Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Gauging of connectors was mandatory in our metrology labs, as was use of a calibrated torque wrench for the connections. In the event we had to mate SMA to 3.5 mm, 3.5 to 2.92, etc. (any connection that was between mateable but ?non identical connector types) the maximum torque was limited to 5 lb/in to prevent damage to the precision connectors.? Steve
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 4, 2023, at 2:19 PM, Jim Ford <james.ford@...> wrote:
? Or male SMA to female 3.5 mm probably.? ?SMA was originally designed to be inexpensive, and the center pin protrusion is not well controlled.? ?I've heard of people using connector gauges to check protrusion before mating,? but I haven't tried it myself.? ?HTH.? ? ? Jim Ford
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
-------- Original message -------- From: Willy <ratn9ne@...> Date: 3/4/23 9:25 AM (GMT-08:00) Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
?It is not just generic cheap SMA connectors. Mini circuits SMA plugs have been known to ruin 2.92mm jacks. Avoid connecting ANY SMA males to 2.92mm females.
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Hi Paul!?
Yes, Mini Circuit Labs (MCL) is very much different firm from when Harvey Kaylie left AIL and started making DBM's on his kitchen table in the Bronx (he used relay cans because they were cheap, soldered so hermetic, and people recognized them). The evolution of their company is incredible.
I was invited to bring some Ham MW equipment to the IMS in Baltimore in 2011 or so. I displayed the stuff and also got to walk around the place and look at the exhibits. At a time when a booth for the week was like 10x20 feet and cost in the thousands for the week (15-20 K for a booth??), MCL had, like, 30 booths worth of space and were showing off 18 GHz Test Cables, Signal Generators up to 18 or 26 GHz all sorts of MW products, higher than 2 GHz. They must of had 50 people working the spaces. This was 12 years back. They have changed and are probably the single largest supply of microwave parts going as far as single source and variety.
73
Jeff Kruth
In a message dated 3/4/2023 3:44:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, admin@... writes:
?
Hi Matt
I stand corrected I was thinking about the original MiniCircuits rang that
didn't go much above 2 Ghz irrespective off the connector and I think that
might be the range that the other person was referring to that damages a SMA
3.5
The MiniCircuits of to day is a much different company compared to what it
was 25 years ago as you point out in your link You are obviously Passionate
about MiniCircuits and that is not a bad thing as I Have mainly come across
MiniCircuits in satellite IF paths?
Regards Paul
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected][mailto: [email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Huszagh Sent: 04 March 2023 19:01 To: Paul Bicknell < admin@...>; [email protected]Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors "Paul Bicknell" < admin@...> writes: > Just a line from Maury MW > > Regarding Mini circuits they are predominately below 2 GHz so no > reason Mating with APC 3.5 or APC 2.92 connectors What is this based on? I doubt most MiniCircuits SMA connectors are only rated to 2 GHz... If you're refering to adapters, the only ones rated to 2 GHz are SMA to BNC adapters: The rest go to much higher frequencies - typically 18 GHz, but even 26.5GHz for SMA to 3.5 mm. If you're referring to modules, I very much doubt MiniCircuits would use connectors not rated to the frequency rating of the module (be it filters, couplers, etc.). If you're mating SMA to 2.92 and you care about your 2.92 connector, you should gage the SMA connector prior to mating - that applies regardless of manufacturer. For what it's worth, all my MiniCircuits SMA connectors have been in spec according to my Maury SMA gage kit when received. It doesn't surprise me at all that mating SMA male to 2.92 female damages the 2.92 female with sufficient frequency, but I don't think that's a minicircuits problem. You're mating a precision connector to a non-precision connector. If you're doing that, gage your connectors. Matt
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Hi Matt
I stand corrected I was thinking about the original MiniCircuits rang that
didn't go much above 2 Ghz irrespective off the connector and I think that
might be the range that the other person was referring to that damages a SMA
3.5
The MiniCircuits of to day is a much different company compared to what it
was 25 years ago as you point out in your link You are obviously Passionate
about MiniCircuits and that is not a bad thing as I Have mainly come across
MiniCircuits in satellite IF paths
Regards Paul
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected][mailto: [email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Huszagh Sent: 04 March 2023 19:01 To: Paul Bicknell <admin@...>; [email protected]Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors "Paul Bicknell" <admin@...> writes: Just a line from Maury MW
Regarding Mini circuits they are predominately below 2 GHz so no
reason Mating with APC 3.5 or APC 2.92 connectors What is this based on? I doubt most MiniCircuits SMA connectors are only rated to 2 GHz... If you're refering to adapters, the only ones rated to 2 GHz are SMA to BNC adapters: The rest go to much higher frequencies - typically 18 GHz, but even 26.5GHz for SMA to 3.5 mm. If you're referring to modules, I very much doubt MiniCircuits would use connectors not rated to the frequency rating of the module (be it filters, couplers, etc.). If you're mating SMA to 2.92 and you care about your 2.92 connector, you should gage the SMA connector prior to mating - that applies regardless of manufacturer. For what it's worth, all my MiniCircuits SMA connectors have been in spec according to my Maury SMA gage kit when received. It doesn't surprise me at all that mating SMA male to 2.92 female damages the 2.92 female with sufficient frequency, but I don't think that's a minicircuits problem. You're mating a precision connector to a non-precision connector. If you're doing that, gage your connectors. Matt
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Or male SMA to female 3.5 mm probably.? ?SMA was originally designed to be inexpensive, and the center pin protrusion is not well controlled.? ?I've heard of people using connector gauges to check protrusion before mating,? but I haven't tried it myself.? ?HTH.? ? ? Jim Ford
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: Willy <ratn9ne@...> Date: 3/4/23 9:25 AM (GMT-08:00) Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
?It is not just generic cheap SMA connectors. Mini circuits SMA plugs have been known to ruin 2.92mm jacks. Avoid connecting ANY SMA males to 2.92mm females.
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
"Paul Bicknell" <admin@...> writes: Just a line from Maury MW
Regarding Mini circuits they are predominately below 2 GHz so no reason Mating with APC 3.5 or APC 2.92 connectors What is this based on? I doubt most MiniCircuits SMA connectors are only rated to 2 GHz... If you're refering to adapters, the only ones rated to 2 GHz are SMA to BNC adapters: The rest go to much higher frequencies - typically 18 GHz, but even 26.5GHz for SMA to 3.5 mm. If you're referring to modules, I very much doubt MiniCircuits would use connectors not rated to the frequency rating of the module (be it filters, couplers, etc.). If you're mating SMA to 2.92 and you care about your 2.92 connector, you should gage the SMA connector prior to mating - that applies regardless of manufacturer. For what it's worth, all my MiniCircuits SMA connectors have been in spec according to my Maury SMA gage kit when received. It doesn't surprise me at all that mating SMA male to 2.92 female damages the 2.92 female with sufficient frequency, but I don't think that's a minicircuits problem. You're mating a precision connector to a non-precision connector. If you're doing that, gage your connectors. Matt
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Just a line from Maury MW Regarding Mini circuits they are predominately below 2 GHz so no reason Mating with APC 3.5 or APC 2.92 connectors ? Paul ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Willy
Sent: 04 March 2023 17:25
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors ? ?It is not just generic cheap SMA connectors. Mini circuits SMA plugs have been known to ruin 2.92mm jacks. Avoid connecting ANY SMA males to 2.92mm females.
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
?It is not just generic cheap SMA connectors. Mini circuits SMA plugs have been known to ruin 2.92mm jacks. Avoid connecting ANY SMA males to 2.92mm females.
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Thanks On 2023. 03. 03. 21:40, Bruce wrote: Tam -
Interesting use of Decade - spoken lie a true engineer :-)
Cheers!
Bruce
Quoting Tam Hanna <tamhan@...>:
China is easy to misunderstand. Sadly, I am not allowed by NDA with a client to go into detail.
Let me ONLY say that - while bashing the Chinese gets you brownie points with the good looking Conservative girl down the road, and pisses off the libz, you are dealing with an ancient civilization which, until about 100 years ago, could and did easily rebuff offers from Western powers. Then the century of shame came, but now they are back again to the normal status.
The Chinese are a deeply manufacturing oriented civilization, are 1.2 billion strong in manpower, with a Conservative government and no social decay. For them, manufacturing and trade of durable goods is the core of civilization. By numbers alone, even if they were a decade stupider, the sheer amount of more men would be enough to ensure that they still have an equal absolute number of great engineers to the USA. And to be clear there is no evidence of the Chinese being stupider at all.
Plus, their social order and culture means that they work together more efficiently by and large. Do not let Conservative pundits misguide you - OK, face orientation MAY lead to minimal inefficiencies, but the otherwise higher work ethic compensates for that. It is like a very fast one handed cigar roller, and a decently fast two handed one.
To my Conservative brothers: feel free to - misguidedly - hate the Chinese. I incidentally still wait for someone to show me on the doll, where the Chinese hurt him. But ignore them at your peril.
I type this in English, but if I had a son, he would learn Chinese.
Tam
On 2023. 03. 03. 20:04, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 3/3/23 13:44, Martin Rickes wrote:
Calma chicos :) there's no need for inappropriate language here. ? There certainly isn't.? And I'm sure that wasn't appreciated by any of the respected, educated engineers here who happen to be Asian.
? We are unified here by the purity of engineering, and common interests, passions, and professions.
???????????? -Dave
With best regards
Tam HANNA
--
Enjoy electronics, 3D printing and cigars? Join more than 21000 followers on my Instagram at
With best regards Tam HANNA -- Enjoy electronics, 3D printing and cigars? Join more than 21000 followers on my Instagram at
|
Re: Unknown component on HP1345A monitor
Hello all,
Looks like an axial Kemet solid Tantalum electrolytic capacitor, 2,2 uF, 20V.
Kind regards,
Thomas
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Hi Dave, many thanks for the paper also from me, very informative! Hi Martin,
unless you do some very critical work and need to see 50dB of matching... :)
I think, this isn't even possible with commercial grade equipment. When I worked with the PNA-X and the Rosenberger 67GHz 2,92mm cal kit, I have noticed that the fixed load is assumed as ideal over the full frequency range. The actual load would have to have a better match than 50dB to measure 50dB match. I don't think it has. 40dB match is already very challenging. Also, opening and closing the connector yields effects of this order. Moreover, I have noticed that neither the open nor the short standard is modelled with any loss. Maybe, I'm too spoiled with low frequency measurement accuracies... Best regards, Tom DG8SAQ
|
Hello Jeremy,
a big thank you for the info I will apply this in my 8593e and ok also for the release of the LO Jo?l ON4LJ
|
Re: Unknown component on HP1345A monitor
I missed it, you have sharp eyes. Hugh Gilbert
C49 appears on the schematic of service sheet 3A, page 114 of the 1345A PDF service manual. It is located on the -15V supply line at the lower right end of the schematic.
|
Re: Unknown component on HP1345A monitor
C49 appears on the schematic of service sheet 3A, page 114 of the 1345A PDF service manual. It is located on the -15V supply line at the lower right end of the schematic.
|
Re: Unknown component on HP1345A monitor
It might be Sprague 173D225X9020V Capacitor-Fxd 2.2uF 10% 20V TATBSA. That is what is shown in the display section parts list for my 3577B. They apparently did not see fit to include C49 on the three page board schematic.
Hugh Gilbert
It is a Sprague/Vishay 150 series Tantalum Part Number: 150D225x9020A2 A link to the datasheet: (The capacitor is on page 13)
Yes, it appears to be a 2.2uF 20V tantalum. According to the PCB silk screen it is identified as C49, which on the parts list identifies it as such (A1 C49). If this is a bypass on the -15V supply, you might replace with a cap of higher voltage rating, as a 20V tantalum cap on a 15V supply is cutting it pretty close. A 35V or higher cap might be more appropriate.
|
Re: 6502 inverse assembler for 16700 series LA
The 6502 inverse assembler for 16700 LA's is available on this thread on the eevblog forum
Ironically the files there are actually from this list, so maybe they're in the list archive or files section here too. There's been quite a bit of progress working with those files in that eevblog thread though and there are a lot of resources. There's enough info there to compile any of the oldschool IAs into a dll that you can use on the newer windows based 169xx analyzers as well.
Andrew
On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 4:17 PM Steve Hendrix < SteveHx@...> wrote: On 2023-03-03 07:03 PM, Marc Howard via wrote:
>
> I know there was some partial 6502 disassembler support for the 16500
> series.? Has anyone ported it or something else to the 16700?
>
A long time ago I wrote a disassembler for 6502, and I still have the
source code. It's written in Basic so shouldn't be too hard to port to a
modern platform if you want it. My use for it was to disassemble the
Ohio Scientific Basic-in-Rom and the monitor chip, eventually using it
to figure out all the hooks to tie HexDOS into it so I could keep the
RAM footprint for HexDOS down to one boot track (2048 bytes exactly). If
you want a copy, reply to me offline steve hx AT hxengineering DOT com.
Steve Hendrix
|
Re: 6502 inverse assembler for 16700 series LA
On 2023-03-03 07:03 PM, Marc Howard via groups.io wrote:
I know there was some partial 6502 disassembler support for the 16500 series. ?Has anyone ported it or something else to the 16700?
A long time ago I wrote a disassembler for 6502, and I still have the source code. It's written in Basic so shouldn't be too hard to port to a modern platform if you want it. My use for it was to disassemble the Ohio Scientific Basic-in-Rom and the monitor chip, eventually using it to figure out all the hooks to tie HexDOS into it so I could keep the RAM footprint for HexDOS down to one boot track (2048 bytes exactly). If you want a copy, reply to me offline steve hx AT hxengineering DOT com. Steve Hendrix
|
6502 inverse assembler for 16700 series LA
I know there was some partial 6502 disassembler support for the 16500 series. ?Has anyone ported it or something else to the 16700?
Thanks,
Marc Howard
|
Re: Unknown component on HP1345A monitor
It is a Sprague/Vishay 150 series Tantalum Part Number: 150D225x9020A2 A link to the datasheet: (The capacitor is on page 13)
Yes, it appears to be a 2.2uF 20V tantalum. According to the PCB silk screen it is identified as C49, which on the parts list identifies it as such (A1 C49). If this is a bypass on the -15V supply, you might replace with a cap of higher voltage rating, as a 20V tantalum cap on a 15V supply is cutting it pretty close. A 35V or higher cap might be more appropriate.
|
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
Hi Dave Thank you for the Paper Regarding connecting SMA to APC 3.5 or 2.92? the problem is the SMA ?and who made it? ? as a lot of inferior SMA when we are talking about working above 10 Ghz are only fit for the trash can the next reason not to use SMA with the APC 3.5 or 2.92? is Why as a good SMA will probably do 24 Ghz in a lot of work but compare the results using all APC 3.5 and the level flatness against frequency is much improved ? In the past I have found that a 2.95 mm adapter is not that much more expensive than a APC 3.5 so I tend to focus on 2.95 mm adapters So I do quite often use 2.95 and APC 3.5 together ? Regards Paul ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd
Sent: 03 March 2023 16:36
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors ? On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 at 16:23, Dr. David Kirkby <drkirkby@...> wrote: This might be the paper I was thinking of.?
No, that wasn¡¯t the paper. There is one giving corrections between 2.92 and 3.5 mm, but ?concludes not to bother trying to correct with SMA.? -- Dr. David Kirkby,
Kirkby Microwave Ltd,
drkirkby@...
Telephone 01621-680100./ +44 1621 680100
Registered in England & Wales, company number 08914892.
Registered office:
Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, Chelmsford, Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom
|
Re: Unknown component on HP1345A monitor
Yes, it appears to be a 2.2uF 20V tantalum. According to the PCB silk screen it is identified as C49, which on the parts list identifies it as such (A1 C49). If this is a bypass on the -15V supply, you might replace with a cap of higher voltage rating, as a 20V tantalum cap on a 15V supply is cutting it pretty close. A 35V or higher cap might be more appropriate.
|
Paul Bicknell
Willy
Michael A. Terrell