redzilla
All tools
Wireless

Coaxial Cable Loss

Estimate the attenuation of a coaxial cable run (RG-58, RG-213, LMR-400, Heliax…) from the cable type, the frequency and the length. It interpolates the loss by √f from nominal factory data. Everything in your browser.

E.g. 433, 915, 2400 (Wi-Fi 2.4 GHz), 5800. Loss rises with √f.

Physical length of the coax between both ends.

Examples
redzilla.cl — coax
 
Attenuation at that frequency
Total run loss
Power that arrives
after the cable loss
dB/100 m
Total loss

The loss at other frequencies

FrequencydB/100 mRun

The highlighted row is your frequency. The rest is interpolated the same way, by √f.

The same run on other cables

CabledB/100 mRun loss

At your frequency and length. Handy to decide whether a better cable is worth it.

How it is calculated · √f and approximate values

1. Each cable comes with its nominal attenuation in dB/100 m at a few reference frequencies (factory data).

2. Coaxial loss grows with the square root of frequency (resistive loss): atten(f) ≈ atten(f₁)·√(f/f₁). Between two references we interpolate linearly in √f.

3. Total loss: dB = atten(f)/100 × length(m). This is the cable's own loss; it excludes connectors and adapters (each adds ~0.1–0.5 dB).

4. Every 3 dB is half the power; 10 dB leaves 1/10. The values are approximate: they vary by manufacturer, temperature and cable quality.

Runs locally in your browser · no sign-up · nothing leaves your browser.

How it works

The calculator estimates the attenuation of a coaxial cable run from three inputs: cable type (RG-58, RG-6, RG-213, LMR-400, LMR-600 or Heliax 1/2"), frequency in MHz and length in meters. Each cable carries its nominal factory attenuation in dB/100 m at several reference frequencies, and the total run loss is dB = atten(f)/100 × length. It also shows the percentage of power that survives: 10^(−dB/10) × 100.

Between reference frequencies the value is interpolated in √f, because the resistive loss of coax (skin effect in the conductor) grows roughly with the square root of frequency: atten(f) ≈ atten(f₁) × √(f/f₁). Outside the data range the tool extrapolates with the same law and flags it. Values are approximate: they vary with manufacturer, temperature and cable condition, and do not include connectors or adapters (add about 0.1 to 0.5 dB each).

Example: 30 m of LMR-400 for 2.4 GHz WiFi

  1. At 2400 MHz, LMR-400 attenuates 12.7 dB/100 m (nominal factory figure).
  2. Run loss: 12.7 / 100 × 30 = 3.81 dB.
  3. Power reaching the far end: 10^(−3.81/10) ≈ 41.6 %: more than half is lost in the cable.
  4. The comparison table shows the same run in RG-58 would lose over 15 dB: unusable at that frequency.

Frequently asked questions

Can I use RG-58 for a 2.4 GHz WiFi antenna?
Only for very short runs. Extrapolating its data, RG-58 loses about 50 dB per 100 m at 2400 MHz, that is 0.5 dB per meter: a 10 m run drops about 5 dB, more than two thirds of the power. For 2.4 GHz and anything beyond a couple of meters, use LMR-400 or better.
How many dB of coax loss are acceptable?
As a rule of thumb, keep the total cable loss under 3 dB, because 3 dB means losing half the power and 10 dB leaves only one tenth. On links with little margin (distant receivers, power capped by regulation) every dB counts, and shortening the cable or raising the antenna is usually cheaper than adding amplification.
Why does coax loss increase with frequency?
Because of the skin effect: the higher the frequency, the thinner the conductor layer the current flows through, which raises the effective resistance. That resistive loss grows with the square root of frequency, which is why a cable that is excellent at HF can be useless at microwave frequencies.
What is the difference between 50-ohm and 75-ohm cable?
50-ohm cable (RG-58, RG-213, LMR) is the radio and WiFi standard: a compromise between power handling and loss. 75-ohm cable (RG-6) dominates television, CATV and satellite because it minimizes attenuation for reception. Do not mix them: the impedance mismatch creates standing waves (VSWR) and extra loss.
Was this tool useful?
Disclaimer We take great care to keep every tool accurate and review it thoroughly; even so, we can't guarantee it is free of errors or take responsibility for how the results are used. We recommend double-checking anything critical.
Found an error? Let us know →