To keep the transmitter happy, yes, a low SWR is the best. For most
efficient operation of the antenna/feedline resonance is best.
Dave - W?LEV
<>
Virus-free.www.avg.com
<>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 5:10?PM Salvatore Terress via groups.io
<salvatoreterress@...> wrote:
Would it be correct to state that for transmit purpose - the SWR is the
defining component, not the resonance of the antenna proper ?
On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 1:03?PM W0LEV via groups.io <davearea51a=
[email protected]> wrote:
You are so correct. In my many models and in using SimSmith, the "last"
was left with an optional Zo of 1050 ohms, NOT 50 OHMS! The 1050 ohms
was
input into the model to simulate the effect of an ideal 21:1 BB
transformer. I didn't notice or remember that when I hit "copy".
Thank you for calling out my error!
Dave - W?LEV
On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 5:58?PM Fran?ois via groups.io <18471=
[email protected]> wrote:
The qualitative conclusion here is that a "wild"
impedance value of 890 - j418 which is far from resonance can and
does
yield an acceptable
SWR.
I guess there might be a mistake
If Z=890 + j418 Ω then, relative to 50 Ω
ROS=21.7
|S11| = 0.91
S11 = 0.91 -j 0.04
In fact the point you have drawn does indeed produce a ROS < 2 but the
impedance it represents is not
890 + j418 Ω or the normalization impedance, which you do not specify,
is
not 50 Ω
--
F1AMM
Fran?ois
De la part de W0LEV
Envoyé : mercredi 4 septembre 2024 18:55
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
--
Dave - W?LEV
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
--
Dave - W?LEV
