Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
We all know that "power flow" is a bit of an oxymoron, but it still is
widely used as an equivalent to "energy flow".

From your last posting it was not readily apparent
that you knew the difference between energy and power.

There is *** no reflected power wave*** but there is a
*** reflected RF energy traveling wave*** , the power of which
can be measured at a fixed point. A Bird directional
wattmeter indirectly senses the *** reflected power*** at the
fixed location of the Bird.


Cecil,

It was late, but I did not think I was dreaming. You do indeed use
energy and power interchangeably and randomly.

I will try to keep that flexibility in mind in the future.

8-)

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

Gene Fuller wrote:
There is *** no reflected power wave*** but there is a
*** reflected RF energy traveling wave*** , the power of which
can be measured at a fixed point. A Bird directional
wattmeter indirectly senses the *** reflected power*** at the
fixed location of the Bird.

It was late, but I did not think I was dreaming. You do indeed use
energy and power interchangeably and randomly.

I see you are still confused. Waves flow. Power doesn't
flow. Energy flows. Does your Bird wattmeter move while
it's indicating power or does it stand still while
indicating joules of energy passing a fixed point in
one second?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
There is *** no reflected power wave*** but there is a
*** reflected RF energy traveling wave*** , the power of which
can be measured at a fixed point. A Bird directional
wattmeter indirectly senses the *** reflected power*** at the
fixed location of the Bird.

It was late, but I did not think I was dreaming. You do indeed use
energy and power interchangeably and randomly.

I see you are still confused. Waves flow. Power doesn't
flow. Energy flows. Does your Bird wattmeter move while
it's indicating power or does it stand still while
indicating joules of energy passing a fixed point in
one second?


Cecil,

Keep on babbling, but remember, when you are in a hole stop digging.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
.. .
Gene Fuller wrote:
There is *** no reflected power wave*** but there is a
*** reflected RF energy traveling wave*** , the power of which
can be measured at a fixed point. A Bird directional
wattmeter indirectly senses the *** reflected power*** at the
fixed location of the Bird.

It was late, but I did not think I was dreaming. You do indeed use energy
and power interchangeably and randomly.

I see you are still confused. Waves flow. Power doesn't
flow. Energy flows. Does your Bird wattmeter move while
it's indicating power or does it stand still while
indicating joules of energy passing a fixed point in
one second?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

none of them flow. electrons move, this is called CURRENT. a current
causes a voltage which is related to it by an impedance. that is all you
need to know. power flow, energy flow, birds flying, those are all
secondary effects calculated from the fundamental elements of current,
impedance, and voltage. nothing else is necessary, everything else is
confusing since important details get lost when most people do calculations
of power or energy. stick with the basics and it will all become clear!

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:56:02 GMT, Walter Maxwell
wrote:

I call this condition 1. It exhibits a mismatch and it exhibits the
probability of the reflected energy being absorbed by the source to
the degree of the phase relationships.

Richard, although it exhibits a mismatch, and thus detunes the source, the probability of the reflected energy
being absorbed by the source is zero. The additional power dissipated in the source is due to lowered
impedance of the network resulting from off-resonance operation, thus increasing the plate current. The
reflected energy does not enter the network, but only results in a decrease in the power delivered relative to
that when the reactance in the load is cancelled by correct retuning of the source network.

Hi Walt,

Examples of separable energies in lines abound. We needn't have to go
into circulators, isolators, directional couplers (the real ones, not
the Bruene variety) and the rest, which all exhibit classic separation
to achieve many design goals. Hence, it follows that reverse energy
is real. The longer you pour energy into a mismatch, the longer it
will reflect it back. Longer brings time into the discussion and
hence power. Power is directly correlateable to heat.

Now, the amount of heat is directly correlateable to phase relations.
If they are aligned at one of the cardinal points, heat will drive up.
If they are aligned at the other cardinal point (180 degrees away)
heat will fall. Heat is positive proof of resistance. Being hot or
cold is sensation, not heat per se. That is, if the source cools,
this is not proof of the source not exhibiting a source resistance -
phase does not create nor diminish resistance. Or to put it another
way, source resistance is not a function of phase.

There is a continuum of phase relationships expressed in angles
between 0 and 360. Half will tend to heat, half will tend to cool.
Energy is dissipated for the full 360 degrees.

When that reverse energy arrives by transmission line, it sees a load.
Complex as it is, it must resolve to find itself within this continuum
of response. Examples of plate incandescence or arcing are not
trivial parlor tricks. You can force the situation with a lumped
equivalent, but a lumped equivalent will not prove any invalidity of
the transmission line model it replaces (which, on the face of it, is
an ironic appeal). This can be simply proven in that a lumped
equivalent does not exhibit ALL the characteristics of energy storage
in a long line.

Some (others than you, Walt) may be tempted to trot out the ghosts in
the TV line proof. That is certainly one characteristic that a lumped
equivalent can never exhibit (and yet the equivalent acts like the
line to an amazing degree for many considerations). No, I won't delve
into the endless debate about transient vs. steady state. This is an
argument about as insipid as can be offered (by others than you, Walt)
as if it made any difference. Rather, a resonant line will exhibit
identical properties of resonance at harmonics - a lumped equivalent
will not. It is quite obvious that a lumped equivalent is not wholly
equivalent, except for a highly constrained example. To say (by
others than you, Walt) it supports a general solution that invalidates
the line's reality is as absurd a notion as any that are trotted
around the track here. In short, if a line exhibits itself as a
source of energy for any example, no equivalent can negate that
physical truth in a proof for other use.

Hence, it follows that:
1. reflected energy is real and consequential;
2. sources exhibit resistance to energy flow;
3. 1 & 2 combine by their phase to result in a change of heat -
dissipation;
4. the operator of either a tube or transistorized rig can adjust the
phase of 1 through the intermediary of tuning (or conjugating);
5. absolutely no intervention impacts 2, except by degree;
6. successful/unsuccessful intervention still proves 3.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

Dave wrote:
none of them flow. electrons move, this is called CURRENT. a current
causes a voltage which is related to it by an impedance. that is all you
need to know. power flow, energy flow, birds flying, those are all
secondary effects calculated from the fundamental elements of current,
impedance, and voltage.

Sorry Dave, the essence of an EM wave is its electromagnetic
energy. Voltage and current are the secondary effects of
the photons encountering a conductor. What happens when one
doesn't have a conductor?

What's the voltage and current in the light from Alpha
Centauri? Optical physicists have known for decades what
is the essence of EM waves and they don't use voltage and
current except for some esoteric calculation.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:56:02 GMT, Walter Maxwell
wrote:

I call this condition 1. It exhibits a mismatch and it exhibits the
probability of the reflected energy being absorbed by the source to
the degree of the phase relationships.

Richard, although it exhibits a mismatch, and thus detunes the source, the
probability of the reflected energy
being absorbed by the source is zero. The additional power dissipated in
the source is due to lowered
impedance of the network resulting from off-resonance operation, thus
increasing the plate current. The
reflected energy does not enter the network, but only results in a
decrease in the power delivered relative to
that when the reactance in the load is cancelled by correct retuning of
the source network.

Hi Walt,

Examples of separable energies in lines abound. We needn't have to go
into circulators, isolators, directional couplers (the real ones, not
the Bruene variety) and the rest, which all exhibit classic separation
to achieve many design goals. Hence, it follows that reverse energy
is real. The longer you pour energy into a mismatch, the longer it
will reflect it back. Longer brings time into the discussion and
hence power. Power is directly correlateable to heat.

Now, the amount of heat is directly correlateable to phase relations.
If they are aligned at one of the cardinal points, heat will drive up.
If they are aligned at the other cardinal point (180 degrees away)
heat will fall. Heat is positive proof of resistance. Being hot or
cold is sensation, not heat per se. That is, if the source cools,
this is not proof of the source not exhibiting a source resistance -
phase does not create nor diminish resistance. Or to put it another
way, source resistance is not a function of phase.

There is a continuum of phase relationships expressed in angles
between 0 and 360. Half will tend to heat, half will tend to cool.
Energy is dissipated for the full 360 degrees.

When that reverse energy arrives by transmission line, it sees a load.
Complex as it is, it must resolve to find itself within this continuum
of response. Examples of plate incandescence or arcing are not
trivial parlor tricks. You can force the situation with a lumped
equivalent, but a lumped equivalent will not prove any invalidity of
the transmission line model it replaces (which, on the face of it, is
an ironic appeal). This can be simply proven in that a lumped
equivalent does not exhibit ALL the characteristics of energy storage
in a long line.

Some (others than you, Walt) may be tempted to trot out the ghosts in
the TV line proof. That is certainly one characteristic that a lumped
equivalent can never exhibit (and yet the equivalent acts like the
line to an amazing degree for many considerations). No, I won't delve
into the endless debate about transient vs. steady state. This is an
argument about as insipid as can be offered (by others than you, Walt)
as if it made any difference. Rather, a resonant line will exhibit
identical properties of resonance at harmonics - a lumped equivalent
will not. It is quite obvious that a lumped equivalent is not wholly
equivalent, except for a highly constrained example. To say (by
others than you, Walt) it supports a general solution that invalidates
the line's reality is as absurd a notion as any that are trotted
around the track here. In short, if a line exhibits itself as a
source of energy for any example, no equivalent can negate that
physical truth in a proof for other use.

Hence, it follows that:
1. reflected energy is real and consequential;
2. sources exhibit resistance to energy flow;
3. 1 & 2 combine by their phase to result in a change of heat -
dissipation;
4. the operator of either a tube or transistorized rig can adjust the
phase of 1 through the intermediary of tuning (or conjugating);
5. absolutely no intervention impacts 2, except by degree;
6. successful/unsuccessful intervention still proves 3.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

I wish somone would convince my boss reverse power isnt real. Then he
wouldnt be so angry about the power meter head I blew up because I forgot to
put an attnuator on it. Even with the -20db of the coupler ther is still 20
watts peak on the reverse side.

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Others use the term 'power wave', but I DO NOT, so please stop accusing
me of something I am not guilty."

Power waves are respectable but a writer chooses his own words.

Searching the web on topic: "power reflection on mismatched line"
yielded 12,778 hits. First two were from the physics department of the
University of Queensland in Australia. No qualms about the word "power"
are shown and sample problems are worked. Here is one statement: "Note
that the power reflection coefficient is equal to the square of the
voltage (or current) coefficient because forward or reflected waves are
in rhe same impedance."

Remarkable or not, that is the seesnce of what the Bird Electronic
Corporation says in instructions for its "Thruline Wattmeter".

Power is acceptable and accepted. Why avoid the term?

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 20:41:42 -0400, "Jimmie D" wrote:


I wish somone would convince my boss reverse power isnt real. Then he
wouldnt be so angry about the power meter head I blew up because I forgot to
put an attnuator on it. Even with the -20db of the coupler ther is still 20
watts peak on the reverse side.

Jimmie, are you stating your belief that reverse, or reflected power isn't REAL power?

Ya gotta be kidding! Listen to your boss, he's right!

Walt, W2DU

Revisiting the Power Explanation
 

Walter Maxwell, W2DU wrote:
"When the matching is accomplished the phase relationship between the
forward and reflected voltages can either be 0 degrees or 180 degrees,
resulting in a total re-reflection of the voltage. If the resultant
voltage is 0 degrees, then the resultant current is 180 degrees, thus
voltage sees a virtual open circuit and the current sees a virtual sees
a virtual short circuit. The result is that the reflected voltage and
current are totally re-reflected IN PHASE with the source voltage and
current. This is the reason the forward power in the line is greater
than the source power when the line is mismatched at the load, but where
the matching device has re-reflected the reflected waves."

Eloquently stated and significant because there are many who would swear
that a properly matched transmitter re-reflects the reflected waves, but
don`t have a clue as to why.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI