Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #2   Report Post  
Old September 4th 03, 01:38 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dr. Slick" wrote:

wrote in message ...

And yes, |rho| can be greater than unity for a passive load.

...Keith


Absolute Rubbish.. Could you produce a passive circuit that
will reflect a greater voltage than what you feed it? I'd
LOVE to see that...


Several examples have been presented, but rather than accepting
them, you changed the definition of rho. Perhaps you could build
one of these circuits to determine if modifying the definition
of rho was appropriate.

The ratio Pref/Pfwd is directly related to the ratio [rho].

Pref/Pfwd = [rho]**2 Absolute value brackets are a must!

Consider that after the absolute value brackets, the phase information
is gone. But since we are going to a ratio of average (RMS)
values OR peak values of power, it doesn't matter.

In other words, if you use V**2/R, the "V" can be either peak or
RMS, it doesn't matter, because it is a ratio. And of course, the "R"
doesn't matter either. And of course, the phase information is gone
with
the absolute value brackets.

If you agree that the Pref/Pfwd ratio cannot be greater than 1


Which I haven't since Pref and Pfwd are just computed numbers and
the result for some circuits is that Pref/Pfwd is greater than 1.
Of course, Pnet is not equal to Pfwd-Pref in these circumstances
so there is no violation of basic physics. It is just that the
computation of Pfwd and Pref does not really produce real powers
(though, again unfortunately, the dimension of the quantity produced
is power).

for a passive network, then neither can the [Vref/Vfwd]= rho be
greater
than 1 either.


....Keith
  #7   Report Post  
Old September 5th 03, 02:11 AM
Peter O. Brackett
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cecil:

[snip]
rho = (50-50)/(50+50) = 0 i.e. no reflections in either direction
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

[snip]

Hey... that's my line.

That's Mother Nature's reflection coefficient!

At every infinitesimal length along a transmission line rho = (Zo - Zo)/(Zo
+ Zo) = 0.

It's not nice to fool Mother Nature!

--
Peter K1PO
Indialantic By-the-Sea, FL.


  #8   Report Post  
Old September 4th 03, 11:08 PM
Dr. Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message ...

And yes, |rho| can be greater than unity for a passive load.

...Keith


Absolute Rubbish.. Could you produce a passive circuit that
will reflect a greater voltage than what you feed it? I'd
LOVE to see that...


Several examples have been presented, but rather than accepting
them, you changed the definition of rho. Perhaps you could build
one of these circuits to determine if modifying the definition
of rho was appropriate.



The definition of Rho has been set for "God-knows-how-long!"

Way before you or I were born, i would imagine!

Rho is the magnitude of Gamma, which is the complex voltage
reflection coefficient.

BUT, some people write Gamma is Rho, so just in case, it's wise
to say Power RC = [rho]**2 , with absolute value brackets.

Ok, show us a circuit, I'm waiting to see.



The ratio Pref/Pfwd is directly related to the ratio [rho].

Pref/Pfwd = [rho]**2 Absolute value brackets are a must!

Consider that after the absolute value brackets, the phase information
is gone. But since we are going to a ratio of average (RMS)
values OR peak values of power, it doesn't matter.

In other words, if you use V**2/R, the "V" can be either peak or
RMS, it doesn't matter, because it is a ratio. And of course, the "R"
doesn't matter either. And of course, the phase information is gone
with
the absolute value brackets.

If you agree that the Pref/Pfwd ratio cannot be greater than 1


Which I haven't since Pref and Pfwd are just computed numbers and
the result for some circuits is that Pref/Pfwd is greater than 1.
Of course, Pnet is not equal to Pfwd-Pref in these circumstances
so there is no violation of basic physics. It is just that the
computation of Pfwd and Pref does not really produce real powers
(though, again unfortunately, the dimension of the quantity produced
is power).


ok, Keith, i look forward with great interest on your
imaginary passive circuit which can reflect more power than
what you feed it (incident power).

I can't wait to hook it up to see more reflected power than
incident on my DAIWA meter, that would be very interesting.


Slick
  #9   Report Post  
Old September 4th 03, 11:35 PM
Cecil Moore
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dr. Slick wrote:
The definition of Rho has been set for "God-knows-how-long!"


Actually, 'rho' has contradictory definitions. (Z2-Z1)/(Z2+Z1)
is not always the same value as Sqrt(Pref/Pfwd) because of
interference energy.
--
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! =-----
  #10   Report Post  
Old September 5th 03, 02:13 AM
Peter O. Brackett
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Slick:

[snip]
I can't wait to hook it up to see more reflected power than
incident on my DAIWA meter, that would be very interesting.


Slick

[snip]

It sure will be an interesting event for your Daiwa when the transmitter
hooked to the other end is keyed!

--
Peter K1PO
Indialantic By-the-Sea, FL.




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Calculus not needed (was: Reflection Coefficient Smoke Clears a Bit) David or Jo Anne Ryeburn Antenna 17 December 13th 03 10:48 AM
A Subtle Detail of Reflection Coefficients (but important to know) Dr. Slick Antenna 199 September 12th 03 10:06 PM
Reflection Coefficient Smoke Clears a Bit Dr. Slick Antenna 126 September 10th 03 04:26 PM
Mother Nature's reflection coefficient... Peter O. Brackett Antenna 8 August 28th 03 06:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017