Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Smith wrote:
In article , gwhite wrote: [...] You entirely missed the point. You don't know the output impedance because you don't have a way of determining it by swinging the output full-scale. You don't have to swing the output full-scale to measure the impedance. Playing along with the idea that there is some meaningful fixed Z of the device for large swings, yes you would have to do so to prove the concept. You would need to prove that output Z was the same for driving 1 W into the output as for driving 100 W into the output. I also predict that even the small signal output Z of the power amp will not be that conjugate impedance you think it is for a properly designed PA. (I am not making a claim that it would *never* be so for any PA.) Any change in the load, no matter how small, will cause a change in the output voltage and the output current. Likewise, a change in the output Z would do the same thing. Since you're presuming linearity, we can include gain linearity. I.e., the gain with "-10 dB" of drive is the same as the gain with "0 dB" drive. I'll define the 0 dB gain as associated with the 1 db compression point. Since the gain is defined as linear (really fixed regardless of drive), and the load is fixed, something must have "caused" the compression. A way to *model* the compression is a changed output Z as a function of drive. While I realize this is an unconventional view of output compression modeling, I believe it is fair, since you are making the linear presumption. I think this is fair also because the impedance concept is a linear/sinusoid one. Under that presumption, you've given me license to disregard distortion. From these you can calculate the output impedance at the current operating point. When a transistor is operating under large signal conditions into a tuned load, there is still an output impedance and this impedance still discribes what will happen for small changes in the load. Let's do another example. Say the device we've selected has an Imax rating of 1 amp and a generator resistance of 100 ohms. Per standard linear theory, we do our norton model of Igen in parallel with the 100 ohms. Under standard conjugate matching theory, we should load it with 100 ohms. Now with the 100 ohm load, we get a 50 V peak for Imax = 1 amp. But what if both our DC supply and device breakdown won't allow this? We have a practical limiting Vmax not at all included in linear theory. Due to breakdown or supply rail concerns, we'll see our Imax quite short of the 1 amp we expect when the device is loaded with 100 ohms. We won't be getting all the power out of it we "expect" because of practical limitations not built into linear conjugate matching theory. How do we select the best load, since conjugate loading clearly does not use the device to its full potential? We seek Ropt, or what is commonly referred to as the load line match. Ropt = Vmax/Imax where Ropt Rgen, if not (Rgen + Ropt)/(Rgen*Ropt) = Vmax/Imax So even looking into the PA output in the small signal sense (or tweaking the impedance as you suggest), we won't likely see Ropt = Rgen, because we are dealing with some practical design limitations not accounted for in linear theory. Perhaps a couple of quotes from Cripps would be nice: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg.../-/0890069891/ "The load-line match is a real-world compromise that is necessary to extract the maximum power from RF transistors and at the same time keep the RF voltage swing within specified limits and/or the available DC supply." p13 "A final note here concerns the nebulous and highly questionable concept of large signal impedance. The reason for the load-line match is to accommodate the maximum allowable current and voltage swings at the transistor output. That says nothing about the impedance of the device, which remains the same throughout the linear range. Once a device starts to operate in a significantly nonlinear fashion, the apparent value of the impedances will change, but the whole concept of impedance starts to break down as well, because the wave forms no longer are sinusoidal." p14 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Discone antenna plans | Antenna | |||
The "TRICK" to TV 'type' Coax Cable [Shielded] SWL Loop Antennas {RHF} | Antenna | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Shortwave | |||
X-terminator antenna | CB | |||
Outdoor Antenna and lack of intermod | Scanner |