Date
1  1 of 1
A quick correction
WK9M
Hi all; something I noticed late last night after I reread that
article below. And a little correction.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
When comparing VSWR voltages, you have to compare apples to apples. i.e. peak voltage to peak voltage; not compare the rms (the DC equivalent) to peak voltage. The article mentions the rms formula and then goes on to compare it to the peak formula. Just using the same formula below with SWR=1 is more straightforward. So... 1:1 Vpk=sqrt(100*100*1)=100v 3:1 Vpk=sqrt(100*100*3)=173.2v Now you see this is even less dramatic than 3x the voltage. Ironically it's 73% more voltage. I've seen that 73 number somewhere before. '73 Randy
On 9/22/2020 5:10 PM, RK wrote:
Sounds good Allan; the actual loss depends on transmission line quality and frequency then as we chatted on the phone when I was by Ralph's earlier. i.e the losses would be much greater with a long run at 440MHz and 3:1 as it bounces back and forth. Maybe we should just superconducting coax and then the answer is always 100%? Ok so maybe not practical on that one. :)

