John Smith wrote:
The 72 ohm cable being t he only difference... and point being--don't I
only care I am presenting a 50 ohm load to the transmitter?

I won't presume to know what you care about. I care about
the SWR on my feedline. I have homebrew SWR meters calibrated
for 300, 450, and 600 ohms.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Cecil:

Darn!!! I was hoping ya cared... just kidding
I think you took that the wrong way...
I didn't mean to insinuate there was nothing to worry about... or that I
would not be interested in the long run about losses... but either way,
the answer is just as appreciated... grin

Warmest regards,
John

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
The 72 ohm cable being t he only difference... and point being--don't
I only care I am presenting a 50 ohm load to the transmitter?

I won't presume to know what you care about. I care about
the SWR on my feedline. I have homebrew SWR meters calibrated
for 300, 450, and 600 ohms.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

John Smith wrote:
Cecil: Darn!!! I was hoping ya cared... just kidding

I didn't say I didn't care. I said I didn't presume. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Reg Edwards wrote:
You will be pleased to hear I'm back on Sierra Valley, Californian Red
tonight.

Peter Vella Merlot for me. My doctor told me to drink two
glasses of red wine a day so I use ~400 ml iced-tea glasses.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil, if I drank that much wine every day I'd believe the SWR at the input of
the 72-ohm line is 1:1 too, but it ain't. I'm concerned with the guys who think
it is. So please let me be totally elementary in explaining why the SWR on the
72-ohm line is 1.44 everywhere on the line, including the input, yet still has a
50-ohm input impedance.

Step 1. We have a lossless 50-ohm line of random length feeding a 50-ohm source
to an antenna with terminal impedance of 50 + j0 ohms. The input voltage is 1 v
and the input current is 0.02 a. Z = E/R, and 1/0.02 = 50 verifying that the Zo
of the line is 50-ohms. The power absorbed by the antenna is IE = E*/R = 0.02
watts. The SWR is 1:1 everywhere.

Step 2. We now insert a lossless 72-ohm, 1/2 wl line between the antenna and the
output end of the 50-ohm line. Does the power absorbed in the antenna change?
NO. Do the forward voltage and current on the 50-ohm line change? NO. Are there
any reflections on the 50-ohm line? NO. Are the forward voltage and current in
the 75-ohm line 1 v and 0.02 a.? NO. Are there reflections on the 72-ohm line?
YES. Is the input impedance of the 72-ohm line 50 + j0 ohms? YES. Is the SWR at
the input of the 72-ohm line1:1? NO. Is the SWR at the input of the 72-ohm line
1.44:1? YES. Does the antenna still absorb 0.02 watts? YES.

Step 3. To understand why the input impedance of the 72-ohm line is 50 + j0 with
an SWR = 1.44 we need to understand the voltage and current reflection
coefficients, rho as well as the voltage and current transmission coefficients,
tau.

Step 4. In going to a higher line impedance the voltage reflection coefficient
rhoE is positive, and the current reflection coefficient rhoI is negative; The
reverse is true when going to a lower line impedance, as when going from the
72-ohm line into the 50-ohm load.

Step 5. In going to a higher line impedance the voltage transmission coefficient
tauE = (rhoE + 1) and the current transmission coefficient tauI = (rhoI - 1).
The reverse is true when going to a lower line impedance.

Step 6. For an SWR of 1.44, rho = 0.1803. Therefore, when going from a 50-ohm
line to a 72-ohm line, tauE = 1.1803 and tauI = 0.8197. Consequently, the
forward voltage in the 72-ohm line is 1.1803v and the forward current is 0.02 x
0.8197 = 0.01639 a. Note that 1.180/0.01639 = 71.996, which would be 72 if we
used more significant figures.

Step 7. When forward voltage 1.1803 v reaches the 50-ohm antenna load, the
reflection coefficient 0.1803 x 1.1803 = 0.2128 v, which subtracts from the
1.1803 v at the input of the 72-ohm line, making the total voltage at the input
0.9675 v.

Step 8. When forward current 0.01639 a reaches the 50-ohm antenna load, the
current reflection coefficient 0.1803 x 0.0.01639 a = 0.002956 a, which adds to
the 0.01639 a, making the total current at the input of the 72-ohm line 0.01935
a.

Step 9. Dividing the total voltage at the input of the 72-ohm line by the total
current, we get 0.9675/0.01935 = 50.01 ohms, the input resistance of the 72-ohm
line with a 1.44:1 SWR on the line.

Step 10. Consequently, we see that the addition of the reflected voltage and
current to the forward voltage and current yield an impedance at the input of
the 72-ohm line that is 50 ohms, not 72 ohms. It is the effect of the 1.44:1 SWR
on the line that has changed the line impedance (not the characteristic
impedance) to 50 ohms.

I hope this helps in understanding why the SWR at the input of the 72-ohm line
is 1.44:1, and NOT 1:1.

Walt, W2DU

Walter Maxwell wrote:
I hope this helps in understanding why the SWR at the input of the 72-ohm line
is 1.44:1, and NOT 1:1.

Very good stuff, Walt, as usual. It is possible that Gary
misunderstood the question. He apparently thought the question
was: What SWR will a 50 ohm SWR meter indicate and of course,
a 50 ohm SWR meter will erroneously report an SWR of 1:1 at
the 50 ohm (current maximum) point on the 72 ohm feedline. If
we move the 50 ohm SWR meter to the 103.7 ohm (current minimum)
point on the 72 ohm feedline, it will erroneously report an SWR
of 2.1:1. But, on the 72 ohm feedline, the SWR is, of course,
1.44:1 at both the 50 ohm point and the 103.7 point and at all
other points up and down the feedline (neglecting losses).
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

My question was totally answered by Walt W2DU. Thank you for the detailed
explaination.

On Mon, 30 May 2005 16:12:44 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Fred W4JLE wrote:
Assuming I have an antenna that is perfect on 3.8 MHz. Perfect being
defined, as I am feeding it with exactly 1/2 electrical wave length of 50
Ohm feedline and it is 1:1 SWR measured at the source end.

What would the SWR be if I substituted the 50 Ohm feedline with a 1/2
wavelength of 72 Ohm feedline?

The SWR on the 72 ohm feedline would measure 1.44:1. You do
have an SWR meter calibrated for 72 ohms, don't you? :-)
Your 50 ohm SWR meter will measure 1:1, but as Reg says,
it is merely measuring the degree of match to your
transmitter designed for 50 ohm loads.


Gentlemen, I know most of you are much more knowledgeable in some of
this, but with all your nit-picking over the impedances, etc., may I
interject that something is being overlooked?

The antenna feedline has some loss, however little, that may affect
the swr at the "source", which I interpret to be at the radio.

100 watts may be transmitted, 90 watts received at the antenna, 9
watts reflected, and 8.1 watts received back at the rig for reflected
power. My numbers are hypothetical, but you get the idea.

However, your discussions concerning SWR bridge impedance have led me
to wonder how accurate the swr meter in my rig is concerning the
antennas I use. I feed a dipole with 72 ohm into my rig, an IC-706
MKII which expects a 50 ohm load.

My attitude is that it must be ok if the rig sees it as low as it
should measure it as it sees it.


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

Cecil Moore wrote:
Walter Maxwell wrote:
I hope this helps in understanding why the SWR at the input of the 72-ohm line
is 1.44:1, and NOT 1:1.

Very good stuff, Walt, as usual. It is possible that Gary
misunderstood the question. He apparently thought the question
was: What SWR will a 50 ohm SWR meter indicate and of course,
a 50 ohm SWR meter will erroneously report an SWR of 1:1 at
the 50 ohm (current maximum) point on the 72 ohm feedline. If
we move the 50 ohm SWR meter to the 103.7 ohm (current minimum)
point on the 72 ohm feedline, it will erroneously report an SWR
of 2.1:1. But, on the 72 ohm feedline, the SWR is, of course,
1.44:1 at both the 50 ohm point and the 103.7 point and at all
other points up and down the feedline (neglecting losses).
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Yep, it is possible I did, won't be the first time. The orginal
question stated that the swr was somehow measured at the source, how
else could one know it was 1:1. The measurement instrument was not
specified. Assume that it is the average ham with a 50 ohm swr bridge,
an antenna analyzer, and a 50 ohm RLB. If one changes to 1/2 wave 72
ohm cable, using the same measurement instrument you get the same
results.
I understand the mechanics of the actual VSWR on mismatched lines,
but I intrepreted the the question differently I guess. My handy Smith
Chart program reports a 1:1 VSWR, of course it is only at the source,
at 90 degrees it reports 2:1. Wonder what that program uses to
calculate swr?
Gary N4AST
Gary N4AST