Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say Frank.
Frank Gilliland wrote: On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:10:25 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote in : The bridge is calibrated to the impedance of the directional coupler (which is usually built to match the expected line impedance, but cannot be "zero length" in the present state of reality). The direction coupler samples voltage across and current through a given point. There is always a current transformer of some type and a voltage sample through some type of divider. The "voltages" representing E and I are summed before detection (conversion to dc). The "directivity" comes because the current phase sample is reversed 180 degrees from the summing phase, causing voltages to subtract. This means the directional coupler is calibrated for a certain ratio of voltage and current, so when they exist you have twice the voltage in the direction where E and I add, and zero voltage where they subtract. If the impedance of the signal is different than what is expected by the bridge then your power measurements will probably be wrong (to what extent they are wrong may or may not be important). But if that's the case then any error will be the same by percentage and sign for both forward =AND= reflected power because the impedance of the signal is the same for both forward and reflected power. IOW, the ratio is the same -despite- the impedance. ?What does that mean? If the directional coupler is calibrated at 50 ohms and you use it in a 75 ohm system you won't get a total reflected null even if the 75 ohm line has a 1:1 SWR. But if you subtract reflected power from forward power readings you will get the correct power, within linearity and calibration limits of the "meter system". This has nothing to do with standing waves. It has only to do with the relationship between current and voltage at the point where the directional coupler is inserted. I'm not sure if you are saying that or not. 73 Tom |