Keith Dysart wrote:
clip......

Now we know from basic electricity that Power is Volts
times Amps, so we have:

P(x,t) = V(x,t) * I(x,t)

P(x,t) is the instantaneous power at any point and time
on the line. Power being the rate of energy flow, P(x,t)
is the instantaneous energy flow at that point and time
on the line.

If you disagree with any of the above please read no
further and post any objections now.

Good! Agreement.

Hi again Keith,

I would suggest that you add a caveat here. The power equation is true
if the measurements are across a resistance. If we are also measuring
reactive power (or reflected power), then we need to account for that.

73, Roger, W7WKB

Dave wrote:
"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
t...
Dave wrote:
"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...
the REAL answer is that the 'standing' wave is a creation of
experimenters 100 years ago who didn't have the impedance, current, and
voltage measurement tools we have today, and didn't know of or
understand superposition. 'standing' waves are nothing but a result of
superposition of the forward and reflected waves, they have no physical
significance beyond that. it is worthless to talk about power or
energy in them since they can always be broken down into the component
waves which make more sense to work with.

Dave

Whoa!
No physical significance?
Like there is no frying the Hustler loading coil from the bottom up (due
to standing wave current) or corona flames from the tip (due to high SW
voltage) when applying a bit of "worthless" power?

Yuri

not due to 'standing' waves... that is due to the superposition of the
forward and reflected waves. They are the real waves, the 'standing'
ones are just figments of your imagination.
Superposition doesn't work in the environment Yuri described. You've been
hanging around Cecil too long.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

ARGH! i was too nice saying that the ancient guys that started the name
'standing' waves didn't understand superposition, neither does everyone in
this group! YES, superposition works in this case, why would it not work???


Evidently, you haven't done enough reading. Yuri is right this time.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Roger wrote:
Keith Dysart wrote:
clip ....

In the setup above used for "standing waves"
it can be seen that there is zero power in
the line every 90 degrees back from the open
end. At a zero power point, no energy is
being transferred. Therefore, the forward
and reverse waves can not be transferring
energy across these points. Conclusion:
forward and reverse waves do not always
transport energy.

....Keith

Hi Keith,

You are basing this conclusion on the observation that Power = V*I, and
because we can not detect V or I at some points in the standing wave,
then V*I is zero at these points. Correct math, but wrong conclusion.

What you are forgetting is that power is also found from Power = V^2/Zo
and Power = I^2*Zo. More accurately, on the standing wave line,
Power = (V^2 + I^2)/Zo. This is why a SWR power meter detects both
current and voltage from the standing wave.

This will also be true on the quarter wave stub, which is really 1/2
wave length long electrically, when you consider the time required for
the wave to go from initiation to end and back to beginning point. Power
is stored on the stub during the 1/2 cycle energized, and then that
stored power acts to present either a high or low impedance to the next
1/2 cycle, depending upon whether the stub is shorted or open.

I think you did a very good job in building your theory. It was only at
the end (where I think we need to consider additional ways of measuring
power) that we disagree.

73, Roger, W7WKB

Haste makes waste, and errors as well. The standing wave power
equation is incorrect. It should read "Power = V^2 / Zo + I^2 * Zo"

Sorry for any inconvenience, and for the several postings it will
probably stimulate.

73, Roger, W7WKB

"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
. net...
Dave wrote:
"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
t...
Dave wrote:
"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...
the REAL answer is that the 'standing' wave is a creation of
experimenters 100 years ago who didn't have the impedance, current,
and voltage measurement tools we have today, and didn't know of or
understand superposition. 'standing' waves are nothing but a result
of superposition of the forward and reflected waves, they have no
physical significance beyond that. it is worthless to talk about
power or energy in them since they can always be broken down into the
component waves which make more sense to work with.

Dave

Whoa!
No physical significance?
Like there is no frying the Hustler loading coil from the bottom up
(due to standing wave current) or corona flames from the tip (due to
high SW voltage) when applying a bit of "worthless" power?

Yuri

not due to 'standing' waves... that is due to the superposition of the
forward and reflected waves. They are the real waves, the 'standing'
ones are just figments of your imagination.
Superposition doesn't work in the environment Yuri described. You've
been hanging around Cecil too long.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

ARGH! i was too nice saying that the ancient guys that started the name
'standing' waves didn't understand superposition, neither does everyone
in this group! YES, superposition works in this case, why would it not
work???
Evidently, you haven't done enough reading. Yuri is right this time.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Yuri is trying to say that standing waves have real power, they do not. I
have shown that in my last big post on here. The one part he properly
states is that the effects are due to standing wave voltage. The voltage is
indeed real, as i have said. you can measure the 'standing' wave voltage,
that has been known for a long time... but the effects are NOT due to power
in standing waves.

Dave wrote:


[tons of utter crap deleted]

So what do you take away from this?
1. Standing waves have no physical significance, they do not represent power
or energy, they do not obey ohms law, they are ONLY a result of
superposition of the voltage and/or current waves in the line.
2. can you measure standing waves? Yes, of course. that is how they got
their name, you could measure them and they didn't seem to move on the line.
but this is only because simple measurement tools can't distinguish the
forward and reflected components that make them up.
3. if you want to talk about power and energy you MUST use the individual
traveling waves.


"Dave"

It appears to be useful that you choose to be anonymous. Otherwise it
might be embarrassing.

Rather than all of that handwaving nonsense about Ohm's Law and such,
why don't you show us how standing waves fail to satisfy the Maxwell
equations?

So what do you take away from this?

Standing waves and traveling waves have equal legitimacy. There are many
cases where multiple model descriptions completely capture the physical
reality. There is no reason to say that one description is more
fundamental than the other.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

"Gene Fuller" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:


[tons of utter crap deleted]

So what do you take away from this?
1. Standing waves have no physical significance, they do not represent
power or energy, they do not obey ohms law, they are ONLY a result of
superposition of the voltage and/or current waves in the line.
2. can you measure standing waves? Yes, of course. that is how they got
their name, you could measure them and they didn't seem to move on the
line. but this is only because simple measurement tools can't distinguish
the forward and reflected components that make them up.
3. if you want to talk about power and energy you MUST use the individual
traveling waves.


"Dave"

It appears to be useful that you choose to be anonymous. Otherwise it
might be embarrassing.

Rather than all of that handwaving nonsense about Ohm's Law and such, why
don't you show us how standing waves fail to satisfy the Maxwell
equations?

So what do you take away from this?

Standing waves and traveling waves have equal legitimacy. There are many
cases where multiple model descriptions completely capture the physical
reality. There is no reason to say that one description is more
fundamental than the other.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

'standing' voltage and current waves DO satisfy maxwell's equations, ohm's
law, and superposition. you have failed completely to see my point, its
power waves that are the illegitimate children and must be bansished
forever. maxwell's equations are overkill for this exercise, ohm's law and
the simple power equations are all that is necesary to show the
inconsistency, why muddle it with details. after all if you can't
understand ohms law and calculate power properly you have no hope of
understanding maxwell.

"Gene Fuller" wrote in message
...
It appears to be useful that you choose to be anonymous. Otherwise it
might be embarrassing.

i prefer to limit the exposure of my email address to limit spam and direct
email outside of the group. if you really want to know who i am use your
great deductive skills and figure it out.

Cecil Moore wrote:

[big snip]

The *only* energy in a transmission line with standing waves is EM
energy. Standing wave energy does NOT meet the definition of EM
energy. Therefore, standing waves may be a useful math model but
that model has a built in technical contradiction when forced
upon reality.


Cecil,

Where do you get so many goofy ideas? Do you have any references at all
that support your contention that standing wave energy does not meet the
definition of EM energy? I have been in the wave business professionally
for about 40 years, and I have read many technical papers, reference
books, and text books. I have yet to encounter anything that indicated
the inferior nature of standing waves in the energy community.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Dave wrote:
"Gene Fuller" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:


[tons of utter crap deleted]

So what do you take away from this?
1. Standing waves have no physical significance, they do not represent
power or energy, they do not obey ohms law, they are ONLY a result of
superposition of the voltage and/or current waves in the line.
2. can you measure standing waves? Yes, of course. that is how they got
their name, you could measure them and they didn't seem to move on the
line. but this is only because simple measurement tools can't distinguish
the forward and reflected components that make them up.
3. if you want to talk about power and energy you MUST use the individual
traveling waves.

"Dave"

It appears to be useful that you choose to be anonymous. Otherwise it
might be embarrassing.

Rather than all of that handwaving nonsense about Ohm's Law and such, why
don't you show us how standing waves fail to satisfy the Maxwell
equations?

So what do you take away from this?

Standing waves and traveling waves have equal legitimacy. There are many
cases where multiple model descriptions completely capture the physical
reality. There is no reason to say that one description is more
fundamental than the other.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

'standing' voltage and current waves DO satisfy maxwell's equations, ohm's
law, and superposition. you have failed completely to see my point, its
power waves that are the illegitimate children and must be bansished
forever. maxwell's equations are overkill for this exercise, ohm's law and
the simple power equations are all that is necesary to show the
inconsistency, why muddle it with details. after all if you can't
understand ohms law and calculate power properly you have no hope of
understanding maxwell.





"Power waves" is a standing joke around here. The last person to
seriously consider such things is Cecil, and he now denies ever saying such.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

"Dave" wrote in message
news:3Uwbj.9477$_o6.6702@trndny06...

"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
. net...
Dave wrote:
"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
t...
Dave wrote:
"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...
the REAL answer is that the 'standing' wave is a creation of
experimenters 100 years ago who didn't have the impedance, current,
and voltage measurement tools we have today, and didn't know of or
understand superposition. 'standing' waves are nothing but a result
of superposition of the forward and reflected waves, they have no
physical significance beyond that. it is worthless to talk about
power or energy in them since they can always be broken down into
the component waves which make more sense to work with.

Dave

Whoa!
No physical significance?
Like there is no frying the Hustler loading coil from the bottom up
(due to standing wave current) or corona flames from the tip (due to
high SW voltage) when applying a bit of "worthless" power?

Yuri

not due to 'standing' waves... that is due to the superposition of the
forward and reflected waves. They are the real waves, the 'standing'
ones are just figments of your imagination.
Superposition doesn't work in the environment Yuri described. You've
been hanging around Cecil too long.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

ARGH! i was too nice saying that the ancient guys that started the name
'standing' waves didn't understand superposition, neither does everyone
in this group! YES, superposition works in this case, why would it not
work???
Evidently, you haven't done enough reading. Yuri is right this time.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Yuri is trying to say that standing waves have real power, they do not. I
have shown that in my last big post on here. The one part he properly
states is that the effects are due to standing wave voltage. The voltage
is indeed real, as i have said. you can measure the 'standing' wave
voltage, that has been known for a long time... but the effects are NOT
due to power in standing waves.

So you are trying to say that there is standing wave voltage but no standing
wave current and therefore no power associated with current???

OK, explain to me where I went wrong.
Back to our standing wave quarter wave coil loaded antenna, aka Hustler 80m
mobile whip.
I understand that it is standing wave resonant antenna, with maximum current
at the base and maximum voltage at the tip, in between sinusoidal
distribution of them. Inserted loading coil exhibits decrease of the current
along the coil, diminishing at the top, even if W8JI et other gurus do not
believe so.
W9UCW measured the current (standing wave) at top of the coil to be about
40 - 60% less than on the bottom.
K3BU found out that when he put 800W into the antenna, the bottom of the
coil started to fry the heatshrink tubing, demonstrating more power to be
dissipated at the bottom of the coil, proportional to the higher current
there, creating more heat and "frying power" (RxI2). This is in perfect
agreement with W9UCW measurements.
So the way I understand it, forward wave is reflected off the tip, reflected
wave on the way back superimposes with forward wave, creates standing wave,
which at any point can be measured and has current and voltage magnitudes
proportional to their position on the radiator.
They seem to be real current and voltage, current heats up resistance,
voltage lights up the neons and power is consumed, portion is radiated. The
larger the current containing portion, the better antenna efficiency.
Where am I wrong?
I have a hard time to swallow statement that there is no power in standing
wave, when I SAW standing wave's current fry my precious coil and tip burned
off with spectacular corona Elmo's fire due to standing wave voltage at the
tip.
Antenna (quarter wave) radiator is a standing wave circuit exhibiting the
above properties, if the formulas say it ain't so......

Merry Christmas to al believers and unbelievers!

Yuri, K3BU