Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:17:15 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote in : Frank Gilliland wrote: Impedance matching of an SWR meter is generally unimportant since most SWR meters used for HF have a directional coupler that is much shorter than the operating wavelength. Point is that they are usually calibrated for Z0=50 ohms and are in error when used in Z0 environments differing from Z0=50 ohms, e.g. Z0=75 ohms. The point is that the error is insignificant when the directional coupler is much shorter than the wavelength. The error is even more insignificant when there are a host of variables and confounds between the SWR meter and the transmitted field that can (and frequently do) affect the objective -- field strength. It's much simpler (and just plain logical) to measure the field strength directly instead of measuring an abstract value halfway towards the objective and relying on nothing more than speculation that the rest is working according as expected. ----== 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 =---- |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Frank Gilliland" wrote in message ... On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:17:15 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote in : Frank Gilliland wrote: Impedance matching of an SWR meter is generally unimportant since most SWR meters used for HF have a directional coupler that is much shorter than the operating wavelength. Point is that they are usually calibrated for Z0=50 ohms and are in error when used in Z0 environments differing from Z0=50 ohms, e.g. Z0=75 ohms. The point is that the error is insignificant when the directional coupler is much shorter than the wavelength. It is the directional coupler that is balanced for a particular value of Z0. Tam/WB2TT The error is even more insignificant when there are a host of variables and confounds between the SWR meter and the transmitted field that can (and frequently do) affect the objective -- field strength. It's much simpler (and just plain logical) to measure the field strength directly instead of measuring an abstract value halfway towards the objective and relying on nothing more than speculation that the rest is working according as expected. ----== 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 =---- |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Frank Gilliland wrote:
Point is that they are usually calibrated for Z0=50 ohms and are in error when used in Z0 environments differing from Z0=50 ohms, e.g. Z0=75 ohms. The point is that the error is insignificant when the directional coupler is much shorter than the wavelength. Nope, that's not the point at all. It is true that a 50 ohm SWR meter designed for HF may not work on 70 cm but the error I'm talking about is the calibration error in a 50 ohm SWR meter designed for HF and used on HF in, for instance, a Z0 = 450 ohm environment instead of its calibrated-for 50 ohm environment. It works perfectly in a 50 ohm environment at the HF frequency of operation. Here's the proof using a 50 ohm SWR meter: XMTR--1/2WL 450 ohm line--SWR meter--1/2WL 450 ohm line--50 ohm load The 50 ohm SWR meter will read 1:1, nowhere near the actual SWR XMTR--1/4WL 450 ohm line--SWR meter--1/4WL 450 ohm line--50 ohm load The 50 ohm SWR meter will read 81:1, nowhere near the actual SWR An SWR meter calibrated for 450 ohms will correctly read 9:1 in both cases. -- 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 =--- |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
james wrote:
If the transmitter has a refelction coefficient of zero and the load say .3, then that reflected power from the load is dissapated as heat in the output circuits and any final transistors or tubes. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. If the reflected current arrives out of phase with the forward current, then the final dissipation can actually be *reduced* by the mismatch. -- 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 =--- |
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:42:49 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote: Sometimes yes, sometimes no. If the reflected current arrives out of phase with the forward current, then the final dissipation can actually be *reduced* by the mismatch. ***** Power is power. Phase is not a problem. Take the mafnitude of the transmitted power and teh magnitude of the reflected power. The results are phaseless. The magnitudes add linearly. QED james |
#36
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:28:01 -0400, "Tam/WB2TT"
wrote: It is the directional coupler that is balanced for a particular value of Z0. Tam/WB2TT ***** Correct james |
#37
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Frank Gilliland wrote, among other things, "The point is that the error
is insignificant when the directional coupler is much shorter than the wavelength." Certainly "directional couplers" for HF may be built at essentially zero length, and ideally would have exactly zero length, monitoring the current and voltage at a single point on a line. Then SWR or reflection coefficient magnitude or even complex reflection coefficient may be calculated under the assumption we know the desired reference impedance. But if the equipment combines the voltage and current samples in the wrong ratio, you will get the WRONG answer. Even if the coupler looks like a perfect 50 ohms impedance section of transmission line (with some attenuation), the error _in_measurement_output_ can be significant indeed. Just because the coupler looks like a 50 ohm line to the line it's hooked to doesn't mean it will read zero reflection when IT's presented with a 50 ohm load. And by the way, not everyone who measures and cares very much about SWR (or reflection coefficient) cares a whit about field strength. Not all loads are antennas. Indeed, as Reg says, we might do better in amateur applications to consider the SWR meter as an indicator of the degree to which we're presenting a transmitter with the desired load. That's really what we're using it for, most of the time. It may ALSO be interesting to know the field strength, but please be aware that a transmitter's distortion products may be significantly higher if it's presented the wrong load impedance, even though the power output may be increased. Field strength alone is not acceptable to me as a means to adjust an antenna load to a transmitter, or as a way to adjust the operating point of the transmitter. Cheers, Tom |
#38
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
james wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:07:17 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" wrote: What is the reason a 2:1 SWR can cause such havoc? How can I avoid this catastrophic condition? I feed my dipoles with 450 Ohm ladder line, but the last 20 feet or so is 50 Ohm coax, I guess that makes it work ok. I haven't blown up my finals yet. Lions and tigers and bears Oh my... ***** Actually can happen if you push the finals to where there is insufficeint margin to the maximum heat dissapation. Tubes are a bit more forgiving. Transistor inadequately heatsinked and overdriven, typical CB usage, often have little of no margin for heat dissapation. If the transmitter has a refelction coefficient of zero and the load say .3, then that reflected power from the load is dissapated as heat in the output circuits and any final transistors or tubes. Now if the radio has a reflection coefficient other than zero that will lessen the heat dissapation on the transimiiter. Now you get load and source reflections convoluting within the transmission line. You ought to model a 400 Mhz square wave with source and load refelctions coefficients other than zero. It can get ugly james Consider the MRF 140, a 150 Watt 2.0 - 150.0 Mhz N-Channel linear RF power fet. From the technical data sheet: "100% Tested For Load Mismatch At All Phase Angles With 30:1 VSWR." You'd have a tough time damaging this device with a mere 2:1 VSWR. How do load and source reflections convolute within the transmission line? That's a new one on me. My old dictionary defines 'convolute' as "Rolled or folded together with one part over another; twisted; coiled." The rest of the post is pretty fanciful, too. A trip to the library would do wonders. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
#39
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
james wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:42:49 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote: Sometimes yes, sometimes no. If the reflected current arrives out of phase with the forward current, then the final dissipation can actually be *reduced* by the mismatch. ***** Power is power. Phase is not a problem. Take the mafnitude of the transmitted power and teh magnitude of the reflected power. The results are phaseless. The magnitudes add linearly. QED james Cecil was talking about current, not power. You can't add power the way you can voltage and current. If you could, you could build a very nice perpetual motion machine just by using the reflections in a transmission line to add power so that the output was greater than the input. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
#40
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The rig has no way of detecting any alleged "reflected power". It can't
tell the difference between a feedline with a lot of "reflected power", a feedline with no "reflected power", and a plain resistor. It behaves exactly the same in all cases, provided only that the impedance that each provides to it is the same. Anyone not convinced of this should put a couple or more dummy loads in series or parallel, make up a few lengths of transmission line of various impedances, and see for himself. Roy Lewallen, W7EL james wrote: On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:42:49 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote: Sometimes yes, sometimes no. If the reflected current arrives out of phase with the forward current, then the final dissipation can actually be *reduced* by the mismatch. ***** Power is power. Phase is not a problem. Take the mafnitude of the transmitted power and teh magnitude of the reflected power. The results are phaseless. The magnitudes add linearly. QED james |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|