Reciprocity of stubmatching ? Error in Gonzales?

Hi I've been using the Smith-chart to match a load, with a series stub nearest the load to transform to g=1 circle, and then a shunt stub, the usual way, to cancel out the imaginary part.

Now argue with me somebody, because of I believe this:
This circuit is not reciprocal.
I mean, If you find a solution to matching problem with a series stub transmission line nearest the load to transform the load somewhere on the g=1 circle, and then a shunt stub to cancel out the imaginary part,

ONE CANNOT interchange the stubs.
I mean you cannot put the shunt stub first nearest to the load, and then the series line without modifying their lengths ?

Because:
If I plot my normalized load admittance on the Smith-chart y_load, and then add a shunt stub, I'll be walking up or down a constant conductance circle.(g-circle).If you then add the same series stubas in the old solution, this pont is rotated along a constant Gamma-circle(constant radius with respect to the point (1,0)).
This endpoint will not be the point (1,0).
So stubmatching is not reciprocal.

If you agree, you must then agree on that it is an error in the Gonzales book, first edition page 78. In page 76 he extracts the stub-matching network from the Smith-chart, for the input-matchcircuit, but he has the shunt stub nearest the generator. This is wrong.
Also the outputmatching network is wrong.It should start with a shunt stub, but it doesn't.
Do you agree ?

Kindest regards,
StoppTidigare

P.S. I've been following the instructions to design a stub-tuner network as written in "Field and wave electromagnetics" by David K.Cheng. There the metod start by determining the loadadmittance, therefore I used
y_load=2.8+J*1.9, instead of Gonzales y_s=2.8-j*1.9,for the conjugate match. I arrive at the same results in terms of series and shunt stub lengths.

Hi I used the term "serie stub" in the wrong way above. I simple mean the serial line that transforms the load to the g=1 circle.

I wasn't aware of "serial stub matching". I only knew about shunt stub matching.
Sorry for the confusion.

I am only talking about singel shunt stub matching above!
Kindest regards,

StoppTidigare

No, sorry I agree on Gonzales outputmatching network.
Looking into the transistor from the output he has y_out=0.4+j*1.05, because he writes at page 75, that yL=0.4-j*1.05.

If one want to transform y_out to 50 Ohm. I'll first has to add(one of the solutions) a series line which is 0.051*lambda and this should be nearest to the transistor collector, and after that follows the shortcircuited shuntstub of lenght 0.077*lambda nearest to the load.

OK !

Kindest regards,
StoppTidigare

P.S. Why Isn't anybody responding ?

I suspect the reason for no response is that people these days do not use the manual chart method. They copy the data sheet circuit or they use the optimizer in their simulator.

I wonder how many people reading this can remember how to calculate the L and C values for a filter from the polynomial coefficients.

Hey somebody stop me !
This brain is caputt. I give myself a WARNING.
Gonzales is right .
Throw me and my latest posts in the trashcan.
Or keep me and the lastest posts as an example of brain malfunction.

He has the series line nearest the load (the transistor input), and the shunt stub after that closer to the generator. I was keeping saying that he had swapped them. But he hasn't !

What has happened to me ? Perhaps I am starting to grow cancer in my head. Well if you stop hear from me in the future it must be the braincancer has struck.
/StoppTidigare

StopTiggidare, you have a point!!!
I must say, I was laughing a lot reading your last post :lol:
I always appreciate ppl who are courageous enough to argue with whats's written in books!!
Your brain has no malfunction, per contra it's trying to study and reflect on!!
Don't worry :spoko:

Well it's good that you yourself are satisfied that there is no error in the book! The thing is that using Gonzales's book can sometimes be confusing but if you have a smith chart with you and really work out the problems then you may find it easier to understand the matching part. Earlier ,I myself was unsure of some of the things he had done in the stub matching examples but i think he has done it correctly and there is no flaw in them ! it's just the way we look at it

thanks