On Apr 21, 8:47 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Keith Dysart wrote:
Nothing to sweep under the rug, I am afraid. It is key that the
dissipation depends on the design of the generator. Some
times those 'reverse watts' cause the dissipation to drop
to 0, sometimes they cause it to increase by a factor of 4,
sometimes they cause it to increase by the numerical value
of the 'reverse watts'. Pretty much hard to argue that those
'reverse watts' are real when their heating effect is so
variable.

Not at all. The heating effect depends upon how much of
the reverse joules/sec are re-reflected. If the dissipation
drops to 0, that is prima facie evidence that all the
reflected joules/sec have been re-reflected. If the
dissipation increases by a factor of 4, that is prima facie
evidence that all of the reflected joules/sec are being
dissipated in the source along with all of the joules/sec
available from the source into a matched load. Anything
else would violate the conservation of energy principle.

So you expect that some of the reverse wave is reflected at the
generator and yet experiment has shown that none of the
reverse wave is reflected at the generator when the generator]
source impedance is the same as the line characteristic
impedance. I am curious as to why you ignore these
experimental results.

I'd suggest you think of power as a quantity not a situation.
Superposition works for linear, time invariant circuits with
multiple sources. Check any text book. The generators and
lines under discussion meet these requirements.

But superposition obviously doesn't work at the source
*point*. One possible technical conclusion may be that
the dynamic active source is constant, fixed, and refuses
to be superposed (for any constant, fixed load). If that
is true, it would certainly stop the present raging debate
in its tracks.

As you noted previously, it does not matter whether the
reverse wave is created by a reflection or another generator.
So the experiment has been done with a generator at both
ends of the line and the results are entirely consistent with
the results predicted using the generator source impedance
to compute the amount of reflection. I am curious as to
why you ignore these results.

And, of course, there results are consistent with the analysis
described in any basic text book on transmission lines.

....Keith