Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Understanding the s11 and s21 coefficients of a microstrip line with resistor to ground

Parent

Understanding the s11 and s21 coefficients of a microstrip line with resistor to ground

+2
−0

I thought I understood the theory of scattering parameters, smith charts etc. until I tried a practical example.

The following stupid example is supposed to be a microstrip line shunted by two 100 Ohm resistors to ground, that is, an equivalent resistance of 50 Ohm (also checked at DC with a voltmeter). microstrip 50ohm

Note: the bottom of the plate is copper plated.

Now, I cannot afford a good network analyzer, so I bought a nanoVNA network analyzer (image below). Admittedly, this is a toy, but it is a well regarded toy, especially for frequencies below 300MHz. So, I assume it gives not so bad results for this experiment. nanovna

Note: the analyzer has been calibrated.

Testing the example above, here are the results returned by the nanoVNA:

vnaResults1 The yellow line is s11, approximately -9db, and the blue line is s21, approximately -3.53 db, measured and constant in the range 10kHz - 1GHz.

Now, -9 dB is equivalent to a ratio of 0.34 approximately, and -3.53 db is equivalent to a ratio of 0.66 approximately. I expected S11 to be near 0. Regarding s21, I didn't know exactly what to expect.

Notice that these measurements begin at 10 kHz, where everything should behave like the theory, due to the very low frequency.

Trying to understand these values, I finally found an excellent article, full of practical data.

Now, according to fig. 1, it seems that the stimulus has an output impedance of 50 ohm. This is my first question:

Question 1: Should we assume that network analyzers are built in such a way the stimulus (signal toward the port) has an output impedance of 50 ohm?

Question 2: How to understand the above results ?

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (3 comments)
Post
+2
−0

In the absence of VNA product documentation......

Now, -9 dB is equivalent to a ratio of 0.34 approximately, and -3.53 db is equivalent to a ratio of 0.66 approximately. I expected S11 to be near 0.

A 9 dB return loss is a reflection coefficient of $\pm$0.355. Accounting for slight discrepancies in the measurement, I suspect that the reflection coefficient ($\Gamma$) might in fact be -0.3333 (somewhere between 9 dB and 10 dB of return loss). And, a $\Gamma$ of -0.3333 would be obtained from a 25 Ω resistor relative to a measurement reference of 50 Ω: -

$$\Gamma = \dfrac{R_x- 50}{R_x + 50}$$

Plugging 25 Ω into $R_x$ means $\Gamma$ is -0.3333 and return loss is $-20 log_{10}{|\Gamma|}\text{ dB}$ = -9.54 dB.

So, why 25 Ω? It's the input impedance of the VNA in parallel with two 100 Ω resistors in parallel inside the soldered blob i.e. 25 Ω.

Regarding s21, I didn't know exactly what to expect.

If you used a straight cable with no 100 Ω resistors fitted then I would expect 0 dB but, now that the power is shared between the two parallel 100 Ω resistors and the input of the VNA, the signal power level measured by the VNA is half or -3.01 dB. OK the cable and other errors makes this -3.53 dB.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (6 comments)
General comments
coquelicot‭ wrote over 3 years ago · edited over 3 years ago

@Andy, we have written answers in parallel. I'm happy to see that your condensed answer coincides with mine.

coquelicot‭ wrote over 3 years ago

And as always, where I have to spend hours to understand the math, you just feel things, and you feel them right.

coquelicot‭ wrote over 3 years ago

Note: Actually, the analyzer displayed -9.28db at the marker position, as can be hardly seen (a ratio of 0.3435). I've incorrectly approximated with -9db in the question.

coquelicot‭ wrote over 3 years ago

@Andy. Actually, our answers do not coincide for s21. You say that the expected s21 should be 0.5, but I've computed it should be 0.66... as indicated by the analyzer. Is there some mistake in my answer or yours?

Andy aka‭ wrote over 3 years ago

@coquelicot‭ I think S21 would be 0 dB for a straight through wire with no added resistors. But, without documentation, it's just a guess.

coquelicot‭ wrote over 3 years ago · edited over 3 years ago

@Andy. Actually, in my answer, the analyzer output impedance of 50 ohm I've assumed and added inside the schematics (to the left) plays no role: everything is function of U1 alone, and the same results would hold if the output impedance at the s11 terminal had been something else. I think this impedance may play a role for computing the s-coeff of more complex devices, so, I've included it for the sake of completeness.