Talk:SMA connector

message: SMA should be an article in itself. Scott 19:05:23, 2005-09-07 (UTC)
Why? Light current 19:06, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why is there a reference to the "Snap-On" tool company on this page?  The tool company has no relationship to an RF connector that can be pushed on and pulled off without turning a nut.
Agreed. I removed the link Amram99  24 Oct 2006 (UTC)
::Could it be that, as I have noted below, a torque spanner should be used to tighten the SMA connector especially when used at microwave frequencies?  --jmb 09:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tool

message: Could someone add the thread size for a female SMA connector?  I'm trying to find a nut to hold one in place on an aircraft panel.
SMA mounting nut threads: .250-36 threaded coupling  SSC four (talk) 20:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not add some dimensional information?  Would a drawing or sketch based on the governing specification be allowable? Mollynet (talk) 18:19, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Thread Size

message: It offers excellent electrical performance from DC to 18 GHz.
:Can this be expanded to say that there are SMA connectors for use above 18 GHz.  Also when used at microwave frequencies a torque spanner should be used to tighten the connector.  --jmb 09:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Microwave

message: "SMA and precision SMA-like connectors are by far the most popular coaxial connector, though by modern standards, their performance and durability are somewhat limited."
:Shouldn't that read "the most popular sub-miniature coaxial connector"?  --jmb 09:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Most popular?

message: I found you are all right, maybe you are all great engineers.i'll study more from you  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmpter (talk • contribs) 02:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SMA discussion 

message: I arrived at this page looking for the standard dimensions of an SMA connector for my research. I saw it thru the References section but it seems rather incomplete. Should it be better if we put the dimensional specs of the SMA standard here? Along with the SMB and SMC entry. So we can quantitatively see the difference. Thanks. 110.55.198.184 (talk) 15:05, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technical Specs/Dimensions 

message: I had to edit this article, because it was contradicting within itself, and showed EXACTLY the opposite of what it should!
Pictures talk louder that words:
http://www.linxtechnologies.com/products/connectors/rp-sma-connectors/
http://www.linxtechnologies.com/products/connectors/sma-connectors/
--Valent (talk) 06:59, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Somebody is wrong on the internets!!! ;) 

message: I'd like to suggest reverting this article to Mr PIM's edits at 20:38, 30 June 2011.  SMA connector terminology is very tricky and I have referred back to this page like 60 times over the last year to make sure I ordered and specified the right genders, including using the terms plug and socket.  Unfortunately, now those terms were removed from the text in the RPSMA section.  Dif'ing Valent's contributions at Sept 19th 2011, most of them removed useful detail or added the 'pin hole' terminology which I don't like, or added advertising links to Linx's website.  Good connectors and fine to link to their site in the talk page, but the link on the main page just seems like promotion.  The one text addition I'd suggest retaining is "Today, however, both type of connectors are readily available." because RP-SMA is no longer 'unique'.  Let me know what others think, to form consensus.  Personally, I think Male RPSMA has a center pin and outer threads and would be called a jack/socket.  Here are pictures at Mouser.
Otherwise, I'd also suggest someone add a more thorough comparison between 3.5mm and SMA because for a while I thought they were the same, but an RF friend pointed out there are slight differences, I think in the center pin length, that mean an SMA male plugged into a 3.5mm female will cause damage.  The article currently notes that damage to 3.5mm female pins is possible with 'low grade' SMA connectors, but I'm wondering what dimensional tolerance is required to avoid this.  Spazvt (talk) 08:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggest revert to Male RPSMA caption, June 30th version. 

message: Could someone who understands the terminology please fix the figure 2 caption, which described a connector body with outside threads as female in one sentence and a connector body with inside threads as female in the next sentence. Both cannot be right.
"Figure 2.Female RP-SMA (RP-SMA-F or RSMA-F) socket connector: Inner pin contact with a female connector body (outside threads). A male RP-SMA connector is the opposite in both respects: It has a female inner pin hole contact with a female connector body (inside threads)."
And can someone explain the rationale for the use of male and female terms with RP connectors? Were they named by people unfamiliar with human anatomy? Does the "reverse polarity" really mean "reverse terminology", i.e. we are going to name these things opposite to what the words mean? Is there some purpose to this which makes it seem less incredibly stupid than it would be to produce a pair of "reverse feet" shoes where we refer to the left shoe as the right and vice versa?--Ericjs (talk) 18:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Figure 2 caption 

message: Image:Sma and rp-sma.jpg|Good example, since shows 2 different styles in same photos.
Image:SMA Female Socket Connector.jpg|Good example, since PCB-mount.
Image:Semi rigid.jpg|Good example, since has semi-rigid "cable"
Image:Gniazdo SMA.jpg
Image:Sma-mm.jpg|Common SMA adapter (good info for newbies)
Image:Smatee.jpg|Common SMA adapter (good info for newbies)
Image:Smaf-nf.jpg|Common SMA adapter (SMA-Female to N-Female, good info for newbies)
Image:Smaf-nm.jpg|Common SMA adapter (SMA-Female to N-Male, good info for newbies)
I searched Wikimedia Commons for SMA related photos and dropped them here but I didn't describe them.  I'm not sure if all of these should be in the article, but I posted them here for people to see...just in case they want to use it in the article.  Since the article isn't long enough to sprinkle photos throughout it, maybe we should add a gallery...just a thought.  
Concerning the RP style connectors, this article should have RP style photos to show examples and give the common name that is found on the internet for them...the last thing that wikipedia needs to do is cause more confusion.  • Sbmeirow • Talk •  12:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery 

message: This article doesn't mention that the SMA designation is also used for a family of optical fiber connectors, which use the same thread size but have different centre pin dimensions. What's the best way to handle this - an extra sentence in the first paragraph, before the contents block, and/or an entry in the 'See also' list? 195.171.151.220 (talk) 07:46, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: A new paragraph in the Variations section would be a good start. Do you have a reference? -—Kvng 19:57, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Optical fiber SMA connectors

message: I added a "citation needed" tag to the statement regarding using SMA for "metrology".  I think it's a strong statement of recommendation for how NOT to use SMA, even though from personal experience we use them for all sorts of measurement in our RF lab.  It's also not terribly clear what is meant by "metrology" since almost any signal passing though a cable will be "measured" at some point.  I hope this helps, and I submit this comment with respect. 76.97.69.103 (talk) 19:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SMA no good for "metrology"? 

message: Contary to what the article said, they do not offer "excellent" electrical performance to 17 GHz. They are designed for use to 18 GHz, but I think the word "excellent" is mis-placed, as there are much better connectors - e.g. 3.5 mm, which by nature of its air dielectric will have lower losses than SMA. The female pin will expand in diameter when a male is inserted, causing a decrease in the impedance, unlike in the 3.5 mm precision slotless connectors, where the female is of a fixed diameter, and small fingers inside move to create electrical contact. I've added the word "semi-precision", as that is generally what they are known as. Here's two manufacturers who call SMAs semi-precision. 
http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/sma.asp?N=0&sid=515236802DB1617F&
http://www.pasternack.com/images/ProductPDF/PE39437.pdf
There's a graph in this book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Handbook-Microwave-Component-Measurements-Techniques/dp/1119979552
on page 36, which show insertion loss of SMA and 3.5 mm connectors. At about 12 GHz, the 3.5 mm is clearly superior. It actually in one of the sections you can see online at for free at Amazon, and probably elsewhere. Given the author of that book, Joel Dunsmore is Agilents top VNA expert, I think it is about as authoritative as any source. 
The article also stated the life of 3.5 mm connectors would be reduced if mating with SMA and provided a web link to justify that. However, at no point does the word "reduced" appear in that link. The article warns of the risks of damaging 3.5 mm connectors if SMAs are out of spec, but as far as I know, there is nothing to indicate that SMAs within specification will damage a 3.5 mm connector or reduce its life. The problem arises because SMA are often out of spec when new, and so can damage 3.5 mm connectors. Drkirkby (talk) 12:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  General points, specification - I don't have time to cite all the reference, but here are some.  

message: I removed these comments from the article, because non-encyclopedic.  • Sbmeirow • Talk • 01:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed comments from article 

message: I can't help feeling that it might be better if the RP version was in another article. Although the RP version is called a reversed SMA, it is totally incompatible by design. I was going to quote a few of the mechanical specifications on the SMA, but it would be confusing to do it in an article which something reversed is also given. The specifications are completely different. I've seen no evidence to suggest reversed SMA are rated to use at 18 GHz as the article says of SMA. Drkirkby (talk) 13:18, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, with such different characteristics, the reverse polarity connector should have its own article. Binksternet (talk) 13:56, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should reverse polarity be in a separate article?  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on SMA connector. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nutrition-edu.com/ee/terms/C.html#cable_connector
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://fairviewmicrowave.com/sma_2_92_3_5_2_4_compatibility.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130329035448/http://www.wellshow.com:80/technical-support/rf_connector-rp_sma_connector/ to http://www.wellshow.com/technical-support/rf_connector-rp_sma_connector/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:28, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The introduction states: "...but is most commonly encountered with WiFi antenna systems and USB Software Defined Radio dongles." This may be correct in the writer's experience, but this connector has been around and in common use a lot longer than Wireless Ethernet. In my experience (which isn't exhaustive) it turned up a lot on radio antenna connections, including mobile (cell) phones before they became "built in". It's very common now on handheld radios for antenna connection.
I propose changing this sentence to "is commonly found on WiFi, handheld radio and other radio frequency applications where it's displacing BNC due to its smaller size." However, I don't have a reference for it and this is based on MY experience, not a poll of other IET (or IEEE) members!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fjleonhardt (talk • contribs) 12:43, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most common in WiFi dongles! 

message: More and more I see SMA connectors advertised as SMA-J, SMA-K, RPSMA-KY etc
Maybe we can add those alternative names to the list.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.130.145.131 (talk) 14:06, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  SMA-J, SMA-K, RPSMA-KY 

message: I recently ran into a bunch of NOS SMA/Type-N adapters marked as "OSM" rather than "SMA," and looking around, https://connectorsupplier.com/60-year-old-sma-connector-design-still-popular/ has a nice history of the connector as originally designed by Omni Spectra, Inc. and marked as OSM ("Omni Spectra Miniature"). I'm not sure it's a sufficiently encyclopedic source, and I had not previously encountered "OSM" connectors before, so I'm not sure what article edits here are appropriate. jhawkinson (talk) 13:57, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  History and origin, Omni Spectra and "OSM" connector