Measuring Surface Flatness (was "Cabinet Grade Particle Board")

[Jerry Budd]

Especially when you consider that the transmitter antennae is 
typically removed when stowed in the case.

Jerry

>Yes. Maybe not a great one, as the lid is unlikely to be 
>conductively gasketted, but your transmitter would likely not 
>interfere with a plane flying on the same frequency.
>Dean
>
>
>Dean Pappas
>Sr. Design Engineer
>Kodeos Communications
>111 Corporate Blvd.
>South Plainfield, N.J. 07080
>(908) 222-7817 phone
>(908) 222-2392 fax
>d.pappas at kodeos.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: discussion-request at nsrca.org 
>[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Grow Pattern
>Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 6:42 PM
>To: discussion at nsrca.org
>Subject: Re: Measuring Surface Flatness (was "Cabinet Grade Particle Board")
>
>The big question is;
>
>"Is my Ali TX case a working Faraday cube????"
>
>E.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:Rcmaster199 at aol.com>Rcmaster199 at aol.com
>To: <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org>discussion at nsrca.org
>Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 4:55 PM
>Subject: Re: Measuring Surface Flatness (was "Cabinet Grade Particle Board")
>
>The tangents that some threads create are often much more 
>interesting than the original intent of the thread.
>
>Keith I would say it's not a good idea. If you built a fuse out of 
>this material, (done everyday BTW),  I suggest you build it large 
>enough to accomodate the person flying it (vbg). I know Bill, Don 
>Ramsey and Al Glenn and probably several more, flew or still fly 
>"Faraday Cages" for a living
>
>Now, how we went from measuring surface flatness to "shielding" 
>devices from EMI/RFI (regardless of what the emitting source is), is 
>beyond me
>
>MattK
>
>In a message dated 11/23/2004 4:32:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
>tkeithb at comcast.net writes:
>
>In other words, if you built your fuse out of this material you'd 
>probably want to run your antenna externally. ;-)
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: <mailto:bob at toprudder.com>Bob Richards
>To: <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org>discussion at nsrca.org
>Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 2:59 PM
>Subject: Re: Measuring Surface Flatness (was "Cabinet Grade Particle Board")
>
>John,
>
>I disagree. The definition of a "Faraday CAGE", which is what Bill 
>said, is a completely conductive sealed enclosure.
>
>Also, the edges don't have to be fully bonded together for RF 
>protection. They can be stitched together at intervals depending on 
>how high in frequency you want attenuation. The closer the spacing, 
>the higher the cutoff frequency. Obviously, if you want cutoff up 
>into the gigahertz range, you pretty much need a continuous bond.
>
><http://www.boltlightningprotection.com/Elemental_Faraday_Cage.htm>http://www.boltlightningprotection.com/Elemental_Faraday_Cage.htm
>
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage
>
>Bob.
>
>
>John Ferrell <johnferrell at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Sorry to get picky, but a Faraday shield is not an electromagnetic 
>field, it is an electrostatic shield.
>
>An rf tight room needs the edges fully bonded together and a Faraday 
>shield requires that they be insulated.
>
>I think everyone knows what is being said, but I felt obliged to add 
>the detail.
>
>John Ferrell  
>My Competition is not my enemy!
><http://dixienc.us/>http://DixieNC.US
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:bob at toprudder.com>Bob Richards
>To: <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org>discussion at nsrca.org
>Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 1:06 PM
>Subject: Re: Measuring Surface Flatness (was "Cabinet Grade Particle Board")
>
>That's what it is. No RF gets in or out. Something like 110dB attenuation.
>
>Bob.
>
>


-- 
___________
Jerry Budd
mailto:jbudd at qnet.com
=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.