What happened to the post with the links? It appear to have been deleted?
I did check one of the linked articles. Conceptually it was okay, but the math was questionable. They considered the rise time to determine a mid-point, but did not consider at 0 time (start of rise), there is no signal to reflect and what you need to consider is both the amplitude of the initial arrival plus the amplitude of the reflection which is signal and mismatch dependent. With poor matching, that 1.5m could be longer (or shorter) and there will be one length that will be approximately the worst, and that is probably near 1.5m though it could be anywhere between 1-2 meters.
One of the articles talks about speeding up the edges, but the best thing to do is just to use proper impedance matching.
I did check one of the linked articles. Conceptually it was okay, but the math was questionable. They considered the rise time to determine a mid-point, but did not consider at 0 time (start of rise), there is no signal to reflect and what you need to consider is both the amplitude of the initial arrival plus the amplitude of the reflection which is signal and mismatch dependent. With poor matching, that 1.5m could be longer (or shorter) and there will be one length that will be approximately the worst, and that is probably near 1.5m though it could be anywhere between 1-2 meters.
One of the articles talks about speeding up the edges, but the best thing to do is just to use proper impedance matching.