Custom Search
Over 9,000 pages indexed!
|
| Your Host |
 KirtBlattenberger ... single-handedly redefining what an engineering website should be.
5CCG (5th
MOB): |
|
Hobby & Fun Airplanes and Rockets: Equine Kingdom: Doggy Dynasty: |
| ||||||
| ||||||
| CPW Calculation - RF Cafe Forums | ||||||
|
Because of the high maintenance needed to monitor and filter spammers from the RF Cafe Forums, I decided that it would
be best to just archive the pages to make all the good information posted in the past available for review. It is unfortunate
that the scumbags of the world ruin an otherwise useful venue for people wanting to exchanged useful ideas and views.
It seems that the more formal social media like Facebook pretty much dominate this kind of venue anymore anyway, so if
you would like to post something on RF Cafe's
Facebook page, please do.
Below are all of the forum threads, including all the responses to the original posts. ljoseph Post subject: CPW Calculation Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:16 pm Captain Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:54 am Posts: 13 Location: Dallas Hello With the following parameters, I am getting different answers with different tools. H = 0.3mm Er = 4.25 W = 0.56mm T= 32.5um gap = 0.35mm Freq 1842 Mhz With this Agilent Appcad gives 50.2 ohms. AWR Tx line gives 47 ohms. Following online calculator gives 78 ohms. http://www1.sphere.ne.jp/i-lab/ilab/tool/cpw_e.htm Don't understand the reason for this difference. Top Jeanalmira Post subject: Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 3:01 am General Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:43 pm Posts: 65 Location: Singapore Hi ljoseph, the difference is the ground plane. I believe that for your first calculation (AppCad and AWR) you included the groundplane (CPW ground) While the online calculator is without ground plane. you can double check the setting thru AppCad and also AWR (CPW and CPW ground). Hope it helps. Regards, Jean Top imodelit_moderator Post subject: Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:40 am Captain Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 3:01 am Posts: 22 Dear ljoseph, I'm with Jeanalmira in his opinion. As for the lower impedance values you used -most probably- Grounded-Coplanar. While the larger values is for the conventional coplanar waveguide -without lower ground plane-. Kindly check this online applet, it is for conventional coplanar waveguide. http://imodelit.com/ViewDetails.aspx?AID=190 Thanks. Best Regards, imodelit Moderator Posted 11/12/2012 | ||||||
| ||||||
|
Please Support My Advertisers
|