Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Lewallen wrote:
(*) Anybody fond of the notion that reverse power "goes" somewhere or gets dissipated in the source or re-reflected back needs to come to grips with this problem before building further on the flawed model of bouncing waves of flowing power. Roy, none of my textbook authors think the reflection model is flawed. Walter Johnson goes so far as to assert that there is a Poynting (Power Flow Vector) for forward power and a separate Poynting Vector for reflected power. The sum of those two Power Flow Vectors is the net Poynting Vector. Here's my earlier thought example again. 100w----one second long lossless feedline----load, rho=0.707 SWR = (1+rho)/(1-rho) = 5.828:1 Source is delivering 100 watts (joules/sec) Forward power is 200 watts (joules/sec) Reflected power is 100 watts (joules/sec) Load is absorbing 100 watts (joules/sec) It can easily be shown that 300 joules of energy have been generated that have not been delivered to the load, i.e. those 300 joules of energy are stored in the feedline. The 300 joules of energy are stored in RF waves which cannot stand still and necessarily travel at the speed of light. TV ghosting can be used to prove that the reflected energy actually makes a round trip to the load and back. A TDR will indicate the same thing. Choosing to use a net energy shortcut doesn't negate the laws of physics. -- 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 =--- |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|