开云体育

For those on this list first venturing into the v.h.f. and u.h.f.

regions and who would look for repeatable results down around minus
50dBm and quibble over a tenth of a dB, BNC is not the way to go.

Whatever salesmen and their literature say, this fellow with a bit

of exposure to BNC would offer the observation that those connectors
should be regarded simply a quick and easy bench convenience. When it
comes to repeatability at such frequencies, if for no other reason, stay
with SMA series or maybe N.? ?


--

John

at radio station VE7AOV.

For those on this list first venturing into the v.h.f. and u.h.f. regions
and who would look for repeatable results down around minus
50dBm and quibble over a tenth of a dB, BNC is not the way to go.

FWIW, calibrating 50kHz to 100MHz with these 34cm SMA-to-BNC pigtails:

.. and a generic BNC terminator and female coupler
yields lower CH0 LOGMAG when subsequently remeasured (-68 to -81dB)
than do included SMA cable and terminator (~ - 63dB)

For 500-900MHz
CH0 LOGMAG with BNC pigtail remeasured after cal yields -47 to -51 dB
while remeasuring SMA pigtail after calibration yields -68 to -73 dB

For frequencies of interest >>to me<<, BNC appears better..

Years ago somebody theorized that BNC stood for Baby N Connector. It's kinda similar in some ways.

Bear W5VZB

Bear,
From my years in the military I believe BNC actual stood for bayonet connector (hope I spelled that correctly).

Herb

Bayonet-Neil-Concelman, after the inventors.?
On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 at 18:21, hwalker<herbwalker2476@...> wrote: Bear,
From my years in the military I believe BNC actual stood for bayonet connector (hope I spelled that correctly).

Herb

Bayonet Neill–Concelman