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