Does anyone have the assembly instructions (file, link or just the
dimensions) for the UG536B/U Straight N type plug for RG58/U cable ?
My web searching efforts have yielded nothing (it's a bit obsolete).
I'm trying to make up a cable for 2.3 GHz so I would like to get the
dimensions right in the hope of getting a half decent match.

Steve

On 12 Apr 2006 07:42:06 -0700, wrote:

Does anyone have the assembly instructions (file, link or just the
dimensions) for the UG536B/U Straight N type plug for RG58/U cable ?
My web searching efforts have yielded nothing (it's a bit obsolete).
I'm trying to make up a cable for 2.3 GHz so I would like to get the
dimensions right in the hope of getting a half decent match.

---
That part is an Amphenol P/N 34025-RFX.

Go to:

http://www.amphenolrf.com/search_2_results.asp

and click on "Assembly Instructions"

BTW, it doesn't seem to be obsolete. Click on "Distributor
Inventory" for a surprise. :-)


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

John:

The body of the UG536B/U looks quite different from the Amphenol
catalog picture and their drawing link is broken...how did you
cross-reference it ?

Steve

On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:46:54 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On 12 Apr 2006 07:42:06 -0700, wrote:

Does anyone have the assembly instructions (file, link or just the
dimensions) for the UG536B/U Straight N type plug for RG58/U cable ?
My web searching efforts have yielded nothing (it's a bit obsolete).
I'm trying to make up a cable for 2.3 GHz so I would like to get the
dimensions right in the hope of getting a half decent match.

---
That part is an Amphenol P/N 34025-RFX.

Go to:

http://www.amphenolrf.com/search_2_results.asp

and click on "Assembly Instructions"

BTW, it doesn't seem to be obsolete. Click on "Distributor
Inventory" for a surprise. :-)

---
Hmmm...

It appears the RG536B/U is an Amphenol 34025, which has different
cable prep dimensions from the 34025-RFX.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

John:

Yup...now the drawing link is working for me and I found that
too...rather roundabout....and not listed in the catalog section....but
it got me there (and I spent a few minutes poking around that website
before posting too !).

Thanks,
Steve

Does anyone have the assembly instructions (file, link or just the
dimensions) for the UG536B/U Straight N type plug for RG58/U cable ?
My web searching efforts have yielded nothing (it's a bit obsolete).
I'm trying to make up a cable for 2.3 GHz so I would like to get the
dimensions right in the hope of getting a half decent match.
=============================
Question ; Would it be sensible to use RG58/U for 2.3 GHz sig (obviously
depending on length of that type of coax) I thought teflon type coax was
almost mandatory for that frequency.
Just curious , wishing to learn .

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

Highland Ham wrote:

Question ; Would it be sensible to use RG58/U for 2.3 GHz sig (obviously
depending on length of that type of coax) I thought teflon type coax was
almost mandatory for that frequency.

Not really, but it is what I have available at present ! Teflon vs
polyethylene isn't reallly that important with regard to frequency...it
is more a question of quality of the shield, I think. I suppose
polyethylene insulation will tend to melt while soldering connectors so
it is more likely that an impedance bump will occur due to the centre
conductor being off-centre. Non-solid insulation would have less loss
but this has to survive being passed through car-door seals.

It is probably a good thing these things have been discontinued, too.
I found it impossible to assemble without special jigging to prevent
the insulation from melting and swelling up while soldering the pin,
blocking the assembly. Teflon insulation would behave better I
suppose.

With one end kluged into shape with a hot knife and the other end
soldered with the insulation wrapped with aluminum tape, the return
loss of the cable and a good load measures around 27 dB or better
(probably beyond the accuracy limits of my test setup), so they work OK
regardless of the kluges.

Steve (VE3SMA)

wrote:

Question ; Would it be sensible to use RG58/U for 2.3 GHz sig (obviously
depending on length of that type of coax) I thought teflon type coax was
almost mandatory for that frequency.

Not really, but it is what I have available at present ! Teflon vs
polyethylene isn't reallly that important with regard to frequency...it
is more a question of quality of the shield, I think. I suppose
polyethylene insulation will tend to melt while soldering connectors so
it is more likely that an impedance bump will occur due to the centre
conductor being off-centre. Non-solid insulation would have less loss
but this has to survive being passed through car-door seals.

It is probably a good thing these things have been discontinued, too.
I found it impossible to assemble without special jigging to prevent
the insulation from melting and swelling up while soldering the pin,
blocking the assembly. Teflon insulation would behave better I
suppose.

With one end kluged into shape with a hot knife and the other end
soldered with the insulation wrapped with aluminum tape, the return
loss of the cable and a good load measures around 27 dB or better
(probably beyond the accuracy limits of my test setup), so they work OK
regardless of the kluges.
================================
Thanks Steve for the above . Unless 50 Ohms coax is absolutely
necessary , you might wish to consider 75 Ohms coax as used for domestic
satellite receivers (between the rx and the converter,also called
LNB=Low Noise Block,located at the dish). That type of coax is double
screened with both braid + copper foil and would be superior to RG58/U
coax. It is fitted with socalled F-connectors ,without having to solder
since the solid copper core serves as centre pin. I have been able to
purchase F to N-male adaptors and by using an additional double F-female
union ,this would possibly solve your problem as well .
Sat receivers normally have an input signal between 950-2150 MHz ,with
the dish converter subtracting 10 GHz or about from the actual satellite
signal received .

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH