Keyboard Shortcuts
Likes
- HP-Agilent-Keysight-Equipment
- Messages
Search
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýGauging 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 On Mar 4, 2023, at 2:19 PM, Jim Ford <james.ford@...> wrote:
|
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
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
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 MWWhat 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
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýOr 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 |
Re: Mating APC 3.5 with APC 2.92 connectors
"Paul Bicknell" <admin@...> writes:
Just a line from Maury MWWhat 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
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýJust 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 ? From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Willy ? ?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 -With best regards Tam HANNA -- Enjoy electronics, 3D printing and cigars? Join more than 21000 followers on my Instagram at |
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 |
Re: Unknown component on HP1345A monitor
I missed it, you have sharp eyes. Hugh Gilbert On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 12:00?AM mondial <mike.kusiak@...> wrote: 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 On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 6:59?PM Michael A. Terrell <terrell.michael.a@...> wrote:
|
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: |
Re: 6502 inverse assembler for 16700 series LA
On 2023-03-03 07:03 PM, Marc Howard via groups.io wrote:
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: 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) On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 5:16?PM mondial <mike.kusiak@...> wrote: 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
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýHi 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 ? From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd ? On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 at 16:23, Dr. David Kirkby <drkirkby@...> wrote:
? 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, |
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.
|