Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 19 mayo, 11:05, Wimpie wrote:
On 19 mayo, 00:58, Cecil Moore wrote: On May 18, 5:42*pm, John KD5YI wrote: So, we are saying that the load at the line input can be viewed as a lumped circuit. So now we have a transmitter loaded with a lumped circuit for further analysis. It doesn't quite work that well. I gave an earlier example where Wim got the the s11 parameter wrong by an infinite percentage. The s- parameter equations for a lumped circuit vs an impedance discontinuity are nothing alike. Hello Cecil, Would you please remind me to the example where I was completely wrong with S11? Even the IEEE definitions for the two different types of impedances are different. The interference conditions at the impedance discontinuity can be proven to be different than for the lumped circuit replacement. That's all. It's simple. Quoting Einstein again: "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." :-) When you switch to the lumped-circuit model, you are agreeing to faster than light signal speeds, NO superposition of signals, zero interference, zero phase shifts through coils, identical current everywhere, etc. How the heck can you assert and prove there is zero interference inside a source when reflected energy is flowing through it? Did you ever DESIGNED some serious electronic hardware? I am not pointing to using a recipe book or troubleshooting/repair. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com Regarding your helical; I don't have Eznec. Maybe you can use some screenshots from it, put some comment to it and put that on website, so we can view it. Wim PA3DJS www.tetech.nl remove ED from designed.... Wim |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Transmitter Output Impedance | Antenna | |||
Transmitter Output Impedance | Antenna | |||
Transmitter Output Impedance | Antenna | |||
Transmitter Output Impedance | Antenna | |||
Transmitter Output Impedance | Antenna |