Unsolderable wire?

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 15:42:19 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

The easiest way was to look at the imprint: 'Belden headend cable'.

Which end is the head? (Sorry, I couldn't resist).
Click to expand...

If you have to ask, you aren't qualified for the job. :)

The entire system of amplifiers is marked as Forward or Reverse so
just follow the reverse path to the head end. Unless it's Fiber enhanced
CATV.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
 
On 01/20/2014 12:42 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
dave wrote:

The easiest way to spot good headend cable was to try to bend it. It
drapes, like mic cable; not stiff.


The easiest way was to look at the imprint: 'Belden headend cable'.
Click to expand...

It's easier to find in the dark if you feel for it. I knew a lot of CATV
people, including the Chief Head End Technician at Time Warner in
Houston; and we prized the supple stuff for personal use.
 
dave wrote:
On 01/20/2014 12:42 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

dave wrote:

The easiest way to spot good headend cable was to try to bend it. It
drapes, like mic cable; not stiff.


The easiest way was to look at the imprint: 'Belden headend cable'.



It's easier to find in the dark if you feel for it. I knew a lot of CATV
people, including the Chief Head End Technician at Time Warner in
Houston; and we prized the supple stuff for personal use.
Click to expand...

I had a full 1000' spool stolen from me.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
 
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

< I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't tin. It's
< almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can apply it. With both a
< temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F) and a mondo 100W stick I finally
< tried. The solder will barely melt when touched to the braid opposite the
< iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)
 
Steve wrote :
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't tin. It's
almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can apply it. With both
a < temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F) and a mondo 100W stick I
finally < tried. The solder will barely melt when touched to the braid
opposite the < iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)
Click to expand...

Steel, ment to be clamped not soldered?

--
John G Sydney.
 
"Steve" <loft@centurylink.net> wrote in message
news:87egc65xql.fsf@centurylink.net...
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't tin.
It's
almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can apply it. With
both a
temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F) and a mondo 100W stick I
finally
tried. The solder will barely melt when touched to the braid opposite
the
iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)
Click to expand...
Most of the rg-6 uses aluminum instead of copper or tinned copper. The
normal methods of soldering will not work on it.
 
You're doing it wrong: never wait for dry metal to melt solder opposite the
iron. Tin under the iron, so there's thermal transfer. Then go around the
braid, spreading the tinned area around it. Mind the core will melt to goo
while you're doing this...

And as others have mentioned, if it's aluminum or stainless, you're screwed.

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com

"Steve" <loft@centurylink.net> wrote in message
news:87egc65xql.fsf@centurylink.net...
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't tin.
It's
almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can apply it. With
both a
temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F) and a mondo 100W stick I
finally
tried. The solder will barely melt when touched to the braid opposite
the
iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)
Click to expand...
 
Ralph Mowery expressed precisely :
"Steve" <loft@centurylink.net> wrote in message
news:87egc65xql.fsf@centurylink.net...
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't tin.
It's
almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can apply it. With
both a
temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F) and a mondo 100W stick I
finally
tried. The solder will barely melt when touched to the braid opposite the
iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)


Most of the rg-6 uses aluminum instead of copper or tinned copper. The
normal methods of soldering will not work on it.
Click to expand...

I'll believe Aluminium or steel I must admit to only a little actual
experience.
Some Cable guy should give an actual answer.

--
John G Sydney.
 
John G wrote:
Ralph Mowery expressed precisely :
"Steve" <loft@centurylink.net> wrote in message
news:87egc65xql.fsf@centurylink.net...
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't tin.
It's
almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can apply it. With
both a
temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F) and a mondo 100W stick I
finally
tried. The solder will barely melt when touched to the braid opposite the
iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)


Most of the rg-6 uses aluminum instead of copper or tinned copper. The
normal methods of soldering will not work on it.

I'll believe Aluminium or steel I must admit to only a little actual
experience.
Some Cable guy should give an actual answer.
Click to expand...

The original RG6 used a copper center conductor, and a copper braid over
a stiff, solid insulator. It was barely useful for video. The RG6/U used
for CATV has a copper plated steel center conductor, foam inner
insulator and aluminum foil covered by aluminum drain wires. If it is to
be used overhead, it has a separate stainless steel 'messenger' wire
with a Siamese outer jacket over both the coax and the messenger
strand. I worked in CATV, and used to see 50,000 feet of it come in at
a time. The best way to be sure is see who made the cable in question,
and look up the OEM's specifications for that exact type of cable.

We used Belden, Commscope, and other American made brands back in the
mid '80s.
 
On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 20:51:23 -0500, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

John G wrote:

Ralph Mowery expressed precisely :
"Steve" <loft@centurylink.net> wrote in message
news:87egc65xql.fsf@centurylink.net...
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't
tin. It's < almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can
apply it. With both a < temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F)
and a mondo 100W stick I finally < tried. The solder will barely
melt when touched to the braid opposite the < iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)


Most of the rg-6 uses aluminum instead of copper or tinned copper.
The normal methods of soldering will not work on it.

I'll believe Aluminium or steel I must admit to only a little actual
experience.
Some Cable guy should give an actual answer.


The original RG6 used a copper center conductor, and a copper braid over
a stiff, solid insulator. It was barely useful for video. The RG6/U used
for CATV has a copper plated steel center conductor, foam inner
insulator and aluminum foil covered by aluminum drain wires. If it is to
be used overhead, it has a separate stainless steel 'messenger' wire
with a Siamese outer jacket over both the coax and the messenger strand.
I worked in CATV, and used to see 50,000 feet of it come in at a time.
The best way to be sure is see who made the cable in question, and look
up the OEM's specifications for that exact type of cable.

We used Belden, Commscope, and other American made brands back in the
mid '80s.
Click to expand...

He got most of it right.

As a former installer of a dual system (Cube) (Time/Warner)(Warner/
Amex)We had dual 'siamesed' cables and those used for "drops" had the
messenger strand.

However, ALL of it, indoor, outdoor, drop lines, and UG (underground)
ALL had a braided tin plated copper braid over the foil layers. The foam
core had a laminated immobile foil affixed to it, and then there was foil
and braid over that. I know because foil tears and braid does not, and
the fittings used in the industry get crimped on, and foil alone will not
endure those stresses over time, if not fail immediately.

But RG-6 can be bought in many different configurations. It is more
about the form factor and physical size and characteristic impedance.
RG-59 was the same impedance but slightly smaller but had a higher
capacitance per foot and could not be used on longer runs, whereas the RG-6
could perform over greater distances Mainly due to a thicker core to
shield spacing making for a lower parasitic capacitance per foot.
 
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:42:12 -0500, Ralph Mowery wrote:

"DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno" <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote in
message news:nafb0t$t4q$1@gioia.aioe.org...
He got most of it right.

As a former installer of a dual system (Cube) (Time/Warner)(Warner/
Amex)We had dual 'siamesed' cables and those used for "drops" had the
messenger strand.

However, ALL of it, indoor, outdoor, drop lines, and UG (underground)
ALL had a braided tin plated copper braid over the foil layers. The
foam core had a laminated immobile foil affixed to it, and then there
was foil and braid over that. I know because foil tears and braid does
not, and the fittings used in the industry get crimped on, and foil
alone will not endure those stresses over time, if not fail
immediately.

But RG-6 can be bought in many different configurations. It is more
about the form factor and physical size and characteristic impedance.
RG-59 was the same impedance but slightly smaller but had a higher
capacitance per foot and could not be used on longer runs, whereas the
RG-6 could perform over greater distances Mainly due to a thicker core
to shield spacing making for a lower parasitic capacitance per foot.

And you got most of that right. The RG number is mostly the physical
size of the cable. The reason rg-6 size is used is for lower losses at
higher frequencies. It is less expensive and able to be bent and
handled in a house easier than the rg-11 size.
Click to expand...

Nobody ever used RG-11 in a house. It was always RG-59 and now with the
channel count and digital internet being added, most in-house installs are
RG-6 throughout, unless it is a cheap ass cable company.

It is not mere wire resistance either. The capacitance is also a factor
in why RG-6 is better than RG-59.
The main loss in the cable up; to about 1000 MHz is the resistance loss
of
the conductors.
Click to expand...

Another reason why mere foil shielding does not ring true. This is why
the center conductor is not a copper plated steel core, but a copper CLAD
steel core.

By making the center conductor larger there is less
loss. The foil is used to provide a very good shield to keep the RF
inside the cable, and the braid is mainly to provide a way to crimp it
for a good electrical connection.
Click to expand...

There are different braid fill levels available. It comes down to what
the cable company wants to spend on their build.
 
"DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno" <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote in message
news:nafb0t$t4q$1@gioia.aioe.org...
He got most of it right.

As a former installer of a dual system (Cube) (Time/Warner)(Warner/
Amex)We had dual 'siamesed' cables and those used for "drops" had the
messenger strand.

However, ALL of it, indoor, outdoor, drop lines, and UG (underground)
ALL had a braided tin plated copper braid over the foil layers. The foam
core had a laminated immobile foil affixed to it, and then there was foil
and braid over that. I know because foil tears and braid does not, and
the fittings used in the industry get crimped on, and foil alone will not
endure those stresses over time, if not fail immediately.

But RG-6 can be bought in many different configurations. It is more
about the form factor and physical size and characteristic impedance.
RG-59 was the same impedance but slightly smaller but had a higher
capacitance per foot and could not be used on longer runs, whereas the
RG-6
could perform over greater distances Mainly due to a thicker core to
shield spacing making for a lower parasitic capacitance per foot.
Click to expand...

And you got most of that right. The RG number is mostly the physical size
of the cable. The reason rg-6 size is used is for lower losses at higher
frequencies. It is less expensive and able to be bent and handled in a
house easier than the rg-11 size.

The main loss in the cable up; to about 1000 MHz is the resistance loss of
the conductors. By making the center conductor larger there is less loss.
The foil is used to provide a very good shield to keep the RF inside the
cable, and the braid is mainly to provide a way to crimp it for a good
electrical connection.
 
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:12:31 -0500, rickman wrote:

The stuff I use has both copper center conductor and braid. Most RG-6
uses a steel center conductor with a copper plating since the skin
effect limits current flow to the surface at high frequencies and the
steel provides more strength for pulling and aerial runs.
Click to expand...

Nope. Copper plating is too thin. It is referred to as "copper clad".

Same thing for ground rods, except the reason in that case is abrasion
durability.

Goddamned cross-posting retards.
 
"DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno" <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote in message
news:nafi66$1au8$1@gioia.aioe.org...
It is not mere wire resistance either. The capacitance is also a factor
in why RG-6 is better than RG-59.
Click to expand...

The capacitance has almost nothing if anything at all to do with the losses
at the cable frequencies.

If you look at the charts the capacitance is nearly the same and often the
rg-59 is less than the rg-6.. The main losses is the I squared R loss of
the conductors.
 
On 2/21/2016 6:06 PM, John G wrote:
Ralph Mowery expressed precisely :
"Steve" <loft@centurylink.net> wrote in message
news:87egc65xql.fsf@centurylink.net...
Bob E. <bespoke@invalid.tv> writes:

I am trying to solder some RG-6 shield to a pcb. The braid won't
tin. It's
almost like it's dissipating the heat faster than I can apply it.
With both a
temp-controlled iron (set as high as 700F) and a mondo 100W stick I
finally
tried. The solder will barely melt when touched to the braid
opposite the
iron.

That just sounds like another excuse to the use the butane torch :)


Most of the rg-6 uses aluminum instead of copper or tinned copper.
The normal methods of soldering will not work on it.

I'll believe Aluminium or steel I must admit to only a little actual
experience.
Some Cable guy should give an actual answer.
Click to expand...

The stuff I use has both copper center conductor and braid. Most RG-6
uses a steel center conductor with a copper plating since the skin
effect limits current flow to the surface at high frequencies and the
steel provides more strength for pulling and aerial runs.

--

Rick
 
On 2/22/2016 1:57 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
"DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno" <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote in message
news:nafi66$1au8$1@gioia.aioe.org...

It is not mere wire resistance either. The capacitance is also a factor
in why RG-6 is better than RG-59.


The capacitance has almost nothing if anything at all to do with the losses
at the cable frequencies.

If you look at the charts the capacitance is nearly the same and often the
rg-59 is less than the rg-6.. The main losses is the I squared R loss of
the conductors.
Click to expand...

Looking at the chart of loss vs. frequency for Belden 1694A Coax I see
0.24 dB at 1 MHz, > 3 dB at 270 MHz and > 6 dB at 1000 MHz. I don't see
any factor for frequency in I^2R. I suppose this could be skin effect
increasing the conductor resistance.

How do you tell when the losses are mostly due to the dielectric?

--

Rick
 
"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nafms0$6dr$1@dont-email.me...
Looking at the chart of loss vs. frequency for Belden 1694A Coax I see
0.24 dB at 1 MHz, > 3 dB at 270 MHz and > 6 dB at 1000 MHz. I don't see
any factor for frequency in I^2R. I suppose this could be skin effect
increasing the conductor resistance.

How do you tell when the losses are mostly due to the dielectric?
Click to expand...

It is the skin effect of the center conductor mostly up to around 1000 mhz.
Below that the dielectric has very little loss.

There are places that show how to calculat the various losses depending on
the material and frequencies, but the math gets involved.

There is a chart here that shows the relative effect.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjowZuWkIzLAhVFNT4KHRUQBukQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfcafe.com%2Freferences%2Farticles%2FJoe-Cahak%2Frf-connectors-cables-joe-cahak-6-2014.htm&psig=AFQjCNGIEOiXBCpLe3a7WLhDueMCfF231w&ust=1456256383257029
 
"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nafms0$6dr$1@dont-email.me...
On 2/22/2016 1:57 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
Looking at the chart of loss vs. frequency for Belden 1694A Coax I see
0.24 dB at 1 MHz, > 3 dB at 270 MHz and > 6 dB at 1000 MHz. I don't see
any factor for frequency in I^2R. I suppose this could be skin effect
increasing the conductor resistance.

How do you tell when the losses are mostly due to the dielectric?
Click to expand...

If you really want to get into it, here is a place that gives the info.
Lots of math to look through. Much easier just to look at the chart for a
good indication of where the losses are.

http://www.rfcafe.com/references/articles/Joe-Cahak/rf-connectors-cables-joe-cahak-6-2014.htm
 
In article <Bf6dnb0NpNQX-lbLnZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
rmowery28146@earthlink.net says...
"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nafms0$6dr$1@dont-email.me...
On 2/22/2016 1:57 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
Looking at the chart of loss vs. frequency for Belden 1694A Coax I see
0.24 dB at 1 MHz, > 3 dB at 270 MHz and > 6 dB at 1000 MHz. I don't see
any factor for frequency in I^2R. I suppose this could be skin effect
increasing the conductor resistance.

How do you tell when the losses are mostly due to the dielectric?



If you really want to get into it, here is a place that gives the info.
Lots of math to look through. Much easier just to look at the chart for a
good indication of where the losses are.

http://www.rfcafe.com/references/articles/Joe-Cahak/rf-connectors-cables-joe-cahak-6-2014.htm
Click to expand...

Or I could go into the archives at work "Brand-Rex", and get the
original designs specs and charts. Yes, those were the days.

We just retired the very first irradiation cross linking line ever made
for production use of any product. The actual first cross linker
irradiation unit for non commerical use was for the airforce, in a
hanger.

Our unit now sits on the floor waiting for a home in some antique
shop, 170k Watt version. It was getting hard to find chips to keep it
operating. Many BB chips, round can op-amps. The osc for the magnetic
amp was a UNI transistor that drove a transistor Flip Flip to generate a
100Hz sweep for the amp. In that circuit was wave shaping components to
get a step peak on the out sides of the sweep before it changed
direction.

Neat stuff for back then, real engineers not uC coders!

Jamie
 
In sci.electronics.repair M Philbrook <jamie_ka1lpa@charter.net> wrote:
In article <Bf6dnb0NpNQX-lbLnZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
rmowery28146@earthlink.net says...

"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nafms0$6dr$1@dont-email.me...
On 2/22/2016 1:57 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
Looking at the chart of loss vs. frequency for Belden 1694A Coax I see
0.24 dB at 1 MHz, > 3 dB at 270 MHz and > 6 dB at 1000 MHz. I don't see
any factor for frequency in I^2R. I suppose this could be skin effect
increasing the conductor resistance.

How do you tell when the losses are mostly due to the dielectric?



If you really want to get into it, here is a place that gives the info.
Lots of math to look through. Much easier just to look at the chart for a
good indication of where the losses are.

http://www.rfcafe.com/references/articles/Joe-Cahak/rf-connectors-cables-joe-cahak-6-2014.htm

Or I could go into the archives at work "Brand-Rex", and get the
original designs specs and charts. Yes, those were the days.

We just retired the very first irradiation cross linking line ever made
for production use of any product. The actual first cross linker
irradiation unit for non commerical use was for the airforce, in a
hanger.

Our unit now sits on the floor waiting for a home in some antique
shop, 170k Watt version. It was getting hard to find chips to keep it
operating. Many BB chips, round can op-amps. The osc for the magnetic
amp was a UNI transistor that drove a transistor Flip Flip to generate a
100Hz sweep for the amp. In that circuit was wave shaping components to
get a step peak on the out sides of the sweep before it changed
direction.

Neat stuff for back then, real engineers not uC coders!
Click to expand...

Did all this stuff make an electron beam?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top