Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Reg Edwards wrote:
"Ian White, G3SEK" wrote And the conclusion of these experiments? That the concept of "reflected power" is not helping us to understand anything. ============================ I've been saying for years, the so-called SWR-meter is itself the root of the trouble - it has forward and reflected power scales on it. So it is impossible to refer to it without becoming emotionally involved with the highly misleading reflected power notion. Furthermore, the confounded thing doesn't even measure SWR. How can it measure SWR on a transmission line which does not exist? It is a ridiculous, meaningless situation. People drag themseves off to UHF to air their knowledge about such things as echos, S-parameters, circulators and high power TV transmitters. Quite irrelevant to the notion of reflected power at 1.8 MHz. All that's necessary is to erase the meter scales, or at least wash them from our minds, and change the name of the SWR meter to the TLI. (Transmitter Loading Indicator). Or some other more appropriate name. Technically correct, but far too late. "SWR" is everywhere - the genie is out of the bottle, and it won't go back. To expand on what Reg already knows, but clear needs to be said again and again... The only way forward is for everybody to understand that SWR numbers are just one of several alternatives for judging the "goodness" of an impedance match to some specified reference impedance. Other alternatives include reflection coefficient, return loss, gamma, S11, etc. All these alternatives are equally valid, and any one can easily be converted to any other by doing a small amount of math. RF engineers do it all the time, and it's absolutely no big deal. If you're only using "SWR" as a number that indicates the goodness of an impedance match, you can legitimately apply it to *anything* that possesses an impedance (it doesn't need to have waves standing on it). The discussion goes off the rails when someone starts to imagine that an "SWR meter" is truly *measuring* standing wave ratio. It isn't - it is actually measuring one of those other quantities (magnitude of reflection coefficient). Then there has to be a mathematical conversion from that number into the more familiar SWR number, which is done by calibrating the meter scale in a specific non-linear way. It's vital to understand that difference: the instrument is *calibrated* in SWR, but it is actually *measuring* something else. Likewise it's a mistake to believe that a Bird Thruline wattmeter is measuring "forward and reflected watts". It is just another gadget for measuring reflection coefficient, with a fixed sensitivity that allows the meter scale to be calibrated in watts. But it's only a calibration in terms of power - the Bird is not making a power measurement. -- 73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Rho = (Zload-Zo*)/(Zload+Zo), for complex Zo | Antenna | |||
Derivation of the Reflection Coefficient? | Antenna | |||
Length of Coax Affecting Incident Power to Meter? | Antenna |