"Dave" wrote in message
news:cwPbj.1073$ML6.117@trndny04...


you can do it when it makes physical sense. it does not make sense in
standing waves for all the obvious reasons that i have pointed out. it
does make sense in the individual traveling waves. just accept what your
little swr meter tells you, it shows the forward power and reflected
power, that is all you need and the only powers that make sense.


Little SWR meter shows forward AND reflected power in one direction, and
reflected power only in reverse direction. Why is the Bird wattmeter
calibrated in Watts, measuring power (forward and reverse) and has chart to
calculate SWR, when there are no standing waves and no power in them?
Laying waves or sitting waves???

Seems to me that the PROBLEM is that some consider standing wave to be some
imaginary, stopped, frozen wave, no good, while some of us consider standing
wave to be the result of superposition of forward and reverse waves, that
can be (their components) measured, current heats when flowing through
resistance, voltage "burns" when poor dielectric.
Like there is standing wave current, but no standing wave, huh????
Or are we forgetting that we are dealing with electromagnetic waves?
Can someone sort out the terminology and definitions?

Yuri, K3BU

"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
news:cwPbj.1073$ML6.117@trndny04...


you can do it when it makes physical sense. it does not make sense in
standing waves for all the obvious reasons that i have pointed out. it
does make sense in the individual traveling waves. just accept what your
little swr meter tells you, it shows the forward power and reflected
power, that is all you need and the only powers that make sense.


Little SWR meter shows forward AND reflected power in one direction, and
reflected power only in reverse direction. Why is the Bird wattmeter
calibrated in Watts, measuring power (forward and reverse) and has chart
to calculate SWR, when there are no standing waves and no power in them?
Laying waves or sitting waves???

Seems to me that the PROBLEM is that some consider standing wave to be
some imaginary, stopped, frozen wave, no good, while some of us consider
standing wave to be the result of superposition of forward and reverse
waves, that can be (their components) measured, current heats when flowing
through resistance, voltage "burns" when poor dielectric.
Like there is standing wave current, but no standing wave, huh????
Or are we forgetting that we are dealing with electromagnetic waves?
Can someone sort out the terminology and definitions?

Yuri, K3BU

last time, real simple. there ARE standing current waves. there ARE
standing voltage waves. There ARE NOT standing power waves.

On Dec 24, 11:50*am, "Yuri Blanarovich" wrote:
Why is the Bird wattmeter
calibrated in Watts, measuring power (forward and reverse) and has chart to
calculate SWR, when there are no standing waves and no power in them?

Why indeed? The decision of Bird Electronic to build
an instrument that measured actual line voltage and
current and then compute forward or reverse voltage
but display the result in watts has lead to enormous
confusion about the nature of forward and reverse
waves.

If only they had decided to display forward or
reverse volts, life would be much better. People
would not have internalized "forward and reverse
power" to such a degree.

On the other hand, it would have then required
more arithmetic to compute actual power.

But they did it, and it can not be undone.

Do you have an unambiguous definition of "standing
wave power" that can be used?

...Keith

Keith Dysart wrote:
On Dec 24, 11:50 am, "Yuri Blanarovich" wrote:
Why is the Bird wattmeter
calibrated in Watts, measuring power (forward and reverse) and has chart to
calculate SWR, when there are no standing waves and no power in them?

Why indeed? The decision of Bird Electronic to build
an instrument that measured actual line voltage and
current and then compute forward or reverse voltage
but display the result in watts has lead to enormous
confusion about the nature of forward and reverse
waves.

If only they had decided to display forward or
reverse volts, life would be much better. People
would not have internalized "forward and reverse
power" to such a degree.

On the other hand, it would have then required
more arithmetic to compute actual power.

But they did it, and it can not be undone.

Do you have an unambiguous definition of "standing
wave power" that can be used?

...Keith

Hi Keith,
When you take the real part of P = VI*, where
I* is the complex conjugate of the current, you're computing
the power in the transmission line. However, the imaginary
part of VI* doesn't disappear, and you should be aware of
its existence if you're going to put a lot of energy into
said line (unless it's a perfect Cecil//Dave line with no
attenuation etc). Yuri is probably arguing from experience
with real lines. Cecil/Dave are arguing from an idealized,
but flawed understanding of the subject. All of them should
go back to school and study the whole elephant, so they won't
keep making the same mistakes the three blind men made.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Tom Donaly wrote:
All of them should
go back to school and study the whole elephant, so they won't
keep making the same mistakes the three blind men made.

The following all discuss lossless systems in their
writings - Slater, Chipman, Ramo & Whinnery, Johnson,
Kraus, and Balanis. Which of those people are the
three blind men?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
news:cwPbj.1073$ML6.117@trndny04...

you can do it when it makes physical sense. it does not make sense in
standing waves for all the obvious reasons that i have pointed out. it
does make sense in the individual traveling waves. just accept what your
little swr meter tells you, it shows the forward power and reflected
power, that is all you need and the only powers that make sense.


Little SWR meter shows forward AND reflected power in one direction, and
reflected power only in reverse direction. Why is the Bird wattmeter
calibrated in Watts, measuring power (forward and reverse) and has chart to
calculate SWR, when there are no standing waves and no power in them?
Laying waves or sitting waves???

Seems to me that the PROBLEM is that some consider standing wave to be some
imaginary, stopped, frozen wave, no good, while some of us consider standing
wave to be the result of superposition of forward and reverse waves, that
can be (their components) measured, current heats when flowing through
resistance, voltage "burns" when poor dielectric.
Like there is standing wave current, but no standing wave, huh????
Or are we forgetting that we are dealing with electromagnetic waves?
Can someone sort out the terminology and definitions?

Yuri, K3BU



Hi, Yuri,
Cecil and Dave aren't taking resistance into account when they
talk about waves. In other words, they're not writing about real
transmission lines, coils, and such. The only lines they care about are
the ones in their minds: the simple ones where the attenuation constants
are always zero, and current and voltage are always either in phase, or
90 degrees out of phase, and there is never any dielectric breakdown, no
matter the voltage. You can only feel sorry for guys like that.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
. net...
Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
news:cwPbj.1073$ML6.117@trndny04...

you can do it when it makes physical sense. it does not make sense in
standing waves for all the obvious reasons that i have pointed out. it
does make sense in the individual traveling waves. just accept what
your little swr meter tells you, it shows the forward power and
reflected power, that is all you need and the only powers that make
sense.


Little SWR meter shows forward AND reflected power in one direction, and
reflected power only in reverse direction. Why is the Bird wattmeter
calibrated in Watts, measuring power (forward and reverse) and has chart
to calculate SWR, when there are no standing waves and no power in them?
Laying waves or sitting waves???

Seems to me that the PROBLEM is that some consider standing wave to be
some imaginary, stopped, frozen wave, no good, while some of us consider
standing wave to be the result of superposition of forward and reverse
waves, that can be (their components) measured, current heats when
flowing through resistance, voltage "burns" when poor dielectric.
Like there is standing wave current, but no standing wave, huh????
Or are we forgetting that we are dealing with electromagnetic waves?
Can someone sort out the terminology and definitions?

Yuri, K3BU

Hi, Yuri,
Cecil and Dave aren't taking resistance into account when they
talk about waves. In other words, they're not writing about real
transmission lines, coils, and such. The only lines they care about are
the ones in their minds: the simple ones where the attenuation constants
are always zero, and current and voltage are always either in phase, or
90 degrees out of phase, and there is never any dielectric breakdown, no
matter the voltage. You can only feel sorry for guys like that.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

using any decent coax of a reasonable length and typical amateur power
levels the assumptions we have stated are very close to the actual results.
if you want to examine lossy lines in detail then go ahead, the formulas get
much messier and without proper formula rendering on a newsgroup they are
almost impossible to discuss... and for the concepts that have been proposed
the ideal lossless line case is perfectly acceptable.

Dave wrote:
"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
. net...
Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
news:cwPbj.1073$ML6.117@trndny04...
you can do it when it makes physical sense. it does not make sense in
standing waves for all the obvious reasons that i have pointed out. it
does make sense in the individual traveling waves. just accept what
your little swr meter tells you, it shows the forward power and
reflected power, that is all you need and the only powers that make
sense.


Little SWR meter shows forward AND reflected power in one direction, and
reflected power only in reverse direction. Why is the Bird wattmeter
calibrated in Watts, measuring power (forward and reverse) and has chart
to calculate SWR, when there are no standing waves and no power in them?
Laying waves or sitting waves???

Seems to me that the PROBLEM is that some consider standing wave to be
some imaginary, stopped, frozen wave, no good, while some of us consider
standing wave to be the result of superposition of forward and reverse
waves, that can be (their components) measured, current heats when
flowing through resistance, voltage "burns" when poor dielectric.
Like there is standing wave current, but no standing wave, huh????
Or are we forgetting that we are dealing with electromagnetic waves?
Can someone sort out the terminology and definitions?

Yuri, K3BU
Hi, Yuri,
Cecil and Dave aren't taking resistance into account when they
talk about waves. In other words, they're not writing about real
transmission lines, coils, and such. The only lines they care about are
the ones in their minds: the simple ones where the attenuation constants
are always zero, and current and voltage are always either in phase, or
90 degrees out of phase, and there is never any dielectric breakdown, no
matter the voltage. You can only feel sorry for guys like that.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

using any decent coax of a reasonable length and typical amateur power
levels the assumptions we have stated are very close to the actual results.
if you want to examine lossy lines in detail then go ahead, the formulas get
much messier and without proper formula rendering on a newsgroup they are
almost impossible to discuss... and for the concepts that have been proposed
the ideal lossless line case is perfectly acceptable.


Not when you put the kind of stress on it that Yuri does. Yuri has a
choice: he can either believe you, or what he can see with his own eyes,
in which case your fantasy line is not at all "perfectly acceptable."
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Tom Donaly wrote:
Cecil and Dave aren't taking resistance into account when they
talk about waves. You can only feel sorry for guys like that.

Do you also feel sorry for Slater, Ramo, Whinnery, Johnson,
Chipman, Kraus, and Balanis who all wrote about systems
without taking resistance into account?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com