Luke HulleyKeymasterNovember 23, 2017 at 5:40 pmPost count: 13
Post any connectivity questions you have to hear back from an engineerLuke HulleyKeymasterFebruary 14, 2018 at 1:24 pmPost count: 13
Please submit any questions hereClarence (“Clar”) ButtonParticipantNovember 15, 2019 at 12:21 amPost count: 1
I am looking for a bulkhead connector whihc is detachable from the flat face (circular) bulkhead measuring abiur 5″ in diameter. The cableand the connector must carriy 2 x 12AWG Copper stranded ppower wires,2 x 18 AWG Copper stranded communications wires, two (2) twinned fibre optics cables used for signal and digital video transmission. Depth rating will be ca. 30 feet Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. BTW: we are not limited to usingonly one connector.We COULD use a coupe of more specific ones. Many thanks in anticipation of your advice.Aidan ThompsonMemberNovember 26, 2019 at 4:16 pmPost count: 53
We need to suggest either our flange or bulk head to cable mount 900 series. This is a 4 pole connector series that has 10-13AWG allowable size contacts. For your 18AWG conductors you’ll need to add a ferrule or adaptor to have inserted into the two communication contacts.
Below part numbers for you to review:
PX0941/04/S (flange mount)
PX0931/04/S (front panel mount)
Choose from one of the above for your chassis
PX0911/04/P (cable mount)~ this item will mate to either one of the two above
As for your signal and video connections we suggest our 6000 Series duplex connection. Below are the two series mating part numbers. Because there are multiple options to choose from I’ve added the data sheet link below it for further guidance:
PXF6050 series (Flex Cable Connector)
PXF6051 series (Flex In Line Cable Connector)
PXF6052 series (Chassis mount connector)
The above suggestions would make this a two connector solution as we currently do not have a series that includes all these conductors into one housing.
Any other questions, please don’t hesitate to ask away.
Hope this helps,
AidanNicola LeesParticipantJanuary 9, 2020 at 2:20 pmPost count: 3
North Paulding Robotics – Explorer Team
Team Captain – Glen Lewis (email@example.com)
1 of PX0941/03/P
1 of PX0921/03/P
2 of PX0911/03/S
3 of PX0401/014/4S
3 of PX0400/001/4P
We received our order with the following items:
Sample PX0911/03/9 @ 2
We should be able to use connectors that come from the 4000 series Buccaneer line. We can use the Rear Panel Mounting Connector PXP4013 2 pole socket, the Inline Flex Cable Connector PXP4011 2 pole socket, and two of the Flex Cable Connector PXP4010 2 pole plug. All parts would preferably be the solder contact variant and come with the required accessories to house two 18 gauge wires. Should these parts not be available, equivalent parts of similar size from another series would be usable. If they need more information about the parts please let me know.
Please let me know if we can arrange to swop out parts or if you have suggestions?
Glen LewisGiancoParticipantFebruary 6, 2020 at 1:50 pmPost count: 2
I need some clarifications regarding a Bulging product I’ve recently purchased to integrate in our project.
The code is PXPTPU12FIM08XRJ050PU, an M12 x-coded to RJ45 cable.
I’ve found some discrepancies between datasheet (link)
and reality because doing a simple continuiti testing I’ve found these connections:
M12 – RJ45
I imagine M12 pins are joined in couples (1-2), (3-4), (5-6), (7-8) as the cable will fit Gigabit standards but standing to datasheet every couple seem plainly connected to the same respective pins of RJ45 even if it doesn’t.
At this point I need some clarification because I need to be sure of using twisted couples not separate wires belonging to different couples.
GGiancoParticipantFebruary 6, 2020 at 2:31 pmPost count: 2
I’ve inverted M12 RJ45 on the LUT of the cable.
In this way couples are correctly ordinated on M12 and RJ45 from an ethernet standpoint.
Datasheet seems incorrect to me anyway.
GEric ChristopherParticipantFebruary 10, 2020 at 5:06 amPost count: 1
I want to use the IEC insultation boot part no. 11987 the datasheet says the boot is UL94V-0 rated but it doesn’t have a UL file number to back it up. Is this just your declaration to the UL flammability standard or has this test been carried out by UL and does UL recognise this part as having passed the standard?
Thanks!PERALDIParticipantFebruary 14, 2020 at 3:47 pmPost count: 1
We are using the C1350AA from arcolectric since more than 10 years without any problem. Since Bulgin is in charge of the production, the rocker switch no longer holds firmly in its panel-cutout… and can go out quite easily. The bulgin C1350AA is using less plastic, and the locking parts, on each sides, are much thinner…
What should I do to lock it in place? Reduce the cutout? Are you going to come back to the original design?
Thank you. Best regards.
OlivierParisParticipantMarch 20, 2020 at 3:59 pmPost count: 1
We are looking for a compact rocker switch that could achieve IP X4. We thought about a 8600 serie with a cover, but i have a few questions about.
How does the cover goes on the switch, do you have a photo of one assembled
Is the switch normally usable with the cover
What IP rating is usually achieved with that
We also looked at the splah resistant references, but what IP correspond to “splash”?
Thank you and have a nice dayRomylosParticipantMarch 26, 2020 at 1:33 pmPost count: 1
Can you please inform me the NET weight of the FX0380GoddaerParticipantApril 14, 2020 at 12:12 pmPost count: 1
We are using your BULGIN C1500AAAAF rocker switch in several of our devices. We have to ship some spare parts to our Chinese factory. Therefore we need CCC certificate for this switch.
Can you please provide us that certificate ?
I tried to ask through the Bulgin webform on march 25th, but got no response yet.
Barco N.V.Luke HulleyKeymasterApril 17, 2020 at 5:20 pmPost count: 13
Hi there! There are no formal IP rating associated with the protective covers used on the 8600 series. It is simply a clear, soft neoprene cover that fits around the bezel before the switch is installed in the panel.Luke HulleyKeymasterApril 17, 2020 at 5:25 pmPost count: 13
Hi there! We don’t have CCC certification on any of our switches and have no plans to apply for it. In most cases it has not been a problem.Kate PalmerParticipantMay 5, 2020 at 6:49 amPost count: 1
Hi, I am comparing the 400 and 4000 series connectors. They both seem to use the same crimp and solder contacts. For 2 and 3 pole SA3349 and SA3350. However for 400 series wire size acceptance is 20-24 AWG but for 4000 series it is 16-18 AWG.
Why the difference?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.