![]() |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: If you think a standing wave is a "shortcut", how about showing the mathematical models that support your position? I already did, Gene, but here it is again: forward traveling wave + reverse traveling wave = standing wave just substitute the appropriate math symbols. There's a trig identity that corresponds to the above equation. Take away either the forward traveling wave or the reverse traveling wave and the standing wave ceases to exist. There's no valid mathematical model that supports the position that standing waves can exist with the two component waves. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Cecil Moore wrote:
There's no valid mathematical model that supports the position that standing waves can exist with the two component waves. Sorry, obviously should be "without", not "with". I'm engaging in March Madness while I'm posting. Gig 'Um, Aggies! -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Forward traveling wave + reflected traveling wave = standing wave What happens to the standing wave when you take away the reflected wave? It's a different physical situation. The two components of the standing wave are the forward traveling wave and the reverse traveling wave. I guess if the reverse traveling wave disappears, you can't ignore it anymore, huh? -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com Cecil, If I cut off one leg I will probably fall over. So what? Your desperate attempts at evasion are showing. 8-) 73, Gene W4SZ |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Gene Fuller wrote:
Your desperate attempts at evasion are showing. 8-) I'm not evading anything, Gene. I assert that a standing wave cannot exist without its component traveling waves. I can give any number of examples. You are the one who refuses to provide just one example of a standing wave existing without its component traveling waves so exactly who is evading? -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Your desperate attempts at evasion are showing. 8-) I'm not evading anything, Gene. I assert that a standing wave cannot exist without its component traveling waves. I can give any number of examples. You are the one who refuses to provide just one example of a standing wave existing without its component traveling waves so exactly who is evading? -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com And I say, "Big deal." You can set up any combination of components you wish. The physical reality remains exactly the same as that (fully) represented by the standing wave. You simply cannot derive new reality by manipulating the math. 73, Gene W4SZ |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Gene Fuller wrote:
You simply cannot derive new reality by manipulating the math. But, Gene, that is exactly what you have done. Asserting that two waves with different equations are the same *IS* manipulating the math. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Roy Lewallen wrote:
David G. Nagel wrote: If you want a quick lesson in high vswr find a ham with an old tube transmitter and see if he will hook it up to a mismatched load. The cherry red plates are the reflected energy being absorbed. Transistors will just turn to smoke under the same conditions. Unfortunately, you'd be learning the wrong lesson. The cherry color is due to the transmitter being loaded with an impedance it's not designed for, causing the final to run at low efficiency. You can disconnect the antenna and replace it with a lumped RC or RL impedance of the same value and get exactly the same result. Alternatively, you can attach any combination of load and transmission line which give the same impedance, resulting in a wide variation of "reflected energy", and get exactly the same result. All that counts is the impedance seen by the transmitter, not the VSWR on the line or the "reflected power". The problem is that the idea of "reflected energy" turning the plates hot is so easy to understand, that people aren't willing to abandon it simply because it isn't true. See http://eznec.com/misc/Food_for_thought.pdf for more. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Do us a favor, compute the S-vectors for an incandescent lamp with a linear filament. Then follow though with the same for a transmitter, transmission line and a mismatched load. You will find that is the reflected S-vector that adds heat to the plate. -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.Â*Â* --Schiller |
VSWR doesn't matter?
Richard Fry wrote:
"Roy Lewallen" wrote The problem is that the idea of "reflected energy" turning the plates hot is so easy to understand, that people aren't willing to abandon it simply because it isn't true. _____________ But reflected energy/power does exist. For an easy example, such reflections are evident in the picture seen on an analog TV receiver when the match between the transmit antenna and the transmission connected to it is bad enough. In analog TV transmit systems with a typical 500+ foot length transmission line from the tx to the antenna, a 5% reflection from a far-end mismatch can be quite visible, showing as a "ghost" image that is offset from the main image as related to the round-trip propagation time of the transmission line. RF Poppycock, TV ghosting is caused by multipath length differences. Calculate the position ratio and the horizontal scan frequency (15750 Hz is close enough). That gives you the path length difference; it is generally on the order of miles (= major terrain features). -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.Â*Â* --Schiller |
VSWR doesn't matter?
"joseph2k" wrote
Poppycock, TV ghosting is caused by multipath length differences. Calculate the position ratio and the horizontal scan frequency (15750 Hz is close enough). That gives you the path length difference; it is generally on the order of miles (= major terrain features). ________________ Analog TV ghosts can be produced within the TV transmit antenna system as well as by reflections of the transmitted signal in the propagation environment. I know this from my experience as an RCA Broadcast Field Engineer, because I've evaluated and corrected many transmit antenna systems that had been the source of such ghosts. For example, a reflection from a mismatch between a 1,000 foot long, air-dielectric transmission line and the TV transmit antenna connected to it produces a ghost with ~ 2 µs delay from the main image. The active scan width of an NTSC TV line is about 53 µs, so 2/53 = ~4% of the width of the screen, or maybe 5% counting overscan. This ghost is easy to see in a typical TV set/viewing setup. RF |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com