Roy Lewallen wrote:
That's what you're going to have to do to get me to pay attention to
you. Volts, amps, watts.

Roy, you are the one who made the mistake. I have told you exactly
what your mistake is. The rest is your problem, not mine.

Once again there are four component voltages and four component currents.
Forward voltage and current contain TWO terms, not one term as you assert.
Reflected voltage and current contain TWO terms, not one term as you assert.

I'm at work and don't remember all the values in the experiment but
here is something similar which I posted yesterday.

----lossy feedline---+---1WL 50 ohm lossless feedline---10+j60 load
Pfwd1-- Pfwd2--
--Pref1 --Pref2

The ratio of Pref2 to Pfwd2 is 0.7225 on the 50 ohm line.

(Pfwd1 - Pref1) = (Pfwd2 - Pref2)

I don't remember the Z0 of the lossy line but the reflection coefficient
can be calculated to solve the problem. The main thing to realize from
the above is Pfwd2 Pref2. Therefore, Pfwd1 Pref1, i.e. total reflected
power is ALWAYS less than total forward power when dealing with passive
loads.

You have terms left over. There should be no terms left over. There
should be one forward voltage, one forward current, one reflected
voltage, and one reflected current. Until you collect all the terms,
your analysis will contain an error. Why are you so dead set against
collecting like terms?
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP