*From*: "Kevin G. Rhoads" <kgrhoads@xxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:55:33 +0000

>Silver is best, as is well known, but only about 4-5% better than copper. Unless you can afford to chill to superconducting; but the high temp superconductors are all ceramics and don't plate well, and even liquid nitrogen temps are expensive to achieve. As for the metallic superconductors, liquid helium temps are MUCH more expensive, and it is hard to get semiconductors that are happy at those temps. SO, yes, silver plate is the best you can ordinarily do for HF conductors, and can but you a little if the plating depth is greater than a skin depth or three -- but silver tarnishes easily, and you are more likely to get better bang for your buck by concentrating on other kinds of loss that are more readily controlled. ------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list For help: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field List technical documents are available at: http://www.si-list.net List archives are viewable at: //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list or at our remote archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu

**References**:

- » [SI-LIST] Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency
- » [SI-LIST] Re: Conductor loss reduction at High Frequency