Practical Implications of SWR
The most common case for measuring and examining SWR is when installing and tuning transmitting antennas. When a transmitter is connected to an antenna by a feed line, the impedance of the antenna and feed line must match exactly for maximum energy transfer from the feed line to the antenna to be possible. The impedance of the antenna varies based on many factors including: the antenna's natural resonance at the frequency being transmitted, the antenna's height above the ground, and the size of the conductors used to construct the antenna.
When an antenna and feedline do not have matching impedances, some of the electrical energy cannot be transferred from the feedline to the antenna. Energy not transferred to the antenna is reflected back towards the transmitter. It is the interaction of these reflected waves with forward waves which causes standing wave patterns. Reflected power has three main implications in radio transmitters: Radio Frequency (RF) energy losses increase, distortion on transmitter due to reflected power from load and damage to the transmitter can occur.
Matching the impedance of the antenna to the impedance of the feed line is typically done using an antenna tuner. The tuner can be installed between the transmitter and the feed line, or between the feed line and the antenna. Both installation methods will allow the transmitter to operate at a low SWR, however if the tuner is installed at the transmitter, the feed line between the tuner and the antenna will still operate with a high SWR, causing additional RF energy to be lost through the feedline.
Many amateur radio operators consider any impedance mismatch a serious matter. Power loss will increase as the SWR increases. For example, a dipole antenna tuned to operate at 3.75 MHz—the center of the 80 meter amateur radio band—will exhibit an SWR of about 6:1 at the edges of the band. However, if the antenna is fed with 250 feet of RG-8A coax, the loss due to standing waves is 2.2dB, which may seem like a small loss, but is on a logarithmic scale. If running a typical 100W transmitter on the HF band, 2.2dB of loss would reduce the output power to 60W. That is a 40% reduction in power. Feed line loss typically increases with frequency, so VHF and above antennas must be matched closely to the feedline. The same 6:1 mismatch to 250 feet of RG-8A coax would incur 10.8dB of loss at 146 MHz. However, a length of 250 feet would not likely be used for 2m VHF radios. Antennas for the 80m band frequently involve large or complex designs typically mounted on a tall tower with great distances needed between buildings and thus the transmitter. VHF requires a much smaller antenna, and unless being used on a high powered repeater, does not have a very tall tower. The most common usage of 2m band is mobile single or dual band VHF or VHF/UHF mobiles. Also in part due to the typical output power of a VHF band is 50W, due to the FCC requirement of RF exposure evaluations needing to be conducted on power greater than 50W in the 2m band. This 50W with the 250 feet of cable would be reduced to a tiny 5W with 10dB of loss. On the more rare occasion where a long transmission line is needed for 146 MHz, a higher quality low loss transmission line would be used instead of the relatively cheap RG-8A.
Read more about this topic: Standing Wave Ratio
Famous quotes containing the words practical and/or implications:
“Great statesmen seem to direct and rule by a sort of power to put themselves in the place of the nation over which they are set, and may thus be said to possess the souls of poets at the same time they display the coarser sense and the more vulgar sagacity of practical men of business.”
—Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924)
“Philosophical questions are not by their nature insoluble. They are, indeed, radically different from scientific questions, because they concern the implications and other interrelations of ideas, not the order of physical events; their answers are interpretations instead of factual reports, and their function is to increase not our knowledge of nature, but our understanding of what we know.”
—Susanne K. Langer (1895–1985)