and cheap. The SO-239 is overkill and you want to make sure it is solidly mounted because it can be easily over-torqued. I wish they had used an F connector on the DX-394 because the SO-239 on one of mine rotated and fractured the solder pad on the pcb. Tom |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
This won't be a problem with my unit.....................I will use a panel
mount component, with either a two-bolt or a four-bolt mounting pattern. Pete "Tom Holden" wrote in message .. . "starman" wrote in message ... "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: The "F" connectors are 75 ohm impedance. Technically true for VHF and UHF but not that important for MW or HF reception. I use R6U coax (75-ohm) for my HF antenna lead. I agree - the supposed impedance mismatch is a non-issue at these frequencies, connectorised CATV cable is available everywhere and cheap. The SO-239 is overkill and you want to make sure it is solidly mounted because it can be easily over-torqued. I wish they had used an F connector on the DX-394 because the SO-239 on one of mine rotated and fractured the solder pad on the pcb. Tom |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"starman" wrote in message ... "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: starman wrote: Hi Pete, If you have to choose only one antenna impedance input, the high one would probably be more useful, particularly for users of real long wires like beverage antennas. However those like myself with an inverted-L which uses a matching transformer and coax lead would appreciate the 50-ohm input. Is there a reason why you are considering only a BNC connector for the low impedance input? How about a PC board mounted female F-connector which can be adapted by the users to their antenna lead wire. The "F" connectors are 75 ohm impedance. F connectors, like UHF connectors are non constant impedance connectors, unlike BNC, TNC, N or SMA. Dale W4OP |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The receiver will definitely have a high impedance input, and for the 50 ohm
input, I will have a pad on the main PC board that the SO-239 connector center terminal can be soldered to. I wasn't too crazy about that BNC approach either. Hopefully, the receiver should hit the market by the end of summer. I will be leaving the company at the end of April, so I will get everything done that I can. I should have an initial board layout done in the next two weeks. Pete "starman" wrote in message ... Hi Pete, If you have to choose only one antenna impedance input, the high one would probably be more useful, particularly for users of real long wires like beverage antennas. However those like myself with an inverted-L which uses a matching transformer and coax lead would appreciate the 50-ohm input. Is there a reason why you are considering only a BNC connector for the low impedance input? How about a PC board mounted female F-connector which can be adapted by the users to their antenna lead wire. Any idea on when the MW receiver may hit the market? Pete KE9OA wrote: I am finishing up the MW receiver..............anyway, I have a high impedance antenna input in addition to the 50 ohm input. With this type of receiver is the high impedance input enough, or would interested parties rather have both inputs. The reason I am asking this is because my employer would like to have all jacks mounted to the main PC board. The only thing I have been able to find so far has been a right angle BNC connector for the 50 ohm input. Opinions welcomed! Pete ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Pete KE9OA wrote: The receiver will definitely have a high impedance input, and for the 50 ohm input, I will have a pad on the main PC board that the SO-239 connector center terminal can be soldered to. I wasn't too crazy about that BNC approach either. Hopefully, the receiver should hit the market by the end of summer. I will be leaving the company at the end of April, so I will get everything done that I can. I should have an initial board layout done in the next two weeks. What 'brand' will the radio have on it? dxAce Michigan USA Pete "starman" wrote in message ... Hi Pete, If you have to choose only one antenna impedance input, the high one would probably be more useful, particularly for users of real long wires like beverage antennas. However those like myself with an inverted-L which uses a matching transformer and coax lead would appreciate the 50-ohm input. Is there a reason why you are considering only a BNC connector for the low impedance input? How about a PC board mounted female F-connector which can be adapted by the users to their antenna lead wire. Any idea on when the MW receiver may hit the market? Pete KE9OA wrote: I am finishing up the MW receiver..............anyway, I have a high impedance antenna input in addition to the 50 ohm input. With this type of receiver is the high impedance input enough, or would interested parties rather have both inputs. The reason I am asking this is because my employer would like to have all jacks mounted to the main PC board. The only thing I have been able to find so far has been a right angle BNC connector for the 50 ohm input. Opinions welcomed! Pete ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
More Receiver Reviews and Info including 'other' People's WebPages | Shortwave | |||
Announcing 'hifi-am', to discuss High Fidelity AM tuners and hobbyist transmitters | General | |||
a page of motorola 2way 2 way portable and mobile radio history | Policy | |||
stuff for all hams | General | |||
FS:Conar Twins - Conar 500 Receiver & Conar 400 Xmtr | Equipment |