On 25/05/2010 01:55, walt wrote:
....
Or are you considering the output characteristic of the transmitter to
be non-linear? This is not the case, because the effect of energy
storage in the tank circuit isolates the non-linear input from the
output circuit, which is linear as evidenced by the almost perfect
sine wave appearing at the output of the tank.

Well, for the purposes of application of linear circuit theory,
linearity means that V is linearly related to I, or at least dV/dI over
the operating range is substantially constant.

If the circuit is not linear in those terms, then you cannot form a
valid Thevenin equivalent circuit, and discussion of the Thevenin
equivalent series source impedance is a nonsense... it cannot be used.

Owen

On May 25, 3:30*am, Owen wrote:
If the circuit is not linear in those terms, then you cannot form a
valid Thevenin equivalent circuit, and discussion of the Thevenin
equivalent series source impedance is a nonsense... it cannot be used.

Quoting "Fields and Waves ...", by Ramo and Whinnery, "... the
(Thevenin) equivalent circuit was derived to tell what happens *IN THE
LOAD* under different load conditions, and significance cannot be
automatically attached to a calculation of power loss in the internal
impedance of the equivalent circuit."
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

On 25/05/2010 23:19, Cecil Moore wrote:

Quoting "Fields and Waves ...", by Ramo and Whinnery, "... the
(Thevenin) equivalent circuit was derived to tell what happens *IN THE
LOAD* under different load conditions, and significance cannot be
automatically attached to a calculation of power loss in the internal
impedance of the equivalent circuit."

Yes, that is quite correct Cecil, and nothing that I have written says
or implies or is intended to mean otherwise.

However, your own words in another post
(news://news.bigpond.com:119/c8b7540a...oglegroups.com)

"A 60 Hz Power Generation Plant operates at high efficiency, not at the
maximum power transfer point. If they were 50% efficient, they would go
out of business."

demonstrates that whilst you apparently can quote from text books, you
do not necessarily understand what you are quoting. You do talk nonsense
sometimes!

Owen

On May 25, 2:33*pm, Owen wrote:
Yes, that is quite correct Cecil, and nothing that I have written says
or implies or is intended to mean otherwise... You do talk nonsense sometimes!

Owen, my reference supported what you said! Why are you trying to pick
an argument? As my mother would have said, "You would argue with a
fence post".
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

On Tue, 25 May 2010 08:30:30 GMT, Owen wrote:

If the circuit is not linear in those terms, then you cannot form a
valid Thevenin equivalent circuit, and discussion of the Thevenin
equivalent series source impedance is a nonsense... it cannot be used.

The counter argument, as I understand it, is that the tank circuit
isolates the linear from the non-linear, and that the tank also
performs the action of transformation. Thus the proposal is an
analysis of their combination (I had to struggle to avoid
superposition).

Thus, the non-linear Tube (because, I presume, the circuit is in Class
C operation) exhibits a higher efficiency than would be found in a
resistance matched system. What I call the resistance matched system
is the unfortunate appeal to a source "resistance" equaling the load
"resistance." Thevenin/Norton do not mandate resistors, rather
impedances.

What I understand, comes from lengthy emails with multiple
contributors in years past: Walt and Richard being two of them. My
saved mail only goes back nine years, so the other two contributors'
names are lost to me right now.

Of course what I "understand" may be wholly misrepresented by my
exposition here. So be it. The source authorities can correct my
deviations.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC