硬件和射频工程师

 找回密码
 立即注册
查看: 671|回复: 9

Assigning port in CST

[复制链接]
发表于 2014-10-2 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
Can someone tell me if there is a minimum dimension of the waveguide port for any transmission line? Is it related to wavelength somehow? And also when I try to use only a small area to define a port in a microstrip line in CST it shows "error during calculation"
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-10-2 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
The size must be large enough to capture the electric and magnetic field in the port region. Large enough so that the field outside the port area does not matter.      
  
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-10-3 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
Hi volker,
Thanks for your reply. Was wondering why CST shows an error, when I assign a port to a microstrip line at the stripline( dimensions of the port= dimensions of the stripline, except for the height/thickness equal to the substrate. Once I increases the width of the port, it simulates well. Now my question is why do I have to invrease the width? Why is it such a necessity?      
  
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-10-3 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
     Can you show a picture?

     Can you show a plot of the electric field around your line (near the port), so that we can compare it to the size of your wave port?      
  
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-10-3 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训



Please have a look at the attached image and perhaps suggest a reason for such behavior. I've added the E-filed at the two ports just as you wanted.
Many Thanks!      
  
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-10-3 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
     Ooops ... I thought that you would see it yourself from the pictures ....

It is very obvious that the small port area is much to small. In the left plot, you can see that field is not only under the line, but it goes left and right into the dielectric. This is what we expect from a microstrip. CST complains about your small port area because the size is too small to model the fields of the microstrip (which extend to the left and right of the conductor also). Rule of thumb is port width = 3 * conductor width.

Looking at the E field lines at the top of your large port, we can see that they are quite dense. This indicates that you should increase the port size in z direction. Rule of thumb is port height = 3 * substrate height.      
                                         
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-10-3 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
Hi Volker,
Many Thanks for the reply. I'm actually aware of the rule of thumbs which is Width(port)=6*Wf(width of feedline) & Height of port(5*h+t) [h=height of substrate; t=thickness of ground plane]. Now my question was actually, don't know whether you've noticed or not that in Fig 2(previous image) The port end(downwards) didn't reach the end of the substrate or ground plane. Now when I created a port that touches the ground plane [height=1.2mm (substrate)+1mm(above)], it doesn't give any error and the results I've attached here. Hence I guess CST ports tolerate a minimum height of port of 1.8*h and also it must touch or come atleast in level with the ground plane.

      
  
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-10-3 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
     Ok, indeed I missed that.

     Sure, the port must be able to excite the correct mode of the transmission lines. This means we need both signal and return (ground).

     Tolerate is the wrong word ... you won't get an error message, but results for the port excitation will not be accurate.

One more comment: In your picture, there are grounds on the sides. That configuration is grounded CPW, not microstrip, and for accurate results we need to include the additional conductors as well. Then, because of the many different ways to excite the 4 conductors, you will need to help CST with finding the mode that you are interested in. I'm not a CST user myself, so I don't know how CST has implemented that mode setting. In other tools, you typically identify conductor with plus and minus to define the mode of interest.      
                                         
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-9-30 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
Hi Volker,
Firstly Thanks for your reply. Now you are absolutely right, the design that I uploaded is a cpw, and was trying to assign waveguide port to observe the field pattern across the transmission line. Can you also help me to give me an idea as to how the surface current pattern would look like in a cpw structure, and do you think the pattern would look to some extent different than a microstrip line?      
  
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2014-9-30 00:00:00 | 显示全部楼层
易迪拓培训微波射频和天线设计培训
     Yes, it will be different.

For your grounded CPW, the strips on both sides of the "signal" conductor have to be connected to the bottom ground. With these three conductors at the same voltage, most of the E field will be between the center conductor and bottom ground, but you will also see relevant field to the side grounds, because that distance (capacitance) isn't that much more than the distance (capacitance) to the bottom ground. For correct line impedance, you need all these conductors in the port excitation.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|硬件和射频工程师  

GMT+8, 2018-1-22 17:52 , Processed in 0.184177 second(s), 19 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

CoprRight © 20011-2014 hwrf.com.cn

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表