|
A
more exact coax attenuation solution
Updated October
2, 2006
Click
here to go to our main page on transmission lines
Click here
to go to our main page on coax
Click
here to go to our page on coax loss calculations
Click
here to go to our download area and get coax.xls
New for September 2006! This
page shows something that we've never seen in a textbook or web
site or IEEE paper, a calculation of coax attenuation that makes
no assumptions about how many skin depths of metal you have in each
conductor. A calculation that Agilent's ADS gets wrong! Caution:
the material on this page might be useful under certain conditions,
but it might also be considered nerdly by your spouse so try not
to bring up the subject during dinner at that fancy restaurant with
your in-laws who are in town glomming a free meal from your Mastercard...
just keep tipping them back until someone cuts you off...
The "textbook" calculation
for coax metal attenuation makes the assumption that the skin depth
is much less than the inner conductor diameter (dimension "a"
below), or the thickness of the outer conductor (dimension "c"
minus dimension "b" below). So what happens if this is
not the case? Suppose the skin depth is a significant fraction (or
even greater than) the critical dimensions of the conductors? This
can happen when you put a 1 MHz signal through a skinny coax line.
At lower and lower frequencies, the skin depth gets greater and
greater (it goes as 1/SQRT(f)), and at some point this assumption
is no longer valid. Pay attention, owners of AM radio stations!

Let's look at the textbook solution
to coax attenuation. Before we calculate the resistance per unit
length of the two conductors, we'll first just look at how the equivalent
cross-sectional area of the two conductors is calculated (an intermediate
step on the way to calculating resistance/length). Remember that
RF sheet resistance is calculated from an area of conductor that
has depth equal to one skin depth. For very small skin depth (according
to microwave textbooks):

What happens when you misapply
this equation at lower frequencies? At DC (0 Hertz), the skin depth
is infinity. The solution above can't be correct, or your coax would
have infinite conductivity, and zero resistance!
The more exact solution
Before we get started we must
stress that errors under "normal" microwave frequencies
is quite small when the above equation is applied. Now then...
The figure above defines the
dimensions for this little math problem. The center conductor is
radius a, the inside of the outer conductor is radius b, and the
outside diameter of the outer conductor is radius c. The math associated
with the exact solution is an integration problem, noting that as
you penetrate into the conductor the current density goes down as
EXP(-z/ ).
We'll save the integration for an IEEE letter or something scholarly,
and not show it here for now. Plus, it makes a great final exam
problem for microwave students so we don't want to give the entire
solution away!
After integrating and simplifying,
the solutions for the equivalent area of the center conductor and
the outer conductor are:

How do we know this solution
is valid? There's two sniff tests. At DC, the area should equal
the geometric area of the center conductor and outer conductor "donut",
which is an eighth grade geometry problem:

And second, at high frequency
the textbook solution should be satisfied. Looking at the equations,
it is not at all obvious that we have succeeded, so it is time to
make some plots.
From here the solution to determining
metal loss is easy, first you convert the equivalent areas of the
conductors to resistance/length:

Then the attenuation due to metal
can be found by noting:

We're not going to show a closed
form equation that does this all in one step (at least for now).
This type of math is best done using Excel, then you don't have
to solve the entire problem in one step. If you go to our download
area and grab coax.xls we've entered these equations and tons
more into a versatile spreadsheet for studying coax.
Example: a=1mm, b=2.3mm, c=2.4mm
This is a fifty ohm line if air
is used as the dielectric. First let's look at the equivalent area
of the center conductor. We've entered our more exact equations
into a spreadsheet that also calculates skin depth over frequency,
and plotted the equivalent area over many decades of frequency using
a log scale. The blue line is the textbook calculation, below 1
MHz it completely overestimates the equivalent area. Note that the
new equation converges to the correct DC value which is shown in
red (the "geometric area").

Here's the outside conductor
area, it also meets the sniff tests of getting the DC area correct
and converging to the classic textbook solution at microwave frequencies:

Here let's look at the total
equivalent area of both center and outer conductors.

Now let's look at the resistance/length.
This is simply the bulk resistivities of the conductors divided
by their cross-sectional areas which we just calculated. In the
calculation we assumed both conductors are copper. Be sure to keep
your units straight, in the area calculations we used millimeters2,
so the area have to be divided by 1,000,000 to get to meters2.

The bottom line is that the textbook
calculation will always give zero ohms/length at DC, while the new
calculation gives the correct value which is a very small number
(less than 0.02 ohms per meter total for both conductors). The error
is so small it can be ignored, unless you are running miles of cable
with signals below 1 MHz!
BTW, how do we know that Agilent's
ADS doesn't get this calculation right? Look at their circuit model
below. It doesn't specify a thickness for the outer conductor! This
means that the outer conductor is assumed infinite thickness. We
have heard that the center conductor is modeled with the calculation
that we show here, so at best the boyz at Agilent have their model
half right! But again we must stress that the error under "normal"
microwave frequencies is quite small.

Agilent's coax
model
New for October! Go to
our download page and get
the coax spreadsheet that does this calculation and so much more!
More to come!
|