Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Someone may regard the following question a bit OT, but as it deals with
impedances I have considered that the antenna newsgroup could be the most appropriate one where to post it. Let us regard a transmitter as an ideal RF generator with a resistance in series. It is well known that, for maximum power transfer, the load resistance must be equal to the generator resistance. Under such conditions efficiency is 50% (half power dissipated in the generator, half delivered to the load). To achieve a higher efficiency, the load resistance should be made higher than the generator resistance, although this would turn into a lower power delivered to the load (the maximum power transfer condition is now no longer met). This can be verified in practice: by decreasing the antenna coupling in a transmitter, one obtains a higher efficiency though with a lower output power. That said, now the question. Usually, when a transmitter is tuned for maximum output power, efficiency results to be higher than 50% (typically 60% for class-B, 70% for class-C). This would seem to contradict the above cited fact that, under maximum power transfer condition, efficiency is 50%. Pertinent comments are welcome. 73 Tony I0JX - Rome, Italy |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 6, 2:12 pm, "Antonio Vernucci" wrote:
Someone may regard the following question a bit OT, but as it deals with impedances I have considered that the antenna newsgroup could be the most appropriate one where to post it. Let us regard a transmitter as an ideal RF generator with a resistance in series. It is well known that, for maximum power transfer, the load resistance must be equal to the generator resistance. Under such conditions efficiency is 50% (half power dissipated in the generator, half delivered to the load). To achieve a higher efficiency, the load resistance should be made higher than the generator resistance, although this would turn into a lower power delivered to the load (the maximum power transfer condition is now no longer met). This can be verified in practice: by decreasing the antenna coupling in a transmitter, one obtains a higher efficiency though with a lower output power. That said, now the question. Usually, when a transmitter is tuned for maximum output power, efficiency results to be higher than 50% (typically 60% for class-B, 70% for class-C). This would seem to contradict the above cited fact that, under maximum power transfer condition, efficiency is 50%. Pertinent comments are welcome. 73 Tony I0JX - Rome, Italy Simple: a transmitter is not an ideal voltage source with a resistor in series. I'm playing with a switching power supply design that delivers about a kilowatt at 100 volts. The output is designed specifically to have a negative resistance, so the output voltage increases as the current drawn increases. The output dynamic impedance is about -1 ohms (adjustable, actually). The linear model is a 100 volt battery in series with -1 ohms. With an 11 ohm load, I get 10 amps load current, with the battery thus delivering 1000 watts, the load dissipating 1100 watts, and the -1 ohm resistance dissipating -100 watts. Which shows the absurdity of thinking of a dynamic output resistance being anything like a real resistance. In my switching supply, I can adjust the dynamic output resistance between a small negative value and a rather larger positive value, with very little change in efficiency. Although transmitters MAY have dynamic output resistances similar to the recommended load resistance, that's not a necessary condition, and has little to do directly with efficiency. Cheers, Tom |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
This has been a good example of a common pitfall in modeling. The error
made in this case was to attempt to apply an unsuitable model (a voltage source in series with a resistance) to a system to be modeled (a transmitter). As the OP showed, the attempt leads to an impossible result. The classic example of this is the "proof" that a bumblebee can't fly, based on a flawed model and immediately shown to be false by simply observing that they do, indeed, fly. Yet we see people falling into this trap daily, not only in modeling electrical circuits, but also in modeling such diverse processes as human behavior, economic systems, and roulette wheel numbers. Unfortunately, the bad results of applying unsuitable models aren't always so obvious as they were here. So it's always wise to check to see if the model fits before putting faith in the results. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Good to see that everyone agrees that a generator with a resistor in series is
an unsuitable model for an RF transmitter.The easy part of the work is done! Now the more difficult part. As, by the Thevenin theorem, any complex circuit comprising resistors, voltage generators and current generators is equivalent to a generator with a resistor in series, evidently the transmitter model must comprise elements other than just resistors, voltage generators and current generators. Can one suggest how such a model looks like? (even a plain one, that does not take into account second- or superior-order effects). 73 Tomy I0JX - Rome, Italy |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 8, 6:52 am, "Antonio Vernucci" wrote:
Good to see that everyone agrees that a generator with a resistor in series is an unsuitable model for an RF transmitter.The easy part of the work is done! Now the more difficult part. As, by the Thevenin theorem, any complex circuit comprising resistors, voltage generators and current generators is equivalent to a generator with a resistor in series, evidently the transmitter model must comprise elements other than just resistors, voltage generators and current generators. Can one suggest how such a model looks like? (even a plain one, that does not take into account second- or superior-order effects). 73 Tomy I0JX - Rome, Italy I believe you have mis-stated the Thevenin theorem. First, it applies only to linear circuits. Fine -- over some narrow range at least, a transmitter does indeed look like a linear circuit. But more importantly, it describes ONLY what you observe at an external pair of terminals, with no other connections, NOT what goes on inside the "black box" containing those elements you mentioned. A very simple example is a voltage source (a perfect battery) and two resistors in series across the battery; the external terminals for this example will be at opposite ends of one of the resistors. Let's say the battery is 2 volts and each resistor is 2 ohms. That will look like a Thevenin equivalent 1V in series with 1 ohm. Note that it also looks like a one amp source in parallel with a one ohm resistor. But it does not behave INTERNALLY like either of those. Consider also the same internal circuit, except drop the voltage source to 1V and add a 1/2A current source across the output terminals, polarity so that there's no drop across the resistor between the voltage and the current source (with no external load). Now figure the internal dissipation for each of those two cases, with no load, with a 1 ohm load, and with a short-circuit load. Cheers, Tom |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 6, 4:12�pm, "Antonio Vernucci" wrote:
Someone may regard the following question a bit OT, but as it deals with impedances I have considered that the antenna newsgroup could be the most appropriate one where to post it. Let us regard a transmitter as an ideal RF generator with a resistance in series. It is well known that, for maximum power transfer, the load resistance must be equal to the generator resistance. Under such conditions efficiency is 50% (half power dissipated in the generator, half delivered to the load). To achieve a higher efficiency, the load resistance should be made higher than the generator resistance, although this would turn into a lower power delivered to the load (the maximum power transfer condition is now no longer met). This can be verified in practice: by decreasing the antenna coupling in a transmitter, one obtains a higher efficiency though with a lower output power. That said, now the question. Usually, when a transmitter is tuned for maximum output power, efficiency results to be higher than 50% (typically 60% for class-B, 70% for class-C). This would seem to contradict the above cited fact that, under maximum power transfer condition, efficiency is 50%. Pertinent comments are welcome. 73 Tony I0JX - Rome, Italy In addition to Tom's comments, an RF Power Amplifier's efficiency is defined as (Pout/Pin)X100%. Pout is RF and Pin is usually DC. So if you pump 1000 watts DC in to a class B RF amp and get 600 watts rms out you are 60% efficient. Your model of a Voltage Source in series with an internal resistance does not apply here. The maximum power theorem gives conditions where power in the load, is equal to internal power in the generator. Not always a good idea. A 50HZ generator capable of Megawatts of power would dissiapate 1/2 in the generator and 1/2 in our houses if they designed them to conform to the MPT. The 50HZ generators would melt. Utilities design their Generators to have nearly 0.0 ohms internal impedance. Good question. Gary N4AST |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 7, 12:43�am, Owen Duffy wrote:
wrote : ... The maximum power theorem gives conditions where power in the load, is equal to internal power in the generator. �Not always a good idea. �A 50HZ generator capable of Megawatts of power would dissiapate 1/2 in the generator and 1/2 in our houses if they designed them to conform to the MPT. �The 50HZ generators would melt. �Utilities design their Generators to have nearly 0.0 ohms internal impedance. Actually, the AC power distribution system from alternator down has a manged substantial equivalent source impedance. The source impedance serves to limit fault currents, which reduces the demands on protection devices. Sure, the network is not operated under Jacobi MPT conditions, but neither does it have near zero source impedance. Owen Not really sure I agree. A multi-megawatt 60HZ generator by necessity has near zero source impedance. The ones I am familar with require forced air cooling on their output buses. If you are pumping out Mega- watts, then any non -zero source impedance results in serious heat. I^2R. Gary N4AST |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Transfer Impedance(LONG) | Shortwave | |||
Efficiency of Power Amplifiers | Antenna | |||
Matching , Power Transfer & Bandwidth | Antenna | |||
max power transfer theorem | Antenna |