Phase Change in a transmission line

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the phase change in a transmission line of length 0.4λ using the equation βl = ωl/f, where β is the phase constant. The solution confirms that β can also be expressed as β = 2π/λ, leading to the same result of 2.513 radians for the phase change. The relationship between angular frequency (ω) and frequency (f) is clarified, establishing that ω = 2πf. The discussion concludes that understanding these equations is crucial for analyzing transmission lines effectively.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave mechanics, specifically phase constants.
  • Familiarity with transmission line theory.
  • Knowledge of angular frequency and its relationship to frequency.
  • Basic proficiency in algebraic manipulation of equations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the phase constant β in transmission lines.
  • Learn about the significance of wavelength (λ) in transmission line calculations.
  • Explore the use of Smith charts for impedance matching in RF applications.
  • Investigate the effects of frequency on transmission line performance.
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, telecommunications professionals, and students studying transmission line theory and wave propagation.

David J
Gold Member
Messages
140
Reaction score
15

Homework Statement


(a) A transmission line has a length, ##l##, of 0.4λ. Determine the phase change, ##\beta l##, that occurs down the line.

Homework Equations


##\beta=\frac{\omega}{f\lambda}## or ##\beta=\frac{2\pi}{\lambda}##

The Attempt at a Solution


This question was posted a couple of years ago. I wanted to ask questions in that original thread but the last post requested people not to use old threads but start new ones.
Thus this post.
My notes give me the equation
##\beta=\frac{\omega}{f\lambda}##
The original solution that was posted back in 2015 is shown below and used this equation.

β = ω / fλ
∴ βℓ = ω 0.4λ / fλ
= ω 0.4 / f
= 0.4x2π f / f
= 0.8π (=2.513 to 3d.p.)

##\beta=\frac{\omega}{f\lambda}## I understand this
The question is asking me to determine the phase change which is ##\beta l## or ##\beta## multiplied by ##l##

so ##\beta l =\frac{\omega(0.4\lambda)}{f\lambda}## What exactly has happened here?

I can see that the ##0.4\lambda## has been introduced to the equation but I don't understand why it has been inserted at that point

I can see below that the ##\lambda## have been removed as they cancel each other out
##=\frac{\omega(0.4)}{f}##

This next part I am struggling to understand. Suddenly there is a ##2\pi f## introduced
so now we have ##=\frac{0.4(2\pi f)}{f}## Does ##\omega## in some way ##=2\pi##??

In the next step the ##f## appear to have canceled each other out and we are left with
##=0.8\pi=2.513## and I believe this answer is correct in radians

However

During the initial post it was recommended to use the equation ##\beta=\frac{2\pi}{\lambda}##

The statement was What was with the ω and f? β = 2π/λ so βl = (2π/λ)(0.4λ) = 2.513 radians.

So from this I am guessing that ##\omega## does in fact ##=2\pi##

##\beta=\frac{2\pi}{\lambda}##

I need to multiply ##\beta## by ##0.4l## so ##\beta l=\frac{2\pi}{\lambda}(0.4\lambda)##

The ##\lambda## cancel out so we are left with ##\beta l=(2\pi)(0.4)##

so ##\beta l=2.513##

The answer is the same as the first equation.

I have drawn this post out a bit by trying to explain my understanding of all of this. I understand the second method better than the first because in the first we had to deal with ##f## for which I did not have a value.

My question is, is my understanding of this correct ?
Does ##\omega=2\pi##
What is ##f##

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
David J said:
What is f

I'd say it's a safe bet the author uses ƒ for frequency in cycles per second
and ω for frequency in radians per second
of course there being 2π radians in a cycle, ω = 2πƒ

β then is radians per unit length ? 2π radians per wavelength?
We often use wavelengths instead of inches to describe transmission lines and antennas. After you've used Smith charts a couple times it'll be intuitive.
David J said:
My question is, is my understanding of this correct ?
I think you do understand it, just you can't believe it's so easy, ω = 2πƒ


good luck in your studies.
 
Yes I think i understand it a bit better now and it is easier than I thought
When you have this equation, βl=(2π)(0.4), the result relies purely on the ##\lambda## (wavelength) value because ##2\pi## is obviously fixed. It makes sense now.

Thanks for the advice with this
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K