- 1. [AMPS] Re: Conjugate match (score: 1)
- Author: w8jitom@postoffice.worldnet.att.net (w8jitom@postoffice.worldnet.att.net)
- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 08:33:21 +0000
- To: <amps@contesting.com> I thought so. That parameter is NOT what we measure looking back into the PA. It would be like matching the resistance change of a tube or voltage in a power source by hold
- /archives//html/Amps/1997-09/msg00080.html (9,526 bytes)
- 2. [AMPS] Re: conjugate match (score: 1)
- Author: w8jitom@worldnet.att.net (Tom Rauch (W8JI))
- Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 09:47:58 -0500
- Orr's statement is incorrect. This is a topic many amateur texts get wrong. The only person who wrote anything for amateur texts that has it all correct is Walt Maxwell, in his book Reflections. The
- /archives//html/Amps/1997-03/msg00092.html (12,547 bytes)
- 3. [AMPS] Re: conjugate match (score: 1)
- Author: dick.green@valley.net ("Dick Green".)
- Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 18:24:21 -0500
- Thanks, Tom. That cleared up a lot for me. The 1995 ARRL Handbook says basically the same thing, although somewhat less clearly (p 13.3, ff). They say that a Class A amplifier operating with a conjug
- /archives//html/Amps/1997-03/msg00095.html (7,175 bytes)
- 4. [AMPS] Re: conjugate match (score: 1)
- Author: jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid)
- Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 14:16:16 -1000
- Comment: If a transmission line is operating in a conjugate matched system, cut the line anywhere: measure the impedance looking forward, then in the back directions. The real part, the resistance, w
- /archives//html/Amps/1997-03/msg00097.html (10,879 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu