Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Why are Coaxial cables 75 or 50 Ohm?

Expand Messages
  • mrostamy@yahoo.co.uk
    Hi... This is a question that has been annoying me for some time...does anyone know whay the characteristic impedance of caxial cables was chosen to be 50 or
    Message 1 of 6 , Nov 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi...
      This is a question that has been annoying me for some time...does
      anyone know whay the characteristic impedance of caxial cables was
      chosen to be 50 or 75 Ohm? Is it somekind of trade-off?
      :)
    • Steve
      hiya.. After working in the RF realm for many years, I had begun to wonder about this same question... after looking around on the WWW for a while seeking an
      Message 2 of 6 , Nov 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        hiya..

        After working in the RF realm for many years, I had begun to wonder about
        this same question... after looking around on the WWW for a while seeking
        an answer, I came across a document which explained a little about this
        issue... I can't say that this is the final answer, I'm not even sure
        it's the actual truth of the matter, it's just what my research turned up,
        and I'd certainly like to hear if any radio 'old-timers' know anything
        about the true history of coax...

        to the best of my recollection -

        in the 'early' days of radio engineering, transmission lines were
        constructed from those materials already "at-hand"... coaxial lines were
        built using existing pipe and tubing sizes, with air as the dielectric, and
        the inner conductor supported by bakelite discs at regular intervals.
        (wonder how they made 'bends' in the line, used a junction box of some
        sort?)

        the "characteristic impedance" of any coax line is a function of the outer
        diameter of the inner conductor, the inner diameter of the outer conductor,
        and the dielectric material between them; be it air, teflon, or goat milk
        cheese (probably not a good choice for low-loss cables).

        as it happened, due to the sizes of the materials originally used, the
        impedance fell right at about 50 ohms, and it sort of stuck as a standard.
        later research is said to have revealed that lower impedance designs
        produced transmission lines with greater bandwidth, while higher impedance
        designs made for lower losses (less unit capacitance per unit length?)...

        the choice of 75 ohms over 50 for systems such as cable television and
        video (yes, Virginia, there *are* 75 ohm BNC connectors) was supposedly due
        to these issues, a choice of less loss over greater bandwidth. seems kind
        of odd, tho, I'd have guessed greater bandwidth to be more important than
        loss for a multi-channel distribution arrangement.

        the same article also claimed that the 'european' standard was 60 ohms.
        I've never heard of that before, and from what I recall of working with
        european equipment, it was always on a 50 ohm standard. the article was
        also apparently written by an English fellow who may be having a bit of a
        laugh over it all. anyone ever seen a Rohde & Schwartz RF signal generator
        with a 60 ohm output? I haven't.

        my best guess is that the idea regarding available materials is close to
        the real story. the rest of the information... well, I'd like to do more
        research before accepting it as gospel.

        I'll welcome any comments, dissention, clarification, love/hate mail or
        lunatic ramblings on the subject.


        Steve H.
      • Jim Purcell
        Steve, ... Since you didn t quote or paraphrase I have no idea what question you ve been wondering about. Jim
        Message 3 of 6 , Nov 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Steve,

          > After working in the RF realm for many years, I had begun to wonder about
          > this same question...

          Since you didn't quote or paraphrase I have no idea what question you've been
          wondering about.

          Jim
        • 73227.1605@compuserve.com
          ... uhhh.... yeah... well, the uhh, subject header does sorta state the question pretty plainly. but I do get your point, I did sorta forget to address my
          Message 4 of 6 , Nov 2, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Electronics_101@y..., Jim Purcell <jpurcell@w...> wrote:
            > Steve,
            >
            > > After working in the RF realm for many years, I had begun to wonder about
            > > this same question...
            >
            > Since you didn't quote or paraphrase I have no idea what question you've been
            > wondering about.
            >
            > Jim

            uhhh.... yeah... well, the uhh, "subject" header does sorta state the question pretty plainly.

            but I do get your point, I did sorta forget to address my response to the person asking the question and to the question itself.

            I'll make it a point in future posts to be more concise. please don't tell Miss Manners about my egregious omission?

            Steve
          • Doug Hale
            This list seams to want to be a place to be petty - it s not for me - bye Doug
            Message 5 of 6 , Nov 2, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              This list seams to want to be a place to be petty - it's not for me - bye

              Doug

              >Since you didn't quote or paraphrase I have no idea what question you've been
              >wondering about.
              >
            • Jim Purcell
              Steve, ... I have a bad habit of not reading subject headers since threads often go far afield from the original topic. I recall that on my favorite BBS they
              Message 6 of 6 , Nov 2, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Steve,
                >uhhh.... yeah... well, the uhh, "subject" header does sorta state the question pretty plainly.

                I have a bad habit of not reading subject headers since threads often go far
                afield from the original topic. I recall that on my favorite BBS they could go on for
                weeks. :-)

                Jim
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.