[SI-LIST] Re: S11 and S21 for PCB trace with different dielectic think
- From: Ralph Wilson <wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: bradb@xxxxxxxxxxx, si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 06:44:53 -0600
OK, the details of this have had me pondering for some time.... (my
transmission line theory
class was waaaayyyyy to long a go). When we say "renormalize
the S-parameters", what is really going on? and when do I need to
renormalize?
If I have a 50 ohm system under test (SUT), and a 50 ohm test system
(VNA), and the results
I want are for 50 ohms, I assume no renormalization is necessary. If,
however, as
suggested below, I have a 75 Ohm SUT and a 50 Ohm VNA I get reflections
at the
connection between the two, and my S11 / S21 measurements get
discombobulated
due to the mismatch. Now, if I really want a 75 Ohms system, do I
renormalize the
results (since the VNA was 50 Ohms)? To which - 50 Ohms or 75 Ohms -
in this
case, which value is the "base" (non-normalized) and which would I
normalize to?
Can I use the results in a 75 Ohm system simulation?
Thanks,
Ralph Wilson
Alcatel-Lucent
Brad Brim wrote:
> hi John,
>
> You'll see the same thing if you use a 50 ohm network analyzer to measure a
> 75 ohm system :-)
>
> Yes, you are seeing impedance mismatch from your ports/probes to the system
> you are simulating. Simply renormalize the S-parameters to the impedance of
> the nets. You can simulate a single net in isolation to extract its
> impedance or simply get the impedance of the lines from the field solver,
> available in some simulators for certain port setups.
>
> cheers,
> -Brad
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Kwan
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 9:15 PM
>> To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [SI-LIST] S11 and S21 for PCB trace with different
>> dielectic think
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am trying to extract the S11 and S21of some PCB traces
>> using one of the field solver tools. The traces are running
>> on top of a solid ground plane, and I run the simulation for
>> two different dielectric thickness settings. In one case, the
>> Zo for the trace is around 50-ohm, and the other case the Zo
>> is around 80-ohm. The S11 and S21 for the two case is quite
>> different. The insertion loss S21 is much less and smoother
>> through out the frequency range in the case of 50-ohm. The
>> reflection coefficient S11 is also much closer to zero in the
>> case of 50-ohm.
>>
>> Is it because the port reference is set to 50-ohm for the
>> simulation, so the result for the 50-ohm case is much better?
>> If so, how can we use the result if the system is not 50-ohm
>> in the real case?
>>
>> Regards,
>> John
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from si-list:
> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
>
> or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
>
> For help:
> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
>
>
> List technical documents are available at:
> http://www.si-list.net
>
> List archives are viewable at:
> http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> or at our remote archives:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.net
List archives are viewable at:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
Other related posts: