Xref: utzoo rec.ham-radio:5365 sci.electronics:3303 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!amdahl!pacbell!att!whuts!mhuxh!mhuxu!res1 From: res1@mhuxu.UUCP (Rick Stealey) Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,sci.electronics Subject: Re: monimatch? Summary: better than monimatch Message-ID: <7803@mhuxu.UUCP> Date: 13 Jul 88 21:34:08 GMT References: <25048@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 17 > > are there better ways of making an swr meter 26 years later? is > there a place to buy items like the ``monimatch?'' Today the monimatch type of swr bridge has pretty much given way to the toroid transformer type of detector. The transmission line goes through the core of a small donut, and the two small windings are used for detecting the forward and reverse current, and detected with diodes the same way as the monimatch. There are two advantages: :the mechanical arrangement is simpler the outputs are not dependent on frequency (well, not as much) so that you get an output that you can calibrate as a power meter. I built one and the mail problem with it is balancing it so that reverse current is not detected by the forward meter and vice versa. GL with it. 73 de KT2Q -- Rick Stealey {ihnp4}!mhuxu!res1