Years ago before they started burying all the phone drops and cabling the
overhead wires, I connected my BC-348 to the phone withe a 0.005 uF disc
ceramic capacitor. It gave me a VERY long wire, probabaly miles of long wire.

Worked quite well.

I haven't tried it since.

73 de Jack, K9CUN

Reg Edwards wrote:
They are even easier WITHOUT the unessessary over-complication of the chart.

Why do you think the chart is "over-complicated". I have one with the
R,X values and only the to/from wavelength circles outside. I deleted
everything else from the Smith Chart program.

What I find convenient is to carry the image of the Smith Chart around
in my head. I'm more of a visual person than a formula person and that
image has helped me tremendously.

A student's valuable time is much better spent learning about transmissiom
lines instead of how to use an antique chart. The answer can be worked out
in the head in less than a second. Tan(45) = 1.0000000 and therefore X =
Zo.

How about 0.07 wavelength in your head? :-) I can glance at a Smith Chart
faster than you can pick up a calculator.

Sorry to hear about your pH problem. Isn't there an ant-acid preparation
available in this modern day and age?

Prilosec OTC works well. Then I can drink twice as much as usual [hic].
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

KJ4UO wrote:
"If I have an RG-58 coax and it is shorted at the load end."

At the electrical input, 1/8-wave back from the short, you have an
inductive reactance equal to the numerical value of Zo. At 1/4-wave back
from the short, you have added an open-circuit 1/8-wavelength of line to
the first. This new line has a capacitive reactance equal to Zo.

The combination of equal and opposite reactances makes a parallel
resonant circuit equivalent which seems a very high impedance indeed.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Reg, G4FGQ wrote:
"Isn`t there an ant-acid preparation avbailable in this day and age?"

I read in "Spectrum" that J.C. Maxwell took bicarbonate of soda but died
of stomach cancer, regardless.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

"Crazy George" wrote in message
...
"Jack Painter"
snip
Btw I had a Power Quality engineer that I was discussing ground line
impedances with remind me that the same 1/4 wave phenomenon can happen
in
runs of ground and bonding too. The same radial or parallel or "web" of
connections alleviates that risk with lightning grounding as it does
with
RF
grounding.

Jack

Jack:

Alleviates? NO! Reduces somewhat, maybe, and that is one of the most
difficult things to get across to people with little theoretical
knowledge.
Even if it were the perfectly conducting sphere so loved in textbooks,
impedance still exists, and the instantaneous voltage at point A will be
different from point B. All you are doing is increasing the current
carrying capability, so it is less likely to blow up due to a direct
strike.
Instantaneous voltage difference with respect to a remote reference can
still rise to a gazillion volts, no matter how much copper you put in
there,
or how you configure it.

George, thanks for your reply. But in Webster's Dictionary:

Alliviate: To make less hard to bear; to reduce or decrease.

That's exactly why I used that word. And, after all the absolutely
invaluable help available from experts on this group, I still consulted a
Professional for the specifics of my site requirements. And common bonding
everything becomes more important than whatever impedance ground has between
any two points in the entire system. A properly bonded and grounded system
does not care what impedance or voltage is present on the system. Please
don't make me define properly.

;-) 73's

Jack.

Hi Roy, see you're still at it! Just stopped by to say
hello; hope you're doing well.

Regards,
Jack
WB3U


On Tue, 11 May 2004 17:55:48 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

The impedance would be +j50 ohms, that is, 50 ohms of