| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
F Plugs
On 20/03/2019 09:21, John Rumm wrote:
On 19/03/2019 19:57, Terry Casey wrote: In article , says... That's pretty much how I've been doing it since f plugs came on the UK scene. I don't know how far back you are going, Bill, but the first time I saw them was when they were used for the internet connection on the early IBM PCs in the early 80s. I don't recall any networking standard that used F connectors? Early thin ethernet with BNC connectors on 50 ohm coax certainly Yup. BNC was THE professional RF plug in the 70s. F types I dont recall seeing before sattelite..but we had screw on coax - big ones - for radar and microwaves -- "A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding". Marshall McLuhan |
F Plugs
In article 5_-
, says... On 18/03/2019 18:18, Terry Casey wrote: I'd love to know how you would get either of those connectors to fit over the sheath of RG11 (10.3mm nominal). You wouldn't - its insulating tape, not a TARDIS! I was responding to your earlier statement "the screen is now being provided by the threaded part of the plug - the size of which is the same for all sizes of connector." which is obviously untrue - you won't get WF100 into a shotgun type connector any more than you will get RG11 into any smaller connector. The size of the threaded part of the plug is NOT the same for all sizes of connector, as you have now stated. You can make a plug fit the "correct" size of cable or one a bit smaller, you can't as easily make it fit one that is too large to enter even enter to cable grip section at all. But that is not what you previously stated! I am assuming that the characteristics of the coax are controlled by the spacing of iiii from the foil, and what material dddd is made from. Correct. So altering the arrangement to: ==== knurled barrel of plug ---- braid folded back pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding pppp outer plastic jacket ---- braid ffff foil dddd dielectric iiii inner copper conductor dddd dielectric ffff foil ---- braid pppp outer plastic jacket pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding ---- braid folded back ==== knurled barrel of plug Will not alter the critical defining characteristics of the coax at all. OK so long as the foil screen is not removed. However, after the problem I descrihed previously, I wouldn't take a chance. -- Terry --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
F Plugs
In article -
september.org, lid says... In article , says... That's pretty much how I've been doing it since f plugs came on the UK scene. I don't know how far back you are going, Bill, but the first time I saw them was when they were used for the internet connection on the early IBM PCs in the early 80s. I've just been going back over this thread on Google groups and noticed some replies to this post that haven't been picked up by my newsreader, for some peculiar reason so I've copied the quotes here to reply to them. John said: I don't recall any networking standard that used F connectors? Early thin ethernet with BNC connectors on 50 ohm coax certainly and TNP said: Yup. BNC was THE professional RF plug in the 70s. F types I dont recall seeing before sattelite..but we had screw on coax - big ones - for radar and microwaves *** My reply: I only had knowledge of one network, albeit a fairly large one, so I wonder if it was vendor dependent? Nobody, including me, had ever seen F connectors before, which caused a bit of a problem because equally, nobody had ever seen any instructions for using them! The 'correct' method is to do up the connector finger tight then, with a spanner, tighten one flat - ie: one sixth of a turn. In practice, you can appply a lot more force than that without causing problems, but not when the female is a right angled printed circuit board mounting type! The whole connector start to rotate, snapping of the PCB fixings and rendering the network card useless I saw a anumber of these so there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that they were F connectors! --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
F Plugs
In article -
september.org, lid says... I must admit that I've never used a screw on F connector or even handled one - and I don't ever intend to! Another missing reply from John: In light of that statement, this discussion seems to have taken on a rather ironic twist. Do I sense a little back tracking? *** None at all. Assuming that, aside from the screwed thread, the plug's construction was otherwise normal, I couldn't see how it would be possible for the cable to straddle the central tube so that the screening braid and sheath were outside it! Now that you've explained that there is no tube to obstruct the cable, I can see how you did it. -- Terry --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
F Plugs
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 20/03/2019 09:21, John Rumm wrote: On 19/03/2019 19:57, Terry Casey wrote: In article , says... That's pretty much how I've been doing it since f plugs came on the UK scene. I don't know how far back you are going, Bill, but the first time I saw them was when they were used for the internet connection on the early IBM PCs in the early 80s. I don't recall any networking standard that used F connectors? Early thin ethernet with BNC connectors on 50 ohm coax certainly Yup. BNC was THE professional RF plug in the 70s. When we first met them in the '60s, they were known as a "B***** Nasty Connector" -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
F Plugs
On 20/03/2019 13:27, charles wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 20/03/2019 09:21, John Rumm wrote: On 19/03/2019 19:57, Terry Casey wrote: In article , says... That's pretty much how I've been doing it since f plugs came on the UK scene. I don't know how far back you are going, Bill, but the first time I saw them was when they were used for the internet connection on the early IBM PCs in the early 80s. I don't recall any networking standard that used F connectors? Early thin ethernet with BNC connectors on 50 ohm coax certainly Yup. BNC was THE professional RF plug in the 70s. When we first met them in the '60s, they were known as a "B***** Nasty Connector" As a prentice in '68, one of our learning tasks was how to put them on seriously braided cable... -- "When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics." Josef Stalin |
F Plugs
In article , charles
scribeth thus In article , The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 20/03/2019 09:21, John Rumm wrote: On 19/03/2019 19:57, Terry Casey wrote: In article , says... That's pretty much how I've been doing it since f plugs came on the UK scene. I don't know how far back you are going, Bill, but the first time I saw them was when they were used for the internet connection on the early IBM PCs in the early 80s. I don't recall any networking standard that used F connectors? Early thin ethernet with BNC connectors on 50 ohm coax certainly Yup. BNC was THE professional RF plug in the 70s. When we first met them in the '60s, they were known as a "B***** Nasty Connector" Bayonet Neill-Concelman is its correct name!.. Just use them for Two-way radio installs these days. "N" type for anything more powerful up to say 500 odd watts and 7/16 DIN after that 500 watts and above and higher UHF frequencies PL259 or UHF are ****e plugs And TNC quite good for some instrumentation stuff and applications.. -- Tony Sayer Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself. |
F Plugs
In article ,
tony sayer wrote: In article , charles scribeth thus In article , The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 20/03/2019 09:21, John Rumm wrote: On 19/03/2019 19:57, Terry Casey wrote: In article , says... That's pretty much how I've been doing it since f plugs came on the UK scene. I don't know how far back you are going, Bill, but the first time I saw them was when they were used for the internet connection on the early IBM PCs in the early 80s. I don't recall any networking standard that used F connectors? Early thin ethernet with BNC connectors on 50 ohm coax certainly Yup. BNC was THE professional RF plug in the 70s. When we first met them in the '60s, they were known as a "B***** Nasty Connector" Bayonet Neill-Concelman is its correct name!.. Just use them for Two-way radio installs these days. "N" type for anything more powerful up to say 500 odd watts There is/was a a large version of the BNC (simply C, ISTR) which is about the size of an N, but bayonet rather than screw. -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
F Plugs
On 20/03/2019 12:10, Terry Casey wrote:
In article 5_- , says... On 18/03/2019 18:18, Terry Casey wrote: I'd love to know how you would get either of those connectors to fit over the sheath of RG11 (10.3mm nominal). You wouldn't - its insulating tape, not a TARDIS! I was responding to your earlier statement "the screen is now being provided by the threaded part of the plug - the size of which is the same for all sizes of connector." which is obviously untrue I think you are confusing which thread - I am talking about the thread whose size is dictated by the barrel of the female F connector, and which matches the thread on the inside of the captive nut. These are the only threaded parts that *might* be acting as a screen - and then only when using "low loss" coax without a foil under the braided screen. The thread designed to attach the plug to the cable is *always* outside of the screen - even on non foiled cables. - you won't get WF100 into a shotgun type connector any more than you will get RG11 into any smaller connector. The size of the threaded part of the plug is NOT the same for all sizes of connector, as you have now stated. The bit I am talking about is the same for all F connectors. Its part of the standard. The other variable bit has no particular RF related function - its there to provide mechanical attachment only. You can make a plug fit the "correct" size of cable or one a bit smaller, you can't as easily make it fit one that is too large to enter even enter to cable grip section at all. But that is not what you previously stated! Its what I stated, but it might not be what you understood from what I stated! :-)) I am assuming that the characteristics of the coax are controlled by the spacing of iiii from the foil, and what material dddd is made from. Correct. So altering the arrangement to: ==== knurled barrel of plug ---- braid folded back pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding pppp outer plastic jacket ---- braid ffff foil dddd dielectric iiii inner copper conductor dddd dielectric ffff foil ---- braid pppp outer plastic jacket pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding pppp outer plastic jacket - paddding ---- braid folded back ==== knurled barrel of plug Will not alter the critical defining characteristics of the coax at all. OK so long as the foil screen is not removed. However, after the problem I descrihed previously, I wouldn't take a chance. Even if the foil screen is removed on the stripped bit of the cable, the padding on top of the PVC sheath is still outside the *unstripped* part of the cable where is still has full screen integrity. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
F Plugs
On 20/03/2019 12:46, Terry Casey wrote:
In article - september.org, lid says... I must admit that I've never used a screw on F connector or even handled one - and I don't ever intend to! Another missing reply from John: In light of that statement, this discussion seems to have taken on a rather ironic twist. Do I sense a little back tracking? *** None at all. Assuming that, aside from the screwed thread, the plug's construction was otherwise normal, I couldn't see how it would be possible for the cable to straddle the central tube so that the screening braid and sheath were outside it! Now that you've explained that there is no tube to obstruct the cable, I can see how you did it. I did attempt in my very first post, make it clear I was talking about the twist on style of plug. To be fair I had assumed that you were familiar with this type of plug, which subsequently appears may have been an assumption too far. Hence why I was having difficulty seeing exactly what point you were getting at. Hopefully now familiar with the twist on plug design, you understand that the bodge I described will not in any way impact the RF performance of the connection. Its just more time consuming and less convenient way of fitting a plug to a thin cable. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
F Plugs
Terry Casey wrote:
I saw a anumber of these so there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that they were F connectors! Back in the 80's I used thinwire ethernet, arcnet (plus various twisted pair rather than coax cabling) none of them had F connectors all BNC, the PC cards that *did* have screw on rather than bayonet were IBM AS/400 and 5250 twinax connectors ... |
F Plugs
In article
, says... On 20/03/2019 12:10, Terry Casey wrote: I am assuming that the characteristics of the coax are controlled by the spacing of iiii from the foil, and what material dddd is made from. Correct. Actually, this is not correct - it is the ratio of the diameter of the centre conductor and the inside diameter of the foil screen which determines the impedance, as we have previously discussed. Different dielectic materials can vary the velocity of propagation of the cable but this is only important if you are using a TDR to trace the location of a fault. OK so long as the foil screen is not removed. However, after the problem I descrihed previously, I wouldn't take a chance. Even if the foil screen is removed on the stripped bit of the cable, the padding on top of the PVC sheath is still outside the *unstripped* part of the cable where is still has full screen integrity. Yes, but the hole in the connector is now determining the impedance of that section of the cable. Because the foil is very thin, this won't make much difference if the correct connector is used but if the wrong connextor is used there will quite a jump in the impedance over that section. The padding, as you say, plays no part in this. -- Terry --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
F Plugs
In article
, says... I did attempt in my very first post, make it clear I was talking about the twist on style of plug. To be fair I had assumed that you were familiar with this type of plug, which subsequently appears may have been an assumption too far. Hence why I was having difficulty seeing exactly what point you were getting at Yes, I appreciate that.. Hopefully now familiar with the twist on plug design, you understand that the bodge I described will not in any way impact the RF performance of the connection. Its just more time consuming and less convenient way of fitting a plug to a thin cable. But it is very important not to remove the foil screen from the exposed dielectric as I explained in my previous post. -- Terry --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
F Plugs
On 20/03/2019 19:28, Andy Burns wrote:
Terry Casey wrote: I saw a anumber of these so there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that they were F connectors! Back in the 80's I used thinwire ethernet, arcnet (plus various twisted pair rather than coax cabling) none of them had F connectors all BNC, the PC cards that *did* have screw on rather than bayonet were IBM AS/400 and 5250 twinax connectors ... TWINAX. NOW I remember what those screw things were. Also token ring cards...remember those? Type 1 connectors.. And 'bee sting' thick coax adapters that went to a huge D type connector on the card. -- "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them" Margaret Thatcher |
F Plugs
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
TWINAX. NOW I remember what those screw things were. Also token ring cards...remember those? Yes, but we used more Proteon cards (cheaper and 10Mb rather than 4Mb) Type 1 connectors.. I think I know a server room where there's still one lonely type 1 connector on the wall ... And 'bee sting' thick coax adapters that went to a huge D type connector on the card. Only worked on a couple of sites that had thick wire ethernet still in place |
F Plugs
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... On 20/03/2019 19:28, Andy Burns wrote: Terry Casey wrote: I saw a anumber of these so there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that they were F connectors! Back in the 80's I used thinwire ethernet, arcnet (plus various twisted pair rather than coax cabling) none of them had F connectors all BNC, the PC cards that *did* have screw on rather than bayonet were IBM AS/400 and 5250 twinax connectors ... TWINAX. NOW I remember what those screw things were. Also token ring cards...remember those? Type 1 connectors.. And 'bee sting' thick coax adapters that went to a huge D type connector on the card. None of those used F connectors or anything like those. |
More Heavy Trolling by Senile Nym-Shifting Rot Speed!
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 20:31:39 +1100, Jac Brown, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rot Speed, wrote: TWINAX. NOW I remember what those screw things were. Also token ring cards...remember those? Type 1 connectors.. And 'bee sting' thick coax adapters that went to a huge D type connector on the card. None In auto-contradicting mode again, senile auto-contradictor? -- FredXX to Rot Speed: "You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder we shippe the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity and criminality is inherited after all?" Message-ID: |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:30 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter