What is the Relationship Between Impedance of Dielectric and Material?

  • Thread starter Thread starter unscientific
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reflection Wave
unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement



Part(a): Show relation between impedance of dielectric and impedance of material:

Part (b): Show the ratio between reflected and incident amplitude is:

Part (c): Three layers now from left: vacuum, dielectric 2 sandwiched inbetween, and dielectric 1.

Part (d): Give reasons why dielectric coatings are painted on glass transmission devices.

25f3io9.png


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Part(c)
Z_{in} = \frac {E_{(-l)}}{I_{(-l)}} = \frac {E_i e^{jkl} + E_r e^{-jkl} } {E_i e^{jkl} - E_r e^{-jkl} - E_r e^{-jkl} }Z = \frac { (Z_1 + Z_2)e^{jkl} + (Z_1 - Z_2)e^{-jkl} } {(Z_L + Z) e^{jkl} - (Z_L - Z)e^{-jkl} } Z_2
Z_{in} = \frac {Z_2^2}{Z_1}
n_2^2 = n_1

To calculate ratio:
Consider boundary at z=0 between Z2 and Z1:
\frac{E_T}{E_I} = \frac {2Z_1}{Z_1 + Z_2} = \frac {2\sqrt{n_1}}{\sqrt{n_1} + n}

Consider Boundary at z = -λ/4 between Z0 and Z2:
\frac{E_T}{E_I} = \frac {2Z_2}{Z_0 + Z_2} = \frac {2}{\sqrt{n} + 1}

Then they are the same! Which is strange because there should be a standing wave in the sandwiched layer, which destructively interferes to poduce a smaller transmitted wave onto boundary z>0..

Part(d)
For impedance matching, so that maximum power is transmitted; no reflection.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bumpp
 
bumpp
 
bumppp
 
bbump
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top