Dear forum,
I was trying out two different approaches to calculate the dimensions of a ring resonator (sketch below) and got two slightly different solutions.
The first approach is to assume that the waveguide wavelength has to fit n times onto the circumference of the ring (taking the average...
The paper is exactly what I asked for, thank you. Especially equation 22 $$E_z=C_m I_m(\alpha \rho)F_m$$ for dielectric tubes should be the answer, if I understand it correctly that the wave will get damped in the core the closer it gets to the center and in the second dielectric I will see a...
Yes, I am talking about modes. Resonance comes from my cylindrical cavity. So I have a closed cylinder filled with one dielectric material and inside this cylinder another cylinder, with different radius and dielectric constant. Their height can be the same, but don't have to.
Dear Forum,
I would like to ask, if a certain construction is possible:
I have something like coaxial cable, but instead of a conductor at the core I have a different dielectric. Now I want the resonance outside the core to still happen, but not inside the core.
Is this possible? Because I...
Could it be that ##\frac{\lambda_w}{4}## only works, if you have ##\cos\alpha=\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_w}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}##? Because otherwise you have a different ##\lambda_w## in the arms than at the input?
It is a simulation, CST to be precise.
Here is a misunderstanding. I was not suggesting that the setup/simulation was wrong, but that I may have missed something in my calculation of the arm position. Maybe the corners add a weird contribution. Maybe I was reading the wrong books, because I...
Possible. You could use the GLS, after converting ##\Delta t## to ##\Delta s##. Then you can try to rewrite the estimator ##\hat \beta## such that it looks like an average.
P.S. No, it does not work with the mean. Here is an example, where you can see that the estimator is not the mean.
Usually I would agree, but in this case I have a computer simulation, so everything is perfect. Perfect vacuum, precise control, perfect conductor and so on.
Are you sure that you have a different error on all ##s## and ##t## measurements? I am asking, because it really makes it more complicated than high school math. Generally you would want to convert errors in x-direction into y-errors and than proceed normally. If this is not possible or the...
So, I now set both arms, 3 and 4, to ##\frac{\lambda_w}{4}\approx 43##mm length, but get the minima for dampening at ##\approx 2.4##GHz with -70dB and ##\approx 2.6##GHz with -50dB, referring to the frequency of the signal generator, while I would have expected 2.45GHz.
Yes, the load of around 523Ohm (even though I would have expected around 533.9Ohm) is the same at port 1 and 2.
I do not understand why. If the wave in arm 3 gets phase shifted by pi and the wave that would go into arm 4 instead is unchanged, I would expect destructive interference. But if both...
Here is the image. I used port 1 as input, port 2 as output, blocked port 3 and 4. Then I set the height of port 4 to 0mm and of port 3 to 3/8 of the wavelength.
I have some problems understanding the magic-tee. There is a configuration for the E and H arm, where the signal output is blocked. As far as I understand you should be able to set one arm to 0 and the other to 1/4 of a wavelength, so the reflected wave's phase will be shifted by pi compared to...