Products > Test Equipment
Thoughts on RG-316 coaxial cable?
matthuszagh:
I'm thinking about using RG-316 (RG316) SMA cable assemblies for non-performance-critical applications where I primarily want flexibility and ease of use. Any particular thoughts on this? Any alternatives that people prefer in this flexibility class?
Someone:
One of the reasons to choose RG-316 is the PTFE dielectric insulation makes it stiffer and less flexible than alternatives (that aren't hard line).
Perhaps RG-174 or if going to manufacturer specific L -3D2W, L-2.5CHWS, L-1.5C2VS ?
matthuszagh:
--- Quote from: Someone on November 23, 2024, 10:03:43 pm ---One of the reasons to choose RG-316 is the PTFE dielectric insulation makes it stiffer and less flexible than alternatives (that aren't hard line).
Perhaps RG-174 or if going to manufacturer specific L -3D2W, L-2.5CHWS, L-1.5C2VS ?
--- End quote ---
Ah ok that's good to know. Although I've dealt with flexible versions of RG405 cable with a PTFE dielectric and it's flexible enough for my needs - I don't need it to be as flexible as possible.
jonpaul:
see mfg app notes eg at Belden.com eg Blog and notes of app eng Steve Lampen
Jon
nctnico:
--- Quote from: matthuszagh on November 23, 2024, 08:08:54 pm ---I'm thinking about using RG-316 (RG316) SMA cable assemblies for non-performance-critical applications where I primarily want flexibility and ease of use. Any particular thoughts on this? Any alternatives that people prefer in this flexibility class?
--- End quote ---
RG316 is just fine. I use mostly RG316 myself. RG174 is also an option but tends to get tangled up quicker compared to RG316. I use RG174 mostly when I want to solder coax to a board. Just be aware that these types of coax don't have stellar HF performance (say over 500MHz) so for critical measurements where cable dampening is a problem, you want to use a different type of coax.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version