Why Does Zin Calculation Differ in Single Stub Matching?

  • Thread starter Thread starter baby_1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Network
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a discrepancy in the Zin calculation during single stub matching, where the load impedance zl is 0.5 + 1.5i. Despite using both a Smith chart and analytical methods to match to a normalized line with Z0=50, the calculated Zin does not match the expected result of 0.5 + 1.5j. The issue arises from a potential error in the matching process, as the second image shows a different impedance of 0.5 - j1.5. Clarification is sought on the source of this inconsistency. Understanding the correct application of the Smith chart and impedance transformation is crucial for accurate results.
baby_1
Messages
159
Reaction score
16
Hello
As you see this problem with single stub matching
I matched zl=.5+1.5i to a normalized line (Z0=50)(I did it with smith chart and analytically) but as you see in the second picture as I calculate Zin it doesn't get me the same result (.5+1.5j).
2390138400_1435297056.jpg
what is my wrong?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
baby_1 said:
Hello
As you see this problem with single stub matching
I matched zl=.5+1.5i to a normalized line (Z0=50)(I did it with smith chart and analytically) but as you see in the second picture as I calculate Zin it doesn't get me the same result (.5+1.5j).
2390138400_1435297056.jpg
what is my wrong?
In the first picture the load is 0.5 + j1.5 and in the second it is 0.5 - j1.5.
 

Thread '3-terminal device external modeling'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Smith Chart: Calculating Impedance with Loss/Leakage
Replies
4
Views
3K
Designing a Microstrip Impedance Matching Circuit for 50Ω-j500Ω @900MHz
Replies
5
Views
10K
Increasing the 50 Ohm bandwidth of an impedance-matched system
Replies
19
Views
4K
A little help understanding 3 phase waveforms and summation
Replies
5
Views
2K
How Does a CRT TV Work?
Replies
30
Views
4K
I have questions for transmission line (impedance matching)
Replies
8
Views
3K
MHB Why does the ID and name get printed together when the ID is 5 characters?
Replies
7
Views
2K
I How does the raster scan frequency affect the accuracy of a CRT TV picture?
Replies
32
Views
3K
A Numerical Hartree Fock with Finite Difference Matrices for Helium
Replies
4
Views
2K
Underground pump vault airflow considerations
Replies
15
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top