Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+SWR\s+and\s+amplifiers\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+SWR\s+and\s+amplifiers\s*$/: 34 ]

Total 34 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 23:12:54 +0000; There is something I don't completely understand about the effect of SWR on an amplifier. Perhaps someone here can clear it up? Let's say my SWR meter indicates 1000 watts forward and 100 watts refle; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00299.html (7,457 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Ron Youvan <ka4inm@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 19:46:23 -0400; There is something I don't completely understand about the effect of SWR on an amplifier. Perhaps someone here can clear it up? Let's say my SWR meter indicates 1000 watts forward and 100 watts refl; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00300.html (10,420 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Jim Garland <4cx250b@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 18:05:02 -0600; Bill, I believe the answer in your example is that the amplifier is only putting out 900 watts, all of which is being delivered to the antenna (neglecting losses in the transmission line). One way to; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00301.html (9,489 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 01:59:51 +0000; According to Ron, K4INM, (original post below) my hypothetical transmitter is putting out 1000 watts but only 900 is actually radiated into space. The 100 watt difference is lost in the transmission; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00302.html (10,195 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Alek Petkovic <vk6apk@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 10:12:20 +0800; No. Read it again. Ron was saying that 100% of the 1000 Watts, minus the compounded resistive losses is going out into space. Those losses would NOT amount to 100 Watts of dissipation. Therefore, wit; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00303.html (11,442 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 02:32:51 +0000; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: If I understand you correctly, my 100 watts of reflected power is only important because it increases feed line loss, correct? With a lossless feed line; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00304.html (8,684 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 02:44:57 +0000; I think here's what's happening: The meter shows 1000 watts of forward power and that is really true - the amplifier really is putting out 1000 watts. The 100 watts of reflected power is re-reflected; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00305.html (7,851 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 23:22:44 -0400; amplifier power is dissipated in the amplifier itself. Similarly, if we short circuit the amplifier output connector, so that the amplifier sees zero impedance, the SWR is also infinite and the same; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00306.html (8,723 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 22:30:13 -0500; Jim Garland has it right. Disregarding any line loss: Your amp is putting out 900 watts. The wattmeter shows 1000 watts because the reflected 100 watts is re-reflected back towards the antenna and ad; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00307.html (10,217 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 23:49:31 -0400; re-reflected back towards the antenna and adds to the 900 watts from the amp on the wattmeter. The wattmeter shows 1000 watts (assuming the wattmeter is a meter such as a Bird)." It's probably worth; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00308.html (8,210 bytes)
11. [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 22:10:38 -0700; <There is something I don't completely understand about the effect of <SWR on an amplifier. Perhaps someone here can clear it up? Let's say my SWR meter indicates 1000 watts forward and 100 watts ref; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00309.html (9,933 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Vic Rosenthal <k2vco.vic@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 08:15:25 +0300; Everything Ron said is correct-- except that when an amplifier is generating 1000 watts and feeding an antenna through a line with an SWR that results in 100 watts reflected power, the usual SWR/powe; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00310.html (12,735 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Vic Rosenthal <k2vco.vic@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 10:30:06 +0300; The 100 watts is not lost in the transmission line. It is not 'lost' at all. If you had a perfect transmission line, there would be no additional loss in a line with a high SWR over a matched line. V; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00312.html (12,348 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Vic Rosenthal <k2vco.vic@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 10:34:57 +0300; No, your forward power reading is not the power that will be delivered to the antenna less losses. That is only the case with a 1:1 SWR. In any other case, the forward power reading of the usual SWR; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00313.html (10,186 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: donroden@xxxxxxxxxx; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 04:24:08 -0500; A broke analog clock is right twice a day. For it to be right, you just have to know "when" to read it. If you could insert that same SWR meter at various lengths along your transmission line you mig; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00314.html (9,075 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 05:49:42 -0400; IIRC, SWR = (Forward power + reflected power) divided by (forward power - reflected power) And yes, additional power is lost due to the coax loss and number of reflections. IOW the number of times th; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00315.html (10,618 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: "sm0aom@xxxxxxxxx" <sm0aom@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 12:59:04 +0200 (CEST); The SWR meter should measure voltage reflection coefficient or "gamma". These are vector quantities having magnitude and phase which can both add and subtract, and in a lossless line they are constan; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00316.html (11,478 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: Thomas Walsh <w2co@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 06:48:42 -0600; And some of the reflected power ends up as "waste heat" in the final and tank circuit. Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://l; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00317.html (11,591 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <dj7ww@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 16:01:32 +0200; And how can it enter into it? 73 Peter, DJ7WW And some of the reflected power ends up as "waste heat" in the final and tank circuit. Sent from my iPad generating 1000 watts and feeding an antenna thr; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00318.html (12,437 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] SWR and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: donroden@xxxxxxxxxx; Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 09:05:38 -0500; Just like the clock that is only correct twice a day, even the highly regarded Bird 43 "wattmeter" isn't always measuring what you think it is measuring. Don W4DNR Quoting Bill Turner <dezrat@xxxxxxx; /archives//html/Amps/2017-05/msg00319.html (12,084 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]