Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Owen Duffy" wrote
None of these explanations require designating "reflected power" at a point, or implying that it is the energy in "reflected power" that is totally and solely responsible for the physical damage. ___________ I guess you are relying on the fact that there will be no reflected r-f voltage/ current if there is no incident voltage/current? And no argument, there. But of course, it is the vector sum of ALL of these that may cause the transmission line/network/tx failure(s) mentioned in my relevant posts in this thread. And so that does NOT prove that reflected power/voltage/current does not exist, or is unimportant in an r-f system design. The specifications of a transmission line or other r-f network or circuit can be chosen with due engineering care to be rated for a defined incident power applied to a load with a given mismatch to a specific Zo, and with respect to the carrier frequency, the modulation thereon, the ambient air temperature/pressure, solar illumination, line pressurization, and other operating parameters. These realities are commonly recogniz(s)ed and incorporated by most commercial designers/evaluators of r-f transmission systems, and as a result pose no significant problems to them and/or their clients. But none of this means that r-f reflections do not, may not, or can not exist -- whether in "ham" systems, or otherwise. RF PS: Please edit my email address in replies here so that it can't accurately be picked up by spammers. I get enough spam already. Gracias. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The power explanation | Antenna | |||
again a few words of explanation | General | |||
again a few words of explanation | Policy | |||
Explanation wanted | Antenna | |||
New ham needing explanation on radios | General |