Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
William E. Sabin wrote:
Reg Edwards wrote: Given a line's primary characteristics, R,L,C,G, length, or it's secondary characteristics Zo, dB, phase angle, plus the line's terminatiing impedance it is possible to calculate, by classical methods, all other quantities of engineering interest - WITHOUT ANY REFERENCE TO REFLECTION COEFFICIENT OR SWR which are mere man-made notions supposed to assist understanding of what goes on in the real world but, as exchanges on this newsgroup show, are just a pair of bloody useless nuisances. Nevertheless, the outer circle of the Smith chart is *always* the locus of zero positive resistance and infinite SWR, and a rho vector cannot terminate on, or cross over, this circle when a load R0 is present, regardless of the rest of the circuit, including any possible combination of resistances and reactances and complex Z0. One can argue "ignore rho=1 and just jump over it". This cannot be done in good mathematics. Dismissing rho and SWR as "contrived nuisances" is a convenient way to get rid of this problem, but it does not "wash". Rho and SWR are fundamental properties of transmission lines that do not go away, and a non-zero R precludes rho=1.0. Any attempt to circumvent (bypass) these small inconveniences is doomed to failure, regardless of the analytic geometry considerations. Bill W0IYH Power wave theory avoids the Smith chart, since there are no transmission lines. Scattering matrices are used instead. Nevertheless, rho is still an important parameter, but it does not involve distance separation between generator and load as a parameter. Bill W0IYH |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
A Subtle Detail of Reflection Coefficients (but important to know) | Antenna | |||
Re-Normalizing the Smith Chart (Changing the SWR into the same load) | Antenna | |||
Mother Nature's reflection coefficient... | Antenna |