Keyboard Shortcuts
Likes
- HP-Agilent-Keysight-Equipment
- Messages
Search
Re: HP 140B Calibrator
Have you had any of those models where one or both of the plugins is very difficult to remove?? I thought I would never get the amplifier out of mine and ended up having to remove the bottom cover just to get enough push to free it.? I suspect it is the alignment pin that's too tight in the hole but it could also be the connector.? I tried a bit of sanding with a 1/4" dowel and some silicon carbide paper to smooth the surface of the hole and I think that helped but it is still rather tight. Thanks, Barry - N4BUQ
|
Re: HP8640B
I do have a paper manual , Part NO. 08640-90197
Applies directly to serial numbers prefixed 2031A, 2030A and 2025U With the changes in Section VII also to serial numbers 1625U up to 2023A. It has two schematics A10A2 Service sheet 11 RF dividers. Print layout exactly as by the pics. Jos PA0AMX |
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
Its seems to be anathema to some to credit inventors (jealousy, maybe?). Thank you for the spelling.
Dick Knadle, K2RIW, a quite famous ham, who some of you may remember, was steadfast in the attribution of the names of the various connectors, not I. I merely repeat the story he said. As the quote goes "I know not what the truth may be, I tell the tale 'twas told to me". J. Kruth In a message dated 3/24/2024 11:20:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, robert8rpi@... writes: ?
BTW it's? Paul Neill and Carl Concelman who were desiners at Bell Labs. While credited with various connector designs I'm pretty sure the attribution of the N and BNC to their names is coincidental and happened long after the introduction of the connectors. Older docunemts refer to N as Naval but it was almost cetainly just a alphabetic sequence. T/BNC is threaded or Bayonet N Compact in older references. This make more sense than acorporation naming a part after the designer(s) particuarly as when desigined there is no indication of how popular the part may become. I know of at least one case of theis re-naming after the event. This is the standard for rack mounting avionics equipment. It's known as ATR racking. In the first edition of the specification, ARINC 404 ATR was defined a Air Transport Radio racking. At revision A it was re-defined as Austin Trumbull Radio racking in recognition of the main designer. PArt of ARINC 404A appendix 1 is below. "GENERAL founding of AEEC that this definition attributed to the acronym ¡°ATR¡± was completely erroneous, irrelevant, and |
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
Still works OK, in spite of .010 inch delta, but the point of my statement was the refute the "apparent" inferiority of the BNC. However, we can quibble, as all seem to feel the need. J. Kruth
In a message dated 3/24/2024 10:50:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, robert8rpi@... writes: ?
50R BNC / TNC and 50R N types have the same outer conductor inner diameter and center conductor outer diameter BUT the tapered and reduced pin diameter is larger on N types than BNC / TNC . Thus while you can push a N male into a BNC or TNC female it will stress the female contact and my cause permanent deformation depending on the exact connectors. BNC / TNC female is designed to mate with a 0.052 to 0/053" diameter pin Ntype is 0.063-0.066" diameter. See MIL-A-55339A |
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
Correct. My work with JPL on the DSN showed me how much they like TNC's. Everywhere!
However, PROPERLY made BNC last az long time. I have several cubic feet of BNC RG-223 cables gifted me from NSA, and they are VERY good! Connectors do not "twist off" or "distort". You get what you pay for!? J. Kruth
?
In a message dated 3/24/2024 10:01:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, Adrian@... writes:
?
That may be true for 50 Ohm but do not try it with the 75 Ohm versions! BNC/TNC have the same inner pin dimensions and 'fix' the impedance by changing the dielectric insert dimensions in the mating area but 'N' type have a different diameter centre contact! We found the other issue with BNC at higher frequencies is that, again possibly due to the method of retention, they seem to fall off much faster over time with use, the inner contact sleeves seemed to get worn/distorted more. Perhaps due to more 'brute force' being used to overcome misalignment during connection but the TNCs seemed to survive much better 'in the field'. This last, in the case of Radio Astronomy, was both a figurative and literal term! On 24/03/2024 13:36, Jeff Kruth via groups.io wrote:
> To me this is an interesting comment. I do not believe that the > connector design is limiting in this way. TNC, BNC and type N all > share a common coaxial design for the inner portion where the RF goes. > You can plug a type N male into a BNC female and they mate properly, > there is simply no mechanical retention. |
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
BTW it's? Paul Neill and Carl Concelman who were desiners at Bell Labs. While credited with various connector designs I'm pretty sure the attribution of the N and BNC to their names is coincidental and happened long after the introduction of the connectors. Older docunemts refer to N as Naval but it was almost cetainly just a alphabetic sequence. T/BNC is threaded or Bayonet N Compact in older references. This make more sense than acorporation naming a part after the designer(s) particuarly as when desigined there is no indication of how popular the part may become. I know of at least one case of theis re-naming after the event. This is the standard for rack mounting avionics equipment. It's known as ATR racking. In the first edition of the specification, ARINC 404 ATR was defined a Air Transport Radio racking. At revision A it was re-defined as Austin Trumbull Radio racking in recognition of the main designer. PArt of ARINC 404A appendix 1 is below. "GENERAL founding of AEEC that this definition attributed to the acronym ¡°ATR¡± was completely erroneous, irrelevant, and |
Re: HP 140B Calibrator
I¡¯ve had numerous 140s and even a 143 (huge!) but never a 140B. I really don¡¯t need this one, it¡¯s more like the ¡°good cardboard box¡± we hate to throw away (because it¡¯s a really nice box). This 140B is a newer model (1971 by the serial prefix) and looks fairly clean, which is unusual. So I¡¯ll let the group know what it is when it gets here.? Jeremy? On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 9:25?PM Cubdriver <pbmanning@...> wrote:
|
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
50R BNC / TNC and 50R N types have the same outer conductor inner diameter and center conductor outer diameter BUT the tapered and reduced pin diameter is larger on N types than BNC / TNC . Thus while you can push a N male into a BNC or TNC female it will stress the female contact and my cause permanent deformation depending on the exact connectors. BNC / TNC female is designed to mate with a 0.052 to 0/053" diameter pin Ntype is 0.063-0.066" diameter. See MIL-A-55339A |
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
That may be true for 50 Ohm but do not try it with the 75 Ohm versions!
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
BNC/TNC have the same inner pin dimensions and 'fix' the impedance by changing the dielectric insert dimensions in the mating area but 'N' type have a different diameter centre contact! We found the other issue with BNC at higher frequencies is that, again possibly due to the method of retention, they seem to fall off much faster over time with use, the inner contact sleeves seemed to get worn/distorted more. Perhaps due to more 'brute force' being used to overcome misalignment during connection but the TNCs seemed to survive much better 'in the field'. This last, in the case of Radio Astronomy, was both a figurative and literal term! On 24/03/2024 13:36, Jeff Kruth via groups.io wrote:
To me this is an interesting comment. I do not believe that the connector design is limiting in this way. TNC, BNC and type N all share a common coaxial design for the inner portion where the RF goes. You can plug a type N male into a BNC female and they mate properly, there is simply no mechanical retention. |
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
To me this is an interesting comment. I do not believe that the connector design is limiting in this way. TNC, BNC and type N all share a common coaxial design for the inner portion where the RF goes. You can plug a type N male into a BNC female and they mate properly, there is simply no mechanical retention. Bayonet Neil-Councilman (BNC) is exactly the same as a Threaded Neil-Councilman (TNC) (gee, hope I spelled their names right). The threads on the TNC reduce possibility of leakage, BNC's were rated to 4 GHz because they leak a bit above due to the bayonet method of affixing the connector pair. Even the OLD TNC were good to 12 GHz and the modern stainless types to 18 GHz. Type N (Neil, not Navy) in stainless is good to 18 GHz and Brass easily to 10 GHz.
Wear , design (age) and other factors affect all of this, including were it comes from. The PRC does not provide the best quality connectors for serious work. Not sure if they even know what Teflon is.
A modern connector catalog from a reputable supplier will confirm any of this.
J.Kruth
In a message dated 3/24/2024 12:49:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, donbitters@... writes: ?
Typically anything with a BNC connection is only rated to 1 GHz, ie. HP 355 attenuators. ?I have pushed a BNC cable to 1.5 GHz, but that is as far as I would go with it.
DigiKey lists BNC connector spec.
? |
Re: total newbie into GP-IB
Thank you Jason, you spreaded some light in the darkness
Also, I saw?and wonder if it is a good option for me, what you think? Are these ethernet-to-gpib boxes in some maner easier to handle and configure than the USB ones?? If it isn't a good option (maybe is out of date or complex config) I'll go for a NI USB adapter. If you know a realiable seller on eBay Europe, please, tell me. Still not very comfy with the idea of buying a counterfeit, but the price tag of the original or new NIs are totally out of my budget :D I only want to learn GPIB and tinker with my rack, no need to spend 500-1500 € in this. Regards, Ruben |
Re: HP8640B
Eh bien! Such a bunch of knowledge here! Yes, as usual, but amazing anyway.
Adam: I agree, I will probably fix it by logically look where the signal disappears. My "spatio-temporal coordinates" were to find the right manual for the young board. This will help to follow the signals. Not so easy without the right diagram. Tom: Thanks, I did my homework and I'm aware of the VE7CA mod, ¨¤ la N2GX in fact. The MC10EL31DG is available with Mouser here. Then, not sure the problem is there. Glenn: One difficulty is to place the build of mine as the SN is badly scratched. I will investigate though with your datas. Thanks. Jon: Thanks, four of them? Quelle honte! Dave: Now I'll have to compute your datas vs those of Glenn! More work but thanks a lot to both. GH: Perfect! I'll buy that one from Artek too as I have the right one from them already for the 1978 UK made. Thanks again to you all! Renaud |
Re: 11048C feed through termination data?
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýTypically anything with a BNC connection is only rated to 1 GHz, ie. HP 355 attenuators. ?I have pushed a BNC cable to 1.5 GHz, but that is as far as I would go with it.DigiKey lists BNC connector spec. Specifications for BNC Connectors BNC style connectors are miniature, light-weight, weatherproof interconnecting devices characterized by their two-stud, quick disconnect bayonet lock coupling arrangement. Their design functions satisfactorily from DC to 11 GHz in static applications, or from DC to 4GHz in applications involving vibration. The connectors typically yield a low VSWR (reflected signal) to 4GHz. Primary applications include radio telecommunications, broadcast equipment, medical equipment, computer, Precision Video, High definition studio broadcast, video switching and test instrumentation where frequent coupling and de-coupling are necessary.? Bomar¡¯s BNCs are available in an extensive variety of configurations and cable sizes and are impedance matched to either 50 ohm or 75 ohm. ?? Connector Body and Parts Frequency Range ??ELECTRICAL ?? ??Performance Test ? Specification ?? ??Impedance 50 ohm???0-4GHz 75 ohm.???0-1 GHz ? ??VSWR 1.30 Max.??MIL-C-39012 ? ??RF Insertion Loss 0.2 db Min. at 3 GHz.??MIL-C-39012 ? ??RF Leakage ??Working Voltage ( At Sea Level ).??-55 db Min. at 3 GHz.??MIL-C-39012 ???Test Voltage ( At Sea Level) 1500V rms.??MIL-STD-202 ???500V rms.??MIL-STD-202 ? ??Insulation Resistance 5000 Meg ohms Min.???MIL-STD-202 ?? ??Contact Resistance 3 Milli ohms Max. ? ?Don Bitters |