Hi John,
I just had to skim your thesis. I am at the library and only have 30
minutes time to use the internet. My phone is not in yet at the shop.
I see your point but I will read the thesis and study it more once I get
back to the shop with the file.
However, think about the method used to determine the value of an output
series capacitor. Do you not take into account the 3db down point and
calculate the cap for the proper value based on that. If the output
impedance were not a "lossy" element how would that technique work.
Billy
>From: Jon Ogden <na9d@speakeasy.net>
>To: Billy Ward <billydeanward@hotmail.com>, <amps@contesting.com>
>Subject: Re: [AMPS] Conjugate Matching and Efficiency
To: <amps@contesting.com>
>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 07:34:32 -0500
>
>on 5/17/01 11:01 AM, Billy Ward at billydeanward@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > If the same current is flowing in the output of the source as in the
>load
> > and the two are equal, do they not act like any voltage divider would.
>Is
> > the power not evenly divided across each element?
>
>Hi Billy,
>
>I've been trying long and hard to come up with a "scientific" answer to
>your
>point and have been consulting with others as well as noodling it around in
>my head.
>
>Let's see how this works.
>
>I think one of the problems folks have when talking about source impedance
>is that they think of it in terms of a lossy or dissipative resistance. A
>50 Volt, 50 Ohm source would have a lossy 50 Ohm resistor in series with
>its
>output. And so the statement you made above would follow.
>
>However, I don't know if you can treat the source impedance as a lossy
>impedance in this case. "How can you do that?", you ask. Well, let's look
>at another RF type component. Coax cable. What is its impedance? Well,
>generally it is 50 Ohms. But is it dissipative (other than it's
>characteristic loss)? No, it is not. In most models it is an ideal
>component. It is a transmission line with a particular characteristic
>impedance. Yet if you put your Ohm meter across it through it or whatever,
>you won't get a measurement of 50 Ohms.
>
>A tank circuit has some transmission line characteristics as well. It has
>delay characteristics, series L, shunt C, etc. And as one person I talked
>to say, it may even have a characteristic impedance although we might not
>be
>sure what that is. Put your Ohm meter across the output of your amp or
>transceiver, do you get 50 Ohms? No, likely you'll see zero Ohms or an
>open
>circuit.
>
>Let's look at this concept of the 50 Ohm transmission line some more. If
>we
>assume that impedance is impedance is impedance and must be taken into
>account, then we have to look at the following of what is in our circuit.
>
>We have a voltage source with a series resistance of 50 Ohms. Then we have
>another 50 Ohm block of transmission line. Then we have a 50 Ohm load.
>Since these are all equal, each element has the same voltage drop across
>it.
>All currents are equal so each element absorbs the same power. Therefore,
>my efficiency is only 33%!
>
>"But, you can't say that!", will certainly be said. Of course not. It
>doesn't make sense. But it is almost exactly what you said with the
>exception of adding the impedance of the transmission line.
>
>The concept of assigning the source impedance a dissipative resistance is
>assigning an incorrect model. And since we are talking about models, if a
>tank circuit is made up of lossless, ideal elements, then where does this
>50% of the power, that you and other allege gets lost, go?
>
>Now, let's get a little more mathematical here.
>
>The model that we typically use for sources is Thevenin. That is a voltage
>source with a series impedance. But as others have pointed out, we forget
>about another model, the Norton model. The Norton model is a current
>source
>with parallel source impedance. Now I went to engineering school and we
>were always told that you could interchange the two models. They are
>equivalent. Therefore, if a model is proper, the mathematical analysis
>that
>works in one will work in the other. Does anyone want to disagree with the
>concept that the Thevenin and Norton models are interchangeable?
>
>So let's take a 50 Volt Thevenin model with a 50 Ohm resistor as source
>impedeance. What's the Norton equivalent? It is a 1 Amp current source
>with a 50 Ohm shunt resistor. Now let's place a 50 Ohm load across each of
>these and do some math. In each, we get 25 volts across each resistor and
>in each case we develop 25^2/50 or 50 watts. The internal resistor is also
>dissipating 50 Watts in each case. OK, so everything is holding up. This
>"sanity check" seems to show that we have valid models for maximum power
>transfer as well as dissipation.
>
>But let's take things further. What if we use a 10 Ohm load resistor
>instead of a 50 Ohm load?
>
>In the Thevenin circuit, we will have an output voltage of 50*10/60 or
>8.333
>volts. The power dissipation in that resistor is 6.9444 Watts. In the
>Norton circuit, our one amp source is now driving 50 Ohms in parallel with
>10 Ohms which ends up being 8.3333 Ohms. Clearly, a one amp source across
>an 8.333 Ohm resistor develops 8.333 volts into that load. Again, our 10
>Ohm resistor with 8.333 volts across it dissipates 6.9444 Watts.
>
>So, hey, it works! We can swap the two models back and forth and get
>accurate analysis of voltages, currents and power dissipated in the load
>and
>source. Cool! But now at this point, we might be misled into thinking
>that
>the models will therefore work for efficiency calculations. Let's see if
>that's valid.
>
>In our Thevenin model, the internal resistor drops what the load didn't.
>That would amount to 50-8.3333 or 42.6666 volts. The 50 Ohm resistor with
>that voltage across it dissipates 36.4 Watts. If we proceed with an
>efficiency analysis, we can calculate efficiency as Pload/(Pload + Pdiss),
>where Pdiss is the power dissipated in the source. This in our example
>will
>be 6.9444/(6.9444+36.4) = 16.02%. We say, no big deal. We aren't matched,
>efficiency should stink. So we think we are doing OK.
>
>Now let's switch to the Norton model. If you remember in the Norton model,
>we had 8.333 volts across both the 50 Ohm resistor and the 10 Ohm resistor
>in parallel. So the Pdiss in the 50 Ohm resistor with 8.333 volts across
>it
>is 1.388 Watts. The load resistor, meanwhile is dissipating 6.944 Watts.
>Our efficiency therefore is 6.944/(6.944 + 1.388) = 83.4%
>
>STOP! HOLD THE PHONE! WHOA! Our model just failed! Clearly, the
>Thevenin
>and Norton models are NOT equivalent for efficiency calculations, so it
>would be ludicrous for us to expect either one to be correct for efficiency
>calculations.
>
>As has been pointed out, the models must be used within their proper
>context. While the models are valid for calculating voltages and currents,
>the are NOT valid for calculating efficiencies. If the mathematical model
>is to be used and be used accurately, it must be valid in all cases.
>
>Conjugate matching impedances therefore, tells you NOTHING about the
>efficiency of the source or the system. It is quite possible that Zout and
>efficiency have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
>
>There, I am done. Many thanks to those who have discussed this with me off
>line and given me some good positive ideas and examples.
>
>73,
>
>Jon
>NA9D
>
>-------------------------------------
>Jon Ogden
>NA9D (ex: KE9NA)
>
>Member: ARRL, AMSAT, DXCC, NRA
>
>http://www.qsl.net/ke9na
>
>"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|