Walter Maxwell wrote:
Cecil, Steve's equations are out there for all to see as general equations.
Nowhere has he made any caviats to the contrary, or that they only work for
reflection coefficients of 0.5. If they only work for one specific coefficient
it should be so noted that they are not for general use. And if equations are
not valid for general use they are then invalid.

Can you explain this?

They do work for any reflection coefficient, Walt. He chose 0.5 for
his examples because a 0.5 voltage reflection coefficient reflects
half of the voltage and that's easy to do in your head. The S-parameter
analysis will work for any reflection coefficient.

If you will take the time to perform an S-parameter analysis, you
will understand Steve's equations. His analysis is completely
different from yours.

Here's one with a voltage reflection coefficient of 0.707. You
can pick any Z0 for the 1/2WL line below and therefore choose
any reflection coefficient you want.

100W XMTR---50 ohm line---x---1/2WL 291.5 ohm line---50 ohm load
VF1=70.7V-- VF2=241.45V--
--VR1=0V --VR2=170.7V

Dr. Best's V1 = VF1(1+rho) = 70.7(1.707) = 120.7V

Dr. Best's V2 = VR2(rho) = 170.7(0.707) = 120.7V

VF2 = V1 + V2 = 120.7V + 120.7V = 241.4V (200W forward)

This is just an S-parameter analysis without normalizing to the
square root of Z0. In fact, we can *derive* Dr. Best's equations
from the S-parameter equations simply by multiplying by the
square root of Z0.

b2 = s21(a1) + s22(a2)

b2*Sqrt(Z0) = s21(a1)Sqrt(Z0) + s22(a2)Sqrt(Z0)

VF2 = b2*Sqrt(Z0), V1 = s21(a1)Sqrt(Z0), V2 = s22(a2)Sqrt(Z0)

VF2 = V1 + V2
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----