Smith Chart: Calculating Impedance with Loss/Leakage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Magna Visus
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on using the Smith Chart for calculating impedance in lines with leakage or loss, specifically addressing the method for adjusting reduced impedance when accounting for losses. It is suggested that one should calculate the loss in dB per wavelength and then translate the reduced impedance vertically on the chart to find the new impedance. While the Smith Chart is effective for visualizing impedance matching, some participants argue that it is more convenient for lossless lines and recommend using numerical methods for lossy lines. The Smith Chart remains a valuable educational tool for understanding impedance and admittance transformations. Overall, the conversation highlights both the utility and limitations of the Smith Chart in practical applications.
Magna Visus
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Hello guys,

I am using the Smith Chart to calculate impedance in lines, adapted lines, and lines with a stub in parallele (Short circuit).

I understood how to get Zin using the chart, first calculate reduced impedance, draw the circle, etc...

Now I have a question regarding this, and hopefully someone can clarify this.

If we have leakage/loss (γ=α+jβ and α non null) I have been told that I need to calculate how much loss in db/λ I have and then translate the old zin (reduced Zin) vertically by this same amount in oder to get the new zin, is this correct?

Thanks.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
anorlunda said:
ping @sophiecentaur . Another spring cleaning thread.
I think the Smith Chart is more convenient to use for lossless lines. I should imagine that the way to deal with a lossy line would be to take a number of short sections of line with lumped components added to give an equivalent value for the loss in each section of line. (using the sort of method that the OP describes, adding an appropriate Impedance or Admittance then rotating the chart by a small phase angle (That would need to be less than λ/8). This would produce a spiral of points, heading towards the centre of the chart.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
Thanks Sophie, that us the last of the EE spring cleaning threads.
 
anorlunda said:
Thanks Sophie, that us the last of the EE spring cleaning threads.
My answer was a pragmatic one for someone who wants to use the Smith Chart. It would be easier to use other numerical methods these days. The Smith Chart was a great tool and it is still a great way of showing graphically / qualitatively how matching stubs etc. work. It will show, approximately (and understandably) the effect of losses and it teaches 'the student' about hopping from impedance into admittance and back again in a way that I couldn't begin to replace. I only ever used it in that way - with easy values - but I had a colleague who was dynamite with the chart. AND he used it to produce things that WORKED.
 
Last edited:
Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...

Similar threads

Back
Top