Complex Permittivity: Solving Debye's Equation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving Debye's equation for complex permittivity in the context of an advanced signal integrity course. Participants express confusion about the necessity of using Maxwell's equations to derive a model for complex permittivity and how to incorporate conductivity into the permittivity coefficient. The conversation highlights the challenges faced by students in grasping the material, with some feeling overwhelmed by the course's complexity. Key points include the relationship between complex permittivity and conductivity, as well as the need to define loss tangent in relation to the graphs provided. Overall, the thread emphasizes the difficulty of the subject matter and the collaborative effort to understand the concepts.
polarmystery
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The problem statement is shown on the picture
[PLAIN]http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/1184/graphsq.jpg


Homework Equations



Debye's equation?

The Attempt at a Solution



Hey guys, I am trying to figure out how to obtain the equation for the graphs, but from what I understand, losses start vanishing after the pole seen @ ~17GHz. I say the relevant equation is the Debye equation for complex permittivity, but honestly I'm not sure. Any help as always is appreciated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Start with Maxwell's equation for H for a medium with finite conductivity. I'll help you more after that if necessary.
 
Last edited:
I guess I don't understand why we need to use Maxwell's equation to come up with a model for the line. Can you explain why that is necessary? (The chapter in our book doesn't seem to show anywhere in the complex permittivity section that this is necessary, but I wouldn't know either way).
 
Line? Whatb line?

Anyway, you're supposed to derive a model for complex permittivity so the way I look at it you should start with fundamentals.

OK, del x H = σE + ∂D/∂t = (σ + jwε)E transformed for sine waves, right, since ∂D/∂t = wD? And we can rewrite (σ + jwε) = jwε(1 + σ/jwε).

So if we were to substiture a complex εc = ε(1 + σ/jwε) you can see that we would be able to ignore σ from then on & pretend we have a non-conducting dielectric with complex permittivity εc.

So how about the next step?
 
Sorry about the line statement, I mistyped.

Give me some time to absorb what you typed, this subject is excruciatingly difficult for me to grasp.
 
Okay,

I still don't get why this is:

"So if we were to substitute a complex εc = ε(1 + σ/jwε) you can see that we would be able to ignore σ from then on & pretend we have a non-conducting dielectric with complex permittivity εc."

How does injecting εc = ε(1 + σ/jwε) into del x H = jwε(1 + σ/jwε) eliminate the conductivity? My fundamentals are pretty bad, just for the record.
 
It doesn't eliminate it, it incorporates it into the permittivity coefficient, which is now complex.

This is really on a level beyond elementary physics, how come you're involved in it?
Or has it been 'a while' since you had the fundamentals? Don't feel bad, same here, I have to re-learn a lot of what I post myself on the fly.
 
To be honest, this class is supposed to be an "introductory" course in signal integrity in grad school but our professor goes well beyond that when he gives us assignments (And when I signed up for it, I basically had no idea what I was getting into). The last time I had a course in electromagnetic fundamentals was well over 7 years ago, with the intention to NEVER take another Emag course again.

I'm going for a master's in computer engineering, with a focus on embedded systems/computer architecture. In hindsight, I probably should not have taken this course but it's too late to drop it to get any kind of refund. At this point I'm just going to ride it out and hope for the best, because well...there are 7 students (we started with 14, which 7 dropped) in our class and 5 of them failed (myself included) our midterms. I'm sure all of us feel the same way, but I virtually have no say in altering the professors teaching style and I'm just trying to get to the end, which is in 6 weeks time...

So yes, I'm virtually lost on most of it...but I'm trying my damnedest to finish tonight (as it's due tomorrow)
 
I feel for you, this is definitely part of an advanced course in e-m, in the sense of advanced beyond the Resnick & Halliday level (introductory physics for physics and engineering majors).

Define εc = ε0(ε' - jε''). Then loss tangent = ε''/ε' by definition.

Your graph is ε' = ε/ε0 vs. frequency. So you know ε' and you know ε''/ε' so now you know all you need for your modeling of εc or |εc|.
 
  • #10
Yeah I'll see if I can hack at it and try to come up with something. There are still 4 homework assignments left in the semester and I'm sure I'll post questions from them as well. Thanks again for all your help!

I'm probably going to be up all night trying to figure out the rest of my homework...
 
Back
Top