Sorry everyone, but I just retested with no cable and the results I obtain are
precisely the same. The coax cable was only 26" long anyway.
So forget about that transmission line stuff. It's irrelevant here. What I
want to know is why the VSWR indications are the way they are.

If anyone's interested, I can email a small spreadsheet that deals with this
simple circuit (V0-R-jX-r-jx) and allows you to set
a) R,X and r, and vary x
b) R,X and x, and vary r.
I plot side by side on the two corresponding graphs
- modulus of total load voltage
- modulus of load resistor voltage
- modulus of load reactance voltage
- power dissipated in load resistor
- VSWR between source and load
- "conjugate VSWR" between source and load.

One more time with feeling -
What I want to know is why the VSWR indications are the way they are.

Best,
Andrew

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
nope, all done. reg is here and cecil can't be far behind. i've had my
fun, time to do other more productive things than watch them re-hash
conjugal matches for the next month or two.

I guess I need to say this again. My take on discussions of conjugate
matching in ham antenna systems is that it is a waste of time. If reflected
energy is not allowed to reach the source, e.g. typical ham Z0-matched
systems, the source impedance is irrelevant and doesn't affect anything
in the system except for efficiency.
--
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! =-----