Re: Coax Connectors and cables

Bill Blohm (bblohm@hpbs1686.boi.hp.com)
Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:35:23 -0700


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
West Wight Potter Website at URL
http://www.lesbois.com/wwpotter/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ah, good. Thanks for clarifying my post, Jim. It's been a while since
I've really done any work with this stuff and I'm mostly self-taught.
I looked it up in an old note I had written in an old book. I've
updated my note to indicate it's the antenna length and added your
formula. Thanks!

Bill B.
P-19 #454, Dream Catcher
Nampa, ID

Jim Nolan wrote:
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> West Wight Potter Website at URL
> http://www.lesbois.com/wwpotter/
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Bill:
> The cable dielectric (insulation between the inner and outer conductors)
> alters the wavelength in the cable by the reciprocal of the square root of
> its dielectric constant. The formula you gave is for half wavelength for a
> dipole antenna which is about 10% shorter than the free space wavelength.
> The formula I use for free space is 11.8/f where f is in GHz and the
> wavelength is in inches. For foam core coax the alteration is neglible.
> However foam can hold water (not good). For most plastic dielectrics (which
> don't absorb water)the dielectric constant is about 2.5 so the wavelength is
> shortened by a factor of 0.6. All keeping the coax a constant multiple of
> wavelengths does is make the radio see the exact input impedance of the
> antenna. If the antenna and radio are properly designed the coax length
> should be a very small factor in performance. Your best bet is to have the
> proper antenna and radio impedances and not worry about cable length.
>
> Jim Nolan P-19 #426 Panache

> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com