![]() |
what happens to reflected energy ?
I haven't followed this thread since it's been beaten to death so many
times here before. But there's an interesting fact that might have been overlooked, and might (or might not) be relevant: If you put a directional coupler such as a Bruene circuit at the output of a transmitter, and use its "forward" output to control the transmitter power to keep the "forward" directional coupler output constant, you'll find that the power output vs load resistance characteristic is exactly the same as if the transmitter had 50 ohm output impedance. This is assuming that the directional coupler is designed for a 50 ohm system, and that the load is purely resistive. It also assumes that any load is left in place long enough for the feedback circuit to stabilize. The effective source impedance to a very rapidly varying load (that is, one changing so fast that the ALC feedback system doesn't have time to respond) would be the open-loop output impedance which could be quite different. I haven't taken the time to analyze how it behaves with a complex load. I stumbled across this some time ago when designing a rig using this ALC method and found it interesting. I believe many if not most modern solid-state transmitters use this ALC method. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Jun 7, 5:00*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Jun 6, 1:01*pm, K1TTT wrote: as in the other thread, what is the mechanism of that 'interaction' between waves? *i contend there can be no 'interaction' between forward and reflected waves if the device is linear. David, you are preaching to the choir. I explained before that there is NO interaction between forward and reflected waves because they are traveling in different directions. The only time that coherent, collimated waves can interact is when they are traveling in the same direction in a transmission line. Keith's argument requires that forward waves and reflected waves interact. I say they cannot interact in a constant Z0 environment. You say they cannot interact. We are on the same side of this argument. The mechanism of the interaction of two coherent, collimated waves traveling in the same direction is that the superposition process is irreversible. The source photons and the reflected photons are indistinguishable. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com This is what YOU said: What happens to the 50 joules/second of reflected energy depends upon the phasing between the source wave and the reflected wave at the source impedance. What most amateurs don't understand is there are two mechanisms that can redistribute reflected energy back toward the antenna. Those mechanisms are a re-reflection based on the physical reflection coefficient (what RF engineers understand) and wave interaction resulting in constructive/destructive interference (what most RF engineers don't seem to understand) because, unlike optical physicists, have not been forced to follow the energy flow. There is no interaction between the waves, they may be superimposed, and maybe their photons are indistinguishable, but there is no 'interaction'. interaction implies that one wave affects the other, energy is transferred or fields are affected, such things occur in non- linear media, but not in linear ones. |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Jun 7, 12:19*pm, K7ITM wrote:
On Jun 6, 7:29*pm, walt wrote: ... And Tom, why would the source be reactive when the pi-network is tuned to resonance? And because the source resistance of the (tube) power amp is non-dissipative, its reflection coefficient is 1.0 by definition, and so it cannot absorb any reflected energy, and therefore re-reflects it. Walt, W2DU If you allow that the thing driving the pi network has an effective source impedance different from the load that the pi network presents to it, then clearly the output impedance seen at the other end (the "50 ohm" end) of the pi network won't be 50 ohms. *Try it with some numbers; for example, assume a pi network that transforms your 50 ohm load to a 4k ohm load to the amplifier output, and assume an amplifier output stage that looks like a 20k ohm source. *Design the pi network for a loaded Q of 10. *I believe you'll find that the source impedance seen by the 50 ohm load is about 11+j18 ohms. As Wim has pointed out, requiring an amplifier to be loaded and driven in a very particular way unnecessarily dismisses some very important classes of amplifier. *What do you do, for example, with a linear amplifier? *What do you do with an amplifier that drives a voltage very hard (and for which a simple pi network is inappropriate for matching to a load)? *Perhaps an even more basic question is: *why exactly do we tune a pi network to present a particular load to an RF amplifier stage? *Why should we operate a 6146 with, say, a 3000 ohm plate load? *Why not 1000, or 6000? And what if I set up a tube and pi network for operation such that the apparent output source impedance is 50 ohms (while driving a 50 ohm load), and then I add feedback to the amplifier in such a way that the operating conditions are not changed, but the impedance looking back into the plate is changed? How did we get to the source resistance of "the (tube) power amp" being non-dissipative? *I know there are some of us who don't buy into that... Cheers, Tom Hello Tom, Well, the reason I chose to discuss only the tube amp with a pi- network filter and impedance transformer is that that arrangement is the only one I've measured, and that I'm not sufficiently acquainted with other arrangements to discuss them. As to your question, why not use plate loads of 3000, 6000 or 1000? Because the transceivers I measured using two 6146s in parallel are Kenwood TS-830S and Heathkit HW-100. I don't remember the exact plate load with the HW-100, close to 1400 ohms, while the TS-830S was 1400 ohms. I had no control over those plate loads because the plate and grid voltages were preset, and 1400 ohms is the RL I measured at the input of the pi-network when the grid drive and the network were adjusted to deliver precisely 100w to the load 50-ohm load. Now concerning the non-dissipative source resistance of the tube-type power amp. There are two separate resistances in the amp, the cathode- to-plate resistance, Rpd, that accounts for all the dissipation in the tube; and the output-source resistance that is non-dissipative. It is a common myth that an RF power amp cannot have an efficiency greater than 50% when conjugate matched to the load, because half the RF power is dissipated in the source resistance. This is not true, because when the amp is operating properly, resistance Rpd is less than the output source resistance, thus allowing more power delivered to the load than that dissipated in the plate-to-cathode resistance. The output source resistance is derived from the voltage-current ratio E/I that appears at the output terminals of the pi-network. A ratio, as such, cannot dissipate energy, but the load it feeds does. Using an example from Terman's Radio Engineer's Handbook I explain this phenomenon in great detail in Chapter 19 in Reflections, and further in Chapter 19A, an addition to Chapter 19. Both are available on my web page at www.w2du.com. Chapter 19 appears in 'Read Chapters from Reflections 2', and 19A appears in 'Preview Chapter from Reflections 3'. The entire Chapter 19 appears in Reflections 3, which is now available from CQ. I invite you to review these Chapters. Walt, W2DU |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On 7 jun, 22:36, Roy Lewallen wrote:
I haven't followed this thread since it's been beaten to death so many times here before. But there's an interesting fact that might have been overlooked, and might (or might not) be relevant: If you put a directional coupler such as a Bruene circuit at the output of a transmitter, and use its "forward" output to control the transmitter power to keep the "forward" directional coupler output constant, you'll find that the power output vs load resistance characteristic is exactly the same as if the transmitter had 50 ohm output impedance. This is assuming that the directional coupler is designed for a 50 ohm system, and that the load is purely resistive. It also assumes that any load is left in place long enough for the feedback circuit to stabilize. The effective source impedance to a very rapidly varying load (that is, one changing so fast that the ALC feedback system doesn't have time to respond) would be the open-loop output impedance which could be quite different. I haven't taken the time to analyze how it behaves with a complex load. I stumbled across this some time ago when designing a rig using this ALC method and found it interesting. I believe many if not most modern solid-state transmitters use this ALC method. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Hello Roy, If you have sufficient headroom and under the conditions you mentioned, you mimic a 50 Ohms source. I think it also works for any (complex) loads (I couldn’t find why not). The difference between a real 50 Ohms circuit may be that the phase of the belonging EMF may change, in many amplifiers phase shift is somewhat excitation dependent, but who bothers? I expect such scheme in combination with VSWR measurement also, as several PAs have a reverse power indicator present (the other half of a the Bruene circuit). You need the reverse power indication to avoid destroying active devices and/or intermodulation distortion due to voltage saturation. Imagine that you have full reflection |RC| = 1 and it appears at your active device as RC=-1. You want to maintain the original forward power. Your active device has to deliver in that case double the current at zero collector/plate voltage to maintain same forward power as under matched condition. The actual power delivered to the load is zero (as the active device supplies current, but no voltage, RC=-1 means a short circuit). This will result in massive dissipation in the active device. In case of RC=+1, it has to provide double the voltage with no current. In other circumstances you will have a significant phase shift between current and voltage resulting also in increased device dissipation and inconvenient combinations of instantaneous voltage and current. So above some value for VSWR, you may have to reduce the forward power I had a discussion recently about the power control scheme for TETRA terminals, but we couldn't find the answer to what is happening under high VSWR (so we have measure it). It only states VSWR2. Best regards, Wim PA3DJS www.tetech.nl without abc, PM will reach me. |
what happens to reflected energy ?
Wimpie wrote:
. . . I expect such scheme in combination with VSWR measurement also, as several PAs have a reverse power indicator present (the other half of a the Bruene circuit). You need the reverse power indication to avoid destroying active devices and/or intermodulation distortion due to voltage saturation. . . . Yes, I was referring to the operating region at which normal power is maintained. As you pointed out, rigs employing this method will only maintain the same "forward" power over some range of SWR beyond which they'll begin reducing it, otherwise they'd self-destruct in the attempt. In the reduced power region, the apparent 50 ohm output impedance of course no longer holds. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:36:41 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote: I haven't followed this thread since it's been beaten to death so many times here before. But there's an interesting fact that might have been overlooked, and might (or might not) be relevant: If you put a directional coupler such as a Bruene circuit at the output of a transmitter, and use its "forward" output to control the transmitter power to keep the "forward" directional coupler output constant, you'll find that the power output vs load resistance characteristic is exactly the same as if the transmitter had 50 ohm output impedance. This is assuming that the directional coupler is designed for a 50 ohm system, and that the load is purely resistive. It also assumes that any load is left in place long enough for the feedback circuit to stabilize. The effective source impedance to a very rapidly varying load (that is, one changing so fast that the ALC feedback system doesn't have time to respond) would be the open-loop output impedance which could be quite different. I haven't taken the time to analyze how it behaves with a complex load. I stumbled across this some time ago when designing a rig using this ALC method and found it interesting. I believe many if not most modern solid-state transmitters use this ALC method. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Hi Roy, This application that you describe was written up in exactly the same terms within the recent HP Journals I have posted extracts here. HP used Directional Couplers (the Bruene circuit, also called a bridge, qualifies too but uses a non-wave design) to separate out the forward from the reverse power reflected from the mismatch to create a reference power. Later, HP and others strapped the signals back into the source in much the manner you describe. The rudimentary version can be found in HP Journal v.6 n.1-2. HP Journal v.12 n.4 strengthens the concept with hard copy sweeps of the reflection coefficient of a load. By HP Journal v.16 n.6, we have the description of automatic level control. For the 45 years beyond that last article, more refinements. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 12:09:23 -0700 (PDT), Wimpie
wrote: I think, most people that are willing to read will support Walt's statements on output impedance of an amplifier under matched output power (given a certain drive condition). However there are many practical circumstances where Walt's conditions are not met. So, that is one vote for (with bulky provisos), and one vote against (with bulky provisos) going into the ballot box. Walt, if this community were pressed for an "up or down" vote: "Does Walt's data support the evidence of a Conjugate Match?" It seems writing the phrase "Conjugate Match is shown by Walt's data" is a fearsome (loathsome) step to take, or can be taken with qualifiers and other soporifics to deaden the pain. Walt's data shows evidence of a Conjugate Match. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 14:21:16 -0700 (PDT), Keith Dysart
wrote: The 100W forward and 50W reflected have no relation to actual powers From a current NARDA specification: GENERAL COUPLER OPERATION A coaxial directional coupler has the general appearance of a section of coaxial line, with the addition of a second parallel section of line and with one end terminated (see Figure 9). These two sections are known as the main and auxiliary lines. The two lines are internally separated from each other; the amount of spacing between lines determines the amount of RF energy that may be transferred from the main line to the auxiliary line. In operation, assume that energy is fed into port A of the main line. Most of this energy will appear at output port B of the main line. However, a fraction of this energy (determined by coupling value) will also appear at the coupled port C, of the auxiliary line. A dual-directional coaxial coupler, such as the reflectometer coupler, consists essentially of two single- ended couplers connected back-to-back. Perhaps the most important characteristic of the directional coupler (and the one from which its name originates) is its directivity. .... For reflectometry applications, the dual directional coupler, incorporating two auxiliary outputs, permits the simultaneous sampling of incident and reflected power. .... RF power applied to the load is reflected to some degree depending on load characteristics, thereby resulting in a voltage standing wave ratio (VSWR) which is reflected back to the main line output port. this reflected power is coupled out of the reflected output port at a level 10 dB down from the reflected power level at the load. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:49:04 -0700, Richard Clark
wrote: The rudimentary version can be found in HP Journal v.6 n.1-2. HP Journal v.12 n.4 strengthens the concept with hard copy sweeps of the reflection coefficient of a load. By HP Journal v.16 n.6, we have the description of automatic level control. For the 45 years beyond that last article, more refinements. HP Journal Nov. 1970 is dedicated to all system elements going into one box, 8620A, 8632A (with options for an external Directional Coupler and Power Meters). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Jun 7, 4:21*pm, K1TTT wrote:
There is no interaction between the waves, they may be superimposed, and maybe their photons are indistinguishable, but there is no 'interaction'. *interaction implies that one wave affects the other, energy is transferred or fields are affected, such things occur in non- linear media, but not in linear ones. Note that I was not talking about forward and reflected waves in a constant Z0 transmission line. I am talking about the four wavefront components that are generated at an impedance discontinuity. It has been proven in experimentally that those waves indeed interact. In fact, the transfer of destructive interference energy from wave cancellation to the areas that permit constructive interference is obviously interaction since the canceled waves disappear in their original direction of travel. But, as the FSU web page says, they are not annihilated - their energy components simply change direction. How can you possibly argue that wave cancellation doesn't require wave interaction? Those two waves completely disappear in the direction of destructive interference. Dr. Best argued that those two waves don't interact and continue propagating (completely devoid of energy) forever in the direction of original travel. I asked him to prove that his phantom waves exist but he could not. Is there such a proof available? At a 1/4WL thin-film coating on non-reflective glass, when the internal reflected wave arrives with equal magnitude and 180 degrees out of phase with the external reflection, wave cancellation occurs. That is an *obvious* effect that one wave has on the other. Wave cancellation is an obvious interaction. In the s-parameter equation: b1 = s11*a1 + s12*a2 = 0 the s11*a1 wavefront has obviously interacted with the s12*a2 wavefront to accomplish wave cancellation. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:58 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com