OwenDuffy.net 

(Moore 2013) gives a series of examples based on lossless transmission line and a lossless inductance to support his propositions about the behaviour of an Antenna Tuning Unit (ATU) in an antenna system.
His examples are based around:
Moore suggests an equivalence between the loading coil and an ATU: [w]hat
if we put the "loading coil" in a box at the source and call it an "antenna
tuner"?
Moore arrives at the conclusion:
It seems to the author that since the "antenna tuner" has the same effect on the load whether it is located at the load or at the source, an Old Wives' Tale has bit the dust.
The question is does the "antenna tuner" ha[ve] the same effect
on the load whether it is located at the load or at the source
in the real world?
Let us work the same problem with practical system components. For the exercise, lets assume:
Note that it is not possible to match the real world system with a simple inductor at the source end, so for consistency, the T match ATU simulation will be used for matching at the source and load end. In fact, only a lossless inductor can match at the source end with this example, so further reason why a more general ATU is used in this article.
Efficiency will be calculated as the power delivered to the feed point as a percentage of the power delivered by the transmitter.
Lets find the total system efficiency when the ATU is used to match the 50j500Ω load and that is connected to the transmitter using one wavelength of Belden 8267.
"Matched" in this section means the ATU is adjusted to deliver an impedance of 50+j0Ω to the feed line.
So, first we must find the efficiency of the ATU in transforming the 50j500Ω load to the nominal feed line Zo of 50+j0Ω.
Fig 1 shows the solution of the ATU problem using A TNetwork Tuner Simulator. ATU efficiency is 10023.0=77.0%.
Next step is to find the transmission line loss with the ATU's input impedance of 50+j0Ω as a load.
RF Transmission Line Loss CalculatorLoad end match

Fig 2 shows the solution of the transmission line connecting the transmitter to the ATU input. Using RF Transmission Line Loss Calculator the line efficiency is 87.51%.
Combined efficiency of line and ATU is 77.0%*87.51%= 67.38%, ie 67% of the transmitter output power is delivered to the antenna feed point.
Note that the load delivered to the transmitter at 50.00j0.06Ω is not perfect, a subtle effect of Zo of RG213 line theoretically not being 50+j0Ω and a consequent by product of adjusting the ATU for 50+j0Ω match at the load end of the line (as would usually be done in practice). The Mismatch Loss caused to a source with equivalent source impedance of 50+j0Ω is less than 0.000dB.
Fig 3 shows distribution of power in the load end matched solution.
Now lets find the total system efficiency when the ATU is used to match the source end of one wavelength of Belden 8267 with a load of 50j500Ω.
"Matched" in this section means the ATU is adjusted to deliver an impedance of 50+j0Ω to the transmitter.
First step is to find the transmission line loss with the a load impedance of 50j500Ω.
RF Transmission Line Loss CalculatorSource end match

Fig 4 shows the solution of the transmission line connecting the ATU output to to the load. Using RF Transmission Line Loss Calculator the line efficiency is 12.76% and the load presented to the ATU is 244.56j314.27Ω.
Next step is to find the efficiency of the ATU in transforming the 244.56j314.27Ω load to the nominal feed line Zo of 50+j0Ω.
Fig 5 shows the solution of the ATU problem using A TNetwork Tuner Simulator. ATU efficiency is 1006.8=93.2%. The impedance at the input to the ATU is 50+j0Ω (it was adjusted for that goal) and since the assumed transmitter equivalent source impedance is 50+j0Ω, the is a conjugate match at this junction.
Combined efficiency of line and ATU is 12.76%*93.2%= 11.89%, ie 12% of the transmitter output power is delivered to the antenna feed point.
Fig 6 shows distribution of power in the load end matched solution.
Fig 7 shows the T match looking back towards the transmitter (right hand side of Fig 6). The impedance looking into the T match towards the transmitter is 258.95+j281.85Ω. Note that the at this junction looking towards the load has already been calculated to be 244.56j314.27Ω. The impedances looking each way are not conjugates, not nearly, there is NOT a conjugate match at this junction.
RF Transmission Line Loss Calculator

Fig 8 shows the solution of the transmission line looking back from the load to the ATU. The impedance seen looking into the line is 236.07+j143.42Ω, and the stated load impedance is 50j500Ω. The impedances looking each way are not conjugates, not nearly, there is NOT a conjugate match at this junction.
(Moore 2013a), makes the statement:
If we disconnect the antenna and measure the impedance looking back toward the shack, in a lowloss system, we will measure pretty close to the conjugate of the antenna feedpoint impedance at the transmit frequency.
This statement depends on the meaning of lowloss system
and it is
true if lowloss system means zero loss, ie lossless. The above work through of
the example that (Moore 2013) uses, but applied to a practical low loss
transmission line and practical ATU model shows the folly of applying lossless
assumptions to the real world without having quantified or otherwise adequately
addressed the error.
Firstly, the above analysis is of Moore's example load but with real world transmission line and ATU losses for a typical 3.6MHz implementation brought to book. The outcome applies to the scenario modeled and may not be directly applicable to other scenarios.
Moore's conclusion [i]t seems to the author that since the "antenna tuner"
has the same effect on the load whether it is located at the load or at the
source
might be supported by his choice of an example, but the working of an
example based on the same load impedance and line length but using practical
transmission line loss and ATU loss reveals a quite different picture where load
end matching results in more than five times the radiated power.
Moore makes the statement:
For the sake of simplicity, transmission line losses, which make the calculations much more complex, have not been taken into account. Failure to include losses does not negate the concepts presented in this article. Note that the conjugate matching theorem applies only to lossless networks and just comes close for lowloss networks.
Well no, [f]ailure to include losses
has led Moore to the false
conclusion that the "antenna tuner" has the same effect on the load whether
it is located at the load or at the source
.
He states in the following discussion [s]ince the conjugate
matching theorem assumes lossless transmission lines which cannot exist in
reality, I would be an absolute fool to assert that a conjugate match is even
possible in the real world
.
The last statement is somewhat confused, the Conjugate Matching Theorem
is probably that popularised by (Maxwell 2001) and his disciples, but originally from (Everitt
1937) who proposed:
If a group of fourterminal networks containing only pure reactances are arranged in tandem to connect a generator to a load, then if at any junction there is a conjugate match of impedances, there will be a conjugate match of impedances at every other junction in the system
To the extent that a lossless transmission line can be represented by a
fourterminal networks containing only pure reactances
, lossless
transmission lines could form part of such a system.
Moore's statement is confused because Everitt's theorem does not to prevent a conjugate match existing at one or more points in a practical (ie lossy) system, just that it does not guarantee that a conjugate match exists at all points in the system simultaneously.
Moore has used a carefully contrived example to support (peddle) his 'concepts', an example he acknowledges cannot exist the real world and without accurately quantifying and adequately addressing the error that results from his approximation, a somewhat confused approach.
It is yet another example where inferring solutions to real world problems from lazy application of lossless analysis may give a false result.
The analysis here did not depend on the Maximum Power Transfer Theorem or conjugate match concepts, much less Everitt's simultaneous system wide conjugate match though much of (Moore 2013) tries to explain these concepts at length as if they underpin the correct solution. Before the Maximum Power Transfer Theorem can be applied to such a problem, it is necessary to demonstrate that a plot of source V,I is a sufficiently straight line that a Thevenin equivalent circuit of the source is a valid model, and that was not done.
Version  Date  Description 
1.01  31/03/2013  Initial. 
1.02  
1.03  
1.04  
1.05 