Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cecil,
They were undoubtedly confused by their models, and they could not deal with reality. 73, Gene W4SZ Cecil Moore wrote: Gene Fuller wrote: Try it. I believe you will find that your equality requirement on angles reduces to precisely the simple equation offer by Reg. Exactly! That's why I wonder why Ramo and Whinnery said it's an approximation. Wonder why Ramo and Whinnery say that's an approximation for low-loss lines? If the R+jwL angle is equal to the G+jwC angle, doesn't that make Z0 purely resistive? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gene Fuller wrote:
They were undoubtedly confused by their models, and they could not deal with reality. Thanks Gene, I really appreciate it when you contribute something techincal. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Gene Fuller wrote: Cecil, They were undoubtedly confused by their models, and they could not deal with reality. 73, Gene W4SZ I guess one could infer that that if G / C R / L, and R + jwL G + jwC, then perhaps there are losses. I would only add that there are probably also small currents in shunt distributed along the line. 73, ac6xg Cecil Moore wrote: Gene Fuller wrote: Try it. I believe you will find that your equality requirement on angles reduces to precisely the simple equation offer by Reg. Exactly! That's why I wonder why Ramo and Whinnery said it's an approximation. Wonder why Ramo and Whinnery say that's an approximation for low-loss lines? If the R+jwL angle is equal to the G+jwC angle, doesn't that make Z0 purely resistive? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Kelley wrote:
I guess one could infer that that if G / C R / L, and R + jwL G + jwC, then perhaps there are losses. I would only add that there are probably also small currents in shunt distributed along the line. If R 0 and G 0, then there are losses. The only time a line is lossless is when R = G = 0 which, according to Reg, is only in my wet dreams about circles on Smith Charts. :-) For real world transmission lines at HF, (usually) R/Z0 G*Z0. When I was a member of the high speed cable group at Intel, I remember test leads designed for R/Z0=G*Z0 but they were expensive special order devices. We apparently are more successful at designing very good dielectrics than in finding an economically feasible conductor with a couple of magnitudes less resistance than copper. Thus our ordinary transmission lines have a lot more series resistance than shunt conductance, especially open-wire transmission lines in free space. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|