this will allow me to decrease the width of my t-line in order to get a closer width of my SMD (0402) components.
There is no need to decrease substrate thickness, because there is no need for 50 Ohm lines between the SMD in your design.
You misunderstood the comments on using smaller routing dimensions in your previous thread. As already mentioned there, you just need to make the interconnects short & small, to built what you have simulated: a lumped circuit. There is no need to make the interconnecet line impedance 50 Ohm, if they are short!! And if they are not short, your design will fail even if the lines are 50 Ohm, because you have not included the lines in your design.
Actually, by using a thinner substrate you will increase shunt capacitance of the routing, which is not desired.
I've heard from other edaboard users, if my t-lines are less than 1/10 of a wavelength, then I should be fine, which would be negligible in performance using lumped components.
Would you think I'd be able to just use a 1 layer board and have ground on top if I bunched the components as close as possible and this would produce the same results?or be able to use autoroute on eagle?
What size fr4 would you use?
Yes, we discussed that, and that's why you should keep these interconnect small & short, and not worry about the width too much. Only the external long lines need to be 50 Ohm
So even if the t-line at Zo=100 ohms and are very close together (1mm apart or something), then I should still be fine?
If I was going to include 50 ohm lines. How would I design the microstrip with 0402 components? Would the width of the line not matter when connecting to the pads of the components?
So even if the t-line at Zo=100 ohms and are very close together (1mm apart or something), then I should still be fine?
When the line is short compared to the wavelength, the line impedance doesn't make a difference.
And the difference is: Equivalent inductance is scaled with line impedance.So your 1mm line at 2.4 GHz will simply behave as a little series inductance with a little shunt capacitance.
I would use a substrate height that is mechanically stable and fits available end launch connectors, e.g. 0.6 to 0.8 mm. Line width for the 50 ohm feed line respectively. "Lumped" circuit part as small as possible, with parasitics considered in the circuit calculation.If I was going use 50 ohm transmission lines to match my circuit, what width of a transmission line and height (dielectric) would be best to use then?
Inside your LNA, there is no reason to prefer 50 Ohm interconnects over other dimensions, because none of the nodes inside your lumped circuit has 50 Ohm impedance, and the interconnects are short anyway. Only feedlines should be 50 Ohm.
You can't MATCH (in terms of impedance matching) because NOTHING is matched INSIDE your circuit. But anyway, I give up, draw whatever you like best. Good luck!
"Stabilize"? I don't understand your question. What lines? Between the components? => goto post #2 above
"Stabilize"? I don't understand your question. What lines? Between the components? => goto post #2 above
Sorry, your question is not clear, because it is not clear what the term "matching" means to you. I've tried my best to explain that you should route interconnect metal as small as possible inside your lumped circuit, and forget about matched lines inside your circuit. No idea how to explain it any better.
Ok, I see that you added a comment on "stabilizing". I am not aware that there are "best" line impedances for that purpose, but that's not my area of expertise.
I already matched my circuit with L matched networks at the input and output. I should have asked about using 50 ohm transmission lines to stabilize the circuit instead of matching; I already matched my circuit for 2.4 GHz.
But did you put the parasitic PCB inductances and capacitances into the matching circuit calculation, and also that of the component packages?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?