Circuit Response
every model has an edge, and the figure carries it
Concept

Quarter-wave transformer — where it appears

A length of line a quarter of a wavelength long, whose characteristic impedance is the geometric mean of the two it joins, matching one to the other. It is exact at one frequency and its band narrows as the transformation grows, which is what several cascaded sections are for.

Named by 3 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Matching 50 Ω to 200 Ω with 51.7 mm of 100.0 Ω line. computed by solving, not by drawing at 261 frequencies. The reflection at the design frequency is 4.6e-17 — nothing, to the arithmetic — against 0.600 for the bare junction, which throws 36% of the power back. It stays under 0.1 from 0.914 to 1.086 of that frequency, a band of 17.1%.

A quarter wave, and the path the current takes back

A line a quarter of a wavelength long, whose impedance is the geometric mean of the two it joins, matches them exactly — reflecting 5×10⁻¹⁷ of what arrives, which is the arithmetic's floor. At one frequency. Seventeen per cent either side of it the reflection is back to a tenth, and that band is the whole of what the technique is worth.

lines · Matching 3 quarter-wave sections between 50 Ω and 200 Ω. computed by solving, not by drawing. |Γ| computed by cascading exact line impedances from the load back to the source, so every multiple reflection is in it. The binomial design is exact at the centre and holds |Γ| below 0.10 over 67.9% of the centre frequency, against 17.1% for a single section. The equal-ripple design, found by minimax search rather than from a table, covers 98.1% at the same worst reflection — 45% more — and its ripples come out level to 0.0e+0%, which is the check that the search converged.

Several sections, and the band they buy

A quarter-wave transformer is exact at one frequency, and a 4:1 transformation holds |Γ| under 0.1 over 17.1% of it. Several sections whose reflections cancel over a band take that to 47.7, 67.9, 82.1 and 92.6% — which is filter design with the reflection as the shaped quantity. An equal-ripple design found by minimax search buys a further 35 to 46% at the same worst reflection, and its ripples come out level to four decimals.

lines · Matching 5 sections, equal ripple, and the band that is 134% rather than 97. computed by solving, not by drawing. The repaired five-section equal-ripple design over the band it was designed for. The horizontal rule is the 0.1 the specification allows and the 4 interior peaks sit on it, level to 8.5e-4 per cent — which is the condition for a minimax solution and is now checked rather than assumed. The dots are the eighty-one frequencies the objective used to be evaluated at: the worst of them is 0.09999998 and the worst of the design over the whole band is 0.10013858, so an optimiser shown only the dots drove them down to the specification and left the true peaks 13.9 parts in ten thousand above it. That is nothing until something downstream is a threshold, and the band measurement was one: it reported 97.34 per cent for a design that holds 134.04.

The number that was wrong

The rung below printed 97.3 per cent of band for a five-section transformer where the answer is 134, said in its own text that the figure was wrong, and blamed a search that had converged to eight digits. The search was fine. The objective was the worst of a grid rather than the worst of a band, the band was then measured by bisecting a function that crosses its threshold five times, and the assertion guarding all of it passed — because 97.3 is still more than 92.6.

lines · Matching

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Impedance matchingChebyshevReflection coefficientBandwidthBisectionClosed formFilter orderFractional bandwidthLoop areaNumerical errorReturn currentVerification

All concepts