Hallo Samuel, after reading all your decription and the answers given I am impressed and interested on your project!
In general I am fully in agreement with Bob Camp's and John Miles's comments. Personally I would accept as well a SMA-Type connector, I do use them in most cases. If I understand it correct, there is a cutout preparation for a BNC-Type diameter connector in the front panel. It would not be very difficult to fit in a SMA manufacturing a kind of washer with a stepped diameter. I have to look tomorrow into my own 53132A. Never I would use an N-Type connector for this counter. It is not only bulky, there will be a big risk to connect a next good RG214 with the N connector to it, which would be too stiff and heavy, a risk for the panel and the Insrtument would not stay in place. An N-Type connector for small sized cable dias is more difficult to get... I remember the comment of Bob concerning connectors. I worked a lot with the TNC-types. They are quite rugged and even moisture proof and a lot better then the BNC because the thread connection. Moving the cable does not affect the outer and inner contact quality as it is the case with BNC! As I do use only small sizes of cables for that purpose to avoid the bending forces to the panels, I would find either an adapter TNC-SMA or I would apply a rather short adapter cable to connect my SMA sortiment. So I think the TNC on your pictures does look nice and would be a safe solution. My next wish would be to make the frontend repairable even in 10 years ore more. I never killed any input devices of counters or analyzers etc, but a lot of students and young engineers learned very quick that it is wise to try the measurement with at least a 10dB attenuator in front, which can stay if it still work safe with 10 or 20 dB more and make a power check before! ;-) If I think to the hours and tools needed to make a high quality board population without errors - I could think to pay for a professional work... Arnold, DK2WT On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:19:22 +0100, Samuel DEMEULEMEESTER wrote: >I can't. SMA just doesn't fit on the 53131A front panel. A SMA connector is >located on the BNC, but I need a SMA to xxx cable to connect the internal >prescaler PCB to the front panel. You could see the TNC connector on the >picture I linked on my first email. >I would be happy to find a way to match the diameter of the BNC hole with a >SMA connector, but no luck righy now. >-----Message d'origine----- >De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la >part de John Miles >Envoyé : jeudi 25 mars 2010 22:09 >À : Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement >Objet : Re: [time-nuts] FW: Re: Low-Cost 6+ GHz Prescaler board for >I'd vote SMA. TNC isn't widely used on other HP/Agilent gear. >-- john, KE5FX >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]on >> Behalf Of Samuel DEMEULEMEESTER >> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 2:02 PM >> To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' >> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] FW: Re: Low-Cost 6+ GHz Prescaler board for >> >> >> BNC is definitely not an option. My "standard" connector for this >> project is >> a TNC connector. It's rated to 8 GHz and many adapter are available for >> cheap. The N connector might be an option (I can propose the PCB with a >> Type-N) but as you said, it will require another front panel. Keep in mind >> that Agilent is selling this front panel for $199 ! I think this doesn't >> worth that price. >> >> >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la >> part de Rich Stolte >> Envoyé : jeudi 25 mars 2010 21:12 >> À : [email protected] >> Objet : [time-nuts] FW: Re: Low-Cost 6+ GHz Prescaler board for >> >> N connector would be preferable if space would accomidate the cutout being >> drilled to a larger size. If not, the front panel from the 5 GHZ /12 GHz >> counter is available from Agilent. They did not use a BNC >> connector past 3 >> GHz and I don't think you want to either. As far as the specification >> tradeoffs, I think you should try to mirror Agilent's specs as closely as >> possible for their 5 GHz opton >> <http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/product.jspx?cc=US&lc=eng&nid >=-53690243 >8.536907575&pageMode=OV> >http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/product.jspx?cc=US&lc=eng&nid=-536902438 >..536907575&pageMode=OV Anything that does not meet Agilent's spec will >cause calibration problems for anyone who wants to send it off to a >commercial calibration lab unless they are given very specific instructions >which might be hard to do years in the future when the specs to your board >have been forgotten and mislaid. >Pricing would depend on a few factors, not the least of which would be your >fixed cost, and how much work / cost are involved in making the front panel >connector work. I would say a range from $250 each to $1000 each wouldn't >be unreasonable. If you hit the low end of that range, I would be >interested in talking about buying a quantity of them from you to resell. >At the high end of that range, you can probably find a few buyers if you >work hard at marketing, but definitely count me out. >Right now, it is also hard to find option 010 oven timebase for these >counters. I wonder if you or someone else on this list has any insight >about the possibility of retrofitting one of the older ubiquitous oven >oscillators, or possibly even an lpro? _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
