Timeline for Contradiction between wave impedance mismatch and transmission line theory
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27 at 10:15 | vote | accept | rr1303 | ||
| Mar 27 at 10:15 | comment | added | rr1303 | Great, thanks for the insight! | |
| Mar 27 at 0:13 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | yes, that's what I wanted you to understand: important to know which formula applies where! | |
| Mar 26 at 17:02 | comment | added | rr1303 | Right, that's the key here! The wave is confined within the waveguide and the general unbounded reflection coefficient \$ \Gamma = \frac{\eta_2 - \eta_1}{\eta_2 + \eta_1} \$ is therefore of little to no use. Is this the correct idea? | |
| Mar 26 at 16:09 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | "travelling through a homogeneous medium" is not the same as "travelling through a waveguide filled with a medium" | |
| Mar 26 at 14:15 | comment | added | rr1303 | In that same article, first paragraph at the very beginning: “For a transverse-electric-magnetic (TEM) plane wave traveling through a homogeneous medium, the wave impedance is everywhere equal to the intrinsic impedance of the medium.” | |
| Mar 26 at 14:00 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | the expression is correct. it just doesn't matter here :) And you'll really have to point out specifically where wikipedia says that, because I literally just am looking at the Wave Impedance article, and while it's really badly structured, it doesn't say that. | |
| Mar 26 at 13:59 | comment | added | rr1303 | Interesting, then what would be the correct expression for \$ \eta \$? Wikipedia points out that for a TEM (like the ones within a transmission line) the wave impedance matches the intrinsic impedance of the material (it doesn’t say the same for TE and TM modes though). | |
| Mar 26 at 13:27 | history | answered | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 4.0 |