In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily accessible?

I note that CPC sell a single device (https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664) that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?

Mathew Newton Wrote in message:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily accessible?

I note that CPC sell a single device (https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664) that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?


I know no better way than two f-types and a barrel connector.
that one you linked to will be lossy and it's plastic so isn't
even screened. Awful thing!
--


%Profound_observation%


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Thursday, 7 February 2019 14:27:44 UTC, Graham. wrote:

Awful thing!

That's what I was thinking, and worringly cheap too (32p). If it was all-metal and cost £4.99 I'd be inclined to think it was definitely the best thing for the job.

Yes two F plugs and a barrel connector is the way to go. If you are worried about it being accessible or subject to damp then cover the joint with heat shrink sleeving preferably the type with glue inside, failing that self amalgamating tape will do the trick.

Richard

The main things to bear in mind are.
Is it likely to be damp?
If so whatever you use use heat shrink sleeving and some self amalgamating
tape at the interfaces with the coax.
2 How much signal is there? If its a lot then a bit of loss won't really
matter, but try to use good quality coax.
If its a dodgy level replace the whole run its just not worth the hassle.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Mathew Newton" wrote in message
...
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs and
used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better way,
noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily accessible?

I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one of
these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?

IYes sounds a bit odd that.
Who would use such a device. I also learned to my cost that snazzy looking
coax switches were a recipe for losses and crackling.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Graham." wrote in message
...
Mathew Newton Wrote in message:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs and
used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better way,
noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily accessible?

I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one of
these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?


I know no better way than two f-types and a barrel connector.
that one you linked to will be lossy and it's plastic so isn't
even screened. Awful thing!
--


%Profound_observation%


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily accessible?

I note that CPC sell a single device (https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664) that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?

Solder, heat shrink and the ability to be interesting weaving and
soldering outer braids together

TBH for most puropses where there is enough signal even joining the
braids side by side is OK

Frequency response will be a bit wavy, but wont have deep notches.




--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs
and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two.

Yup definitely the way to go IME.

Is there a
better way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not
readily accessible?

You can do as above and then cocoon in self amalgamating tape, or seal
with a decent length of heat shrink over the lot.

I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using
one of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?

Yup! Not keen on the look of those at all.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

IYes sounds a bit odd that.
Who would use such a device.

Electricians IME.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs
and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better
way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily
accessible?
I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one
of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?

Solder, heat shrink and the ability to be interesting weaving and
soldering outer braids together

TBH for most puropses where there is enough signal even joining the
braids side by side is OK

Frequency response will be a bit wavy, but wont have deep notches.

Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.
--
Ian

On Thursday, 7 February 2019 21:40:29 UTC, Ian Jackson wrote:

Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

Thanks everyone for the comments. Will go with the F-type plugs and connector. Whilst the connection will be in the dry I may well heat-shrink it too for completeness.

On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily accessible?

No that's a good way. But wrap it round with self-amalg tape just to
keep it nice and dry.


I note that CPC sell a single device (https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664) that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?


Yes. That's a horrible invention.

Bill

On 07/02/2019 15:21, Mathew Newton wrote:
On Thursday, 7 February 2019 14:27:44 UTC, Graham. wrote:

Awful thing!

That's what I was thinking, and worringly cheap too (32p). If it was all-metal and cost £4.99 I'd be inclined to think it was definitely the best thing for the job.


It would likely introduce an impedance 'bump'. Two fs and a barrel
connector don't seem to.

Bill

On 07/02/2019 17:02, Brian Gaff wrote:
IYes sounds a bit odd that.
Who would use such a device. I also learned to my cost that snazzy looking
coax switches were a recipe for losses and crackling.
Brian

Yes, the plastic ones that we used to use in the 1970s had very poor
isolation between the inputs, so ghosting was the usual result. The only
solution at the time was two separate outlet sockets and a flylead.

The 50 ohm diecast ones that CPC used to sell shorted out the unwanted
input and worked fine on 75 ohm, so they were much better.

Bill

On 07/02/2019 19:39, Graham. wrote:
IYes sounds a bit odd that.
Who would use such a device.

Electricians IME.

Electricians who thought they were being really competent and skillful.

Bill

On 07/02/2019 17:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Solder, heat shrink and the ability to be interesting weaving and
soldering outer braids together

Experimentally I've made joints in which I've used solder and also tried
to keep the ratio between the diameter of the inner and the inside
diameter of the outer (the screen) fairly constant. The screen has been
kept as a full screen, augmented with extra copper foil. These joints
seem to perform perfectly.

Bill

On 07/02/2019 22:01, Mathew Newton wrote:
On Thursday, 7 February 2019 21:40:29 UTC, Ian Jackson wrote:

Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

Thanks everyone for the comments. Will go with the F-type plugs and connector. Whilst the connection will be in the dry I may well heat-shrink it too for completeness.


There's no such thing as in the dry with coax joints, unless you mean in
a brick oven.

Bill

On 07/02/2019 21:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

because any connector is 100 times less reliable than a solder joint.

And this is going to be inaccessible.
As to 'proper'...Are you GERMAN?

There is no 'proper' way to do anything.

Once I joined coax by slodering the inner then making a cylinder out of
brass shim and soldering the outer over that.

--

Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

On 08/02/2019 02:30, Bill Wright wrote:
On 07/02/2019 22:01, Mathew Newton wrote:
On Thursday, 7 February 2019 21:40:29 UTC, Ian JacksonÂ* wrote:

Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

Thanks everyone for the comments. Will go with the F-type plugs and
connector. Whilst the connection will be in the dry I may well
heat-shrink it too for completeness.


There's no such thing as in the dry with coax joints, unless you mean in
a brick oven.


I have to agree.


Bill


--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

On 08/02/2019 02:29, Bill Wright wrote:
On 07/02/2019 17:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Solder, heat shrink and the ability to be interesting weaving and
soldering outer braids together

Experimentally I've made joints in which I've used solder and also tried
to keep the ratio between the diameter of the inner and the inside
diameter of the outer (the screen) fairly constant. The screen has been
kept as a full screen, augmented with extra copper foil. These joints
seem to perform perfectly.


Hey I did that but with brass! Didnt know copper shim/foil was avaialable.

there will be a slight impedance bumpp there, but not enough to be
notoceable unless you slapo a TDR or simialr on it. Or run a sweep
through it.

Those peole that are cincerned abit te intergirty of theior coax shpul
look inside a TV stop see what happens the other side of the input
socket...:-)

Bill



--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

On Friday, 8 February 2019 02:55:51 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is no 'proper' way to do anything.
Once I joined coax by slodering the inner then making a cylinder out of
brass shim and soldering the outer over that.

I thought that *was* the proper way!

Not that anyone would do it since the nineteen-fifties though.

With a slodering iron heated on the gas.

Owain

Cheapskates probably.

Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 07/02/2019 19:39, Graham. wrote:
IYes sounds a bit odd that.
Who would use such a device.

Electricians IME.

Electricians who thought they were being really competent and skillful.

Bill

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/02/2019 21:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

because any connector is 100 times less reliable than a solder joint.

Just how 'reliable' do you need a cable joint to be?

And this is going to be inaccessible.

Few of my cable joints fall apart that often.

As to 'proper'...Are you GERMAN?

Nein, ich bin kein Deutscher.

There is no 'proper' way to do anything.

No - but some ways are a lot less 'proper' than others.

But you're sort-of right. You could argue that the 'proper' way is the
one that does the job for the absolute minimum of cost and effort, and
just performs adequately over the time it is required to work.

Once I joined coax by slodering the inner then making a cylinder out of
brass shim and soldering the outer over that.

As I have not yet mastered the art of 'slodering', I can't really
comment. Did you check the RLR of your joint (preferably with a TDR)?
--
Ian

In message , Bill Wright
writes
On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs
and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better
way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily
accessible?

No that's a good way. But wrap it round with self-amalg tape just to
keep it nice and dry.

I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one
of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?


Yes. That's a horrible invention.

Indeed - but to be perfectly frank and honest, it probably works
absolutely perfectly in all of the situations where it's likely to be
used!
--
Ian

As I have not yet mastered the art of 'slodering', I can't really
comment. Did you check the RLR of your joint (preferably with a TDR)?
Ian

shocking

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Bill Wright
writes
On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs
and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a better
way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not readily
accessible?

No that's a good way. But wrap it round with self-amalg tape just to keep
it nice and dry.

I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one
of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?


Yes. That's a horrible invention.

Indeed - but to be perfectly frank and honest, it probably works
absolutely perfectly in all of the situations where it's likely to be
used!

people can be too fussy .....

On 08/02/2019 09:04, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Bill Wright
writes
On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs
and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a
better way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not
readily accessible?

No that's a good way. But wrap it round with self-amalg tape just to
keep it nice and dry.

No doubt sensible but you remind me that I once bodgered temporarily an
old downlead of ancient brown coax which was filling with water by
cutting it and making a deliberately loose joint at the bottom of a loop
so the water dripped out. I found it quite scary to pull the aerial
lead out of the telly and see water drip.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 08/02/2019 08:55, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/02/2019 21:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

because any connector is 100 times less reliable than a solder joint.

Just how 'reliable' do you need a cable joint to be?

And this is going to be inaccessible.

Few of my cable joints fall apart that often.

As to 'proper'...Are you GERMAN?

Nein, ich bin kein Deutscher.

There is no 'proper' way to do anything.

No - but some ways are a lot less 'proper' than others.

But you're sort-of right. You could argue that the 'proper' way is the
one that does the job for the absolute minimum of cost and effort, and
just performs adequately over the time it is required to work.

Once I joined coax by slodering the inner then making a cylinder out
of brass shim and soldering the outer over that.

As I have not yet mastered the art of 'slodering', I can't really
comment. Did you check the RLR of your joint (preferably with a TDR)?

In the very distant past I did, when I worked for Marconi radar.

It wass better than a connector.

--
In a Time of Universal Deceit, Telling the Truth Is a Revolutionary Act.

- George Orwell

On 08/02/2019 09:08, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using one
of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?


Yes. That's a horrible invention.

Indeed - but to be perfectly frank and honest, it probably works
absolutely perfectly in all of the situations where it's likely to be
used!

people can be too fussy .....



Philosophy

A large part of being an effective and experienced tradesman or engineer
is knowing what you can get away with. The reason for this is that an
excess of anything wastes money and adds unnecessary complexity.

DIY aerial and dish installs fall into two categories, in general. The
first is that necessary items and procedures are omitted. The second is
that unnecessary items and procedures are included. Examples are, coax
not taped to the mast and coax taped to the mast every two inches.

In the case of these connectors, they fall down because they are not
significantly cheaper or quicker than the far better alternative, and
any faults that they cause are likely to be subtle and thus might not be
immediately apparent. Installed inaccessibly they present a small risk
that is easily avoided.

Bill

On 08/02/2019 09:16, Robin wrote:

No doubt sensible but you remind me that I once bodgered temporarily an
old downlead of ancient brown coax which was filling with water by
cutting it and making a deliberately loose joint at the bottom of a loop
so the water dripped out.Â* I found it quite scary to pull the aerial
lead out of the telly and see water drip.


I used to do rental aerials on a block of flats in Ponty where there was
no communal system. The downleads came down 11 floors to the ground
floor. If the junction box cap came off the aerial the water really
flowed out into the back of the VCR.

Bill

On 08/02/2019 02:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 07/02/2019 21:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

because any connector is 100 times less reliable than a solder joint.

And this is going to be inaccessible.
As to 'proper'...Are you GERMAN?

There is no 'proper' way to do anything.

There's prejudice against soldering because it's a skill.

Bill

On 08/02/2019 08:55, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/02/2019 21:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the original
post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get damp) either
heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the connectors.

because any connector is 100 times less reliable than a solder joint.

Just how 'reliable' do you need a cable joint to be?

Totally.

As I have not yet mastered the art of 'slodering', I can't really
comment. Did you check the RLR of your joint (preferably with a TDR)?

I did and it came out better than connectors.

Bill

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 02:19:28 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

It would likely introduce an impedance 'bump'. Two fs and a barrel
connector don't seem to.

Aye, even though they look cheap and nasty F-type plugs and a barrel
is designed to be constant impedance.

I'd probably not bother with self amalgamating tape in a floor void,
unless the is was a suspended floor over bare earth. Ordinary heat
shrink will protect the joint but won't keep moisture out, capillary
action between the heatshrink and cable jacket. Adhesive lined
heatshrink would be better but can be a pain to get off again and
doesn't really flex very well. Self amalgamting tape doesn't suffer
these problems.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
On 08/02/2019 09:16, Robin wrote:

No doubt sensible but you remind me that I once bodgered temporarily an
old downlead of ancient brown coax which was filling with water by
cutting it and making a deliberately loose joint at the bottom of a
loop so the water dripped out. I found it quite scary to pull the
aerial lead out of the telly and see water drip.


I used to do rental aerials on a block of flats in Ponty where there was
no communal system. The downleads came down 11 floors to the ground
floor. If the junction box cap came off the aerial the water really
flowed out into the back of the VCR.

if the water got into thenback of tehnTV set, there could be quite
spectacular eht arcing

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/02/2019 02:29, Bill Wright wrote:
On 07/02/2019 17:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Solder, heat shrink and the ability to be interesting weaving and
soldering outer braids together

Experimentally I've made joints in which I've used solder and also tried
to keep the ratio between the diameter of the inner and the inside
diameter of the outer (the screen) fairly constant. The screen has been
kept as a full screen, augmented with extra copper foil. These joints
seem to perform perfectly.


Hey I did that but with brass! Didnt know copper shim/foil was avaialable.


You can get self adhesive copper foil in various widths, the small stuff is
often available in hobby shops as people who build dolls houses use it for
lighting circuits before they cover it with paper.
I have a roll of the heavier gauge stuff 20mm width and have used that to
join the screen of a coax when I needed to extend the cable on a cctv
camera in the garden . Then the whole joint was covered with a bit of 15mm
plastic pipe slid on before the joint was made, that was then filled with
resin.
Has survived in all weathers for a few years now.


GH

In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 02:19:28 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

It would likely introduce an impedance 'bump'. Two fs and a barrel
connector don't seem to.

Aye, even though they look cheap and nasty F-type plugs and a barrel
is designed to be constant impedance.

I'd probably not bother with self amalgamating tape in a floor void,
unless the is was a suspended floor over bare earth. Ordinary heat
shrink will protect the joint but won't keep moisture out, capillary
action between the heatshrink and cable jacket. Adhesive lined
heatshrink would be better but can be a pain to get off again and
doesn't really flex very well. Self amalgamting tape doesn't suffer
these problems.

For connections outside, I always spray the connectors with a touch of
WD40 before screwing everything together (plus maybe a second squirt
afterwards), I then wipe it off (but not so it's 'squeaky clean'), and
then apply stretched self-amalgamating tape. [As the cable is still
slightly greasy, it's sometimes a bit difficult to get the SA tape
'started'.] I've had connections that, 30 years later, have been just as
shiny as the day I made them (no sign even of tarnishing, let alone
water ingress).
--
Ian

In message , Bill Wright
writes
On 08/02/2019 08:55, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/02/2019 21:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
Why not just do it the easy - and proper - way, ie as in the
original post, with (as subsequently suggested, if it might get
damp) either heat-shrink or self-amalgamating tape cocooning the


because any connector is 100 times less reliable than a solder joint.
Just how 'reliable' do you need a cable joint to be?

Totally.

As I have not yet mastered the art of 'slodering', I can't really
comment. Did you check the RLR of your joint (preferably with a TDR)?

I did and it came out better than connectors.


Well done - but in less-skilled hands it could be an absolute balls-up!

While the F-male is essentially a perfect match, the F-female is
invariably somewhat capacitive. [The same goes for some other types of
connector.]

Most F-female barrels only have two leaves or fingers - and these are
the worst. However, there are some that have four thin fingers - and not
only do these contact the inner conductor more evenly, their impedance
is usually better.

But despite these limitations, physically the most sanitary and
expedient way of joining a drop cable is usually with two males and a
female barrel.
--
Ian

On 08/02/2019 12:51, charles wrote:

if the water got into thenback of tehnTV set, there could be quite
spectacular eht arcing


The Russian Vega table models had the aerial socket centrally above the
tube neck. I saw the aftermath of an explosion this caused.

Bill

On 07/02/2019 13:45, Mathew Newton wrote:
In the past I've always terminated both cables with F-Type male plugs
and used a female-to-female coupler to join the two. Is there a
better way, noting that this join will be under the floor and not
readily accessible?

Do you have something against inline F-type female sockets?
Or do you already have a big bag of males?

I note that CPC sell a single device
(https://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/p...ler/dp/AR70664)
that contains a screw clamp to make the join. Any issue with using
one of these? It appears there's no shielding - does that matter?

It is surprising what you can get away with in practice.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Friday, 8 February 2019 14:47:58 UTC, Martin Brown wrote:

Do you have something against inline F-type female sockets?
Or do you already have a big bag of males?

Good point! I think I was just picturing the bag of plugs I had, and I'm not sure I even knew you could get inline females. Perhaps that's what I'll use as then it'll effectively just be the one connection.