rich wrote,
> >> Transforming 100 j+0 ohms to 100k j+0 ohms by a single reactance is
> >seemingly a bit of a
> >> stretch.
to which i responded,
> >it looks like a snap to me! i've got no resistance ("0"), a pure
> >reactance (+j100 ohms). i want to go straight out the +imaginary
> >axis from 100 ohms to 100k ohms. so, i add an inductor in series
> >with the existing 100j + 0 that has a reactance of j99.9k (+0); the
> >total is now j100k + 0, isn't it? i used a "single" reactance to
> >transform the given impedance to the desired impedance. i think that
> >one was too easy... what am i missing?
to which rich responded,
> The 100 ohm R is paralleled by 75nH?
huh? what 100 ohm R? what 75nH?
i'll repeat my statement... " i've got no resistance ("0"), a pure
reactance (+j100 ohms)." no 100 ohm R! zero "R"! i'm obviously
on a different wavelength (no pun intended) and not understanding
your question, so i'm dropping this.
sorry for the bandwidth, all. back into the woodwork.
73,
George T. Daughters, K6GT
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|