Continue to Site

Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Rectifier Design problem in ADS

19127916

Newbie level 4
Joined
Apr 28, 2022
Messages
7
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1
Activity points
153
Hello,

I have designed a doubler rectifier with a Pi-shaped matching network.
in my first design, I did not use the short copper connections required for fabrication and I got acceptable results. The problem is that when I added short coppers the S11 is still the same but I lost the efficiency (the efficiency dropped from over 35% to about 1.5%).

I would be thankful if anyone can help me with the problem.


First design without short coppers after the rectifier:

1683819294582.png
1683819372847.png


The second design that the efficiency dropped:

1683819513932.png
1683819552412.png
 
Well, now it's time for you to determine which outcome is realistic.

Do your "short coppers" reveal their built-in R, L, C if you look
inside? Then, do those values comport with what you know about
your RF substrate (losses there) and layout geometry (R, L, C)?
You may have two "goalposts" here (no parasitics, and sandbagged)
with eventual, implementable reality lying between them.

Or, you could have introduced something new without meaning to.

That's plain good old fashioned detective work, as they say in the
movies.
 
Well, now it's time for you to determine which outcome is realistic.

Do your "short coppers" reveal their built-in R, L, C if you look
inside? Then, do those values comport with what you know about
your RF substrate (losses there) and layout geometry (R, L, C)?
You may have two "goalposts" here (no parasitics, and sandbagged)
with eventual, implementable reality lying between them.

Or, you could have introduced something new without meaning to.

That's plain good old fashioned detective work, as they say in the
movies.
Thank you for your reply, but I did not understand what should I check to see what is the problem with my circuit.. Could you please explain a bit more?
 

LaTeX Commands Quick-Menu:

Similar threads

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top