0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Yes, and RG-XYZ is not a standard. It has been withdrawn > maybe 30 years ago .
Huber+Suhner reports the max frequency of their RG-400 cable as 6 GHz (https://www.mouser.com/datasheet/2/829/HUBER_2bSUHNER_RG_400_U_DataSheet-1489640.pdf). The typical max frequency given for RG-400 cable is 12.4 GHz. I also compared the construction with Pasternack's RG-400 (https://www.pasternack.com/images/ProductPDF/RG400-U.pdf) and it appears to be identical. Any idea why HS would report such a low max frequency? Are they simply being conservative?Clearly, no one is using the cutoff frequency, which is 33.6 GHz for RG-400.
BTW, while 6 GHz is a bit low, I would not consider it beyond 8 GHz.
Quote from: Neomys Sapiens on December 09, 2023, 05:33:20 pmBTW, while 6 GHz is a bit low, I would not consider it beyond 8 GHz.Why's that? Shielding effectiveness? Something else?
Quote from: matthuszagh on December 09, 2023, 05:50:16 pmQuote from: Neomys Sapiens on December 09, 2023, 05:33:20 pmBTW, while 6 GHz is a bit low, I would not consider it beyond 8 GHz.Why's that? Shielding effectiveness? Something else?1.) see above post. I personally would not refer to a 3dB point as being 'within the usable BW' when I could get better.2.) shielding indeed.3.) At those frequencies, most signals occupy significant bandwith. Too much dispersion.
Quote from: Neomys Sapiens on December 10, 2023, 12:33:37 amQuote from: matthuszagh on December 09, 2023, 05:50:16 pmQuote from: Neomys Sapiens on December 09, 2023, 05:33:20 pmBTW, while 6 GHz is a bit low, I would not consider it beyond 8 GHz.Why's that? Shielding effectiveness? Something else?1.) see above post. I personally would not refer to a 3dB point as being 'within the usable BW' when I could get better.2.) shielding indeed.3.) At those frequencies, most signals occupy significant bandwith. Too much dispersion.Do you actually mean dispersion? The variation of permittivity of PTFE as a function of frequency (and therefore phase velocity) at 8 GHz is very small. Are you instead referring to attenuation as a function of frequency? If that's the case, do you stick to lower loss dielectrics like polyethylene foam at 8 GHz?