Dual-potential problems in transmission

lines with limited or no symmetry

P. Daly

Indexing terms: Transmission lines, Microwave circuits and networks

Abstract: Previous work in the development of dual finite-element methods applied to the solution of quasista-
tic problems has concentrated attention on transmission lines whose cross-section has well-defined dual sym-
metries. Many real problems of interest have either a single symmetry axis or no symmetry axis at all. It is the
purpose of the paper to deal with these special cases with the stated aim of widening the scope of application of
dual methods to include any coaxial simply connected Cartesian geometry. The provision of upper and lower
bounds already makes the dual-potential approach extremely powerful and flexible. Examples of practical inter-
est are chosen including coupled rectangular metallic bars in square coaxial line.

1 Introduction enough to effect when considering materials, as a dielectric

The design of microwave integrated circuits using planar
technology depends heavily on the computed accuracy of
the large-scale parameters of the propagating modes of the
uniform transmission-line structure. Among the most
important of these quantities is the characteristic imped-
ance of the lowest-order propagating mode, which is
assumed to be a TEM-mode, at least near cutoff. Compu-
tation of characteristic impedance, or, equivalently, capac-
itance or inductance per unit length, has been the subject
of a great deal of research effort in recent years, much of it
concentrated on the use of numerical techniques and main-.
frame digital computers.
In this regard, special attention must be given to the
finite-element technique initially used in this context by
Silvester [1] to solve potential problems. By combining a
variational approach to the governing differential equa-
tions and associated boundary conditions with a finite-
element formulation of the local potential function, it was
easily established that numerical results for characteristic
impedance (for example) were always upper bounds. Later
developments have taken advantage of the fact that a dual
formulation of the problem, essentially interchanging
directional derivatives, magnetic and electric material
properties and boundaries, resulted in an identical varia-
tional form whose numerical evaluation was now guar-
anteed to be a lower bound to the same wanted large-scale
parameter. Details of the use of dual potentials in
transmission-line analysis are to be found in the literature
[2-5]. It is obvious that the use of both upper and lower
bounds in solving field problems leads to significant
advantages over the use of either bound by itself. In the
latter case [6], one is forced to attempt to solve a particu-
lar problem at least twice using mesh subdivision followed
by assumptions concerning convergence in order to
extrapolate a final result. On the other hand, use of both
bounds leads immediately to an absolute limit on the error
magnitude and averaging leads, in practice, to an order of
magnitude improvement. It is crucial from the point of
view of efficient programming to ensure that that dual-
potential approach is carried out by the computer in an
identical manner for both bounds. This point is dealt with
in detail in the later discussion on preprocessing.
As previously explained, the use of the dual potentials
relies on the interchange of magnetic and electric material
properties and boundaries. This interchange is simple
Paper 4093H (E12), received 18th February 1985
The author is with the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Uni-
versity of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom
IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985
permittivity becomes magnetic permeability and vice versa.
Also the interchange of boundary conditions from electric
wall, that is, a perfect conductor, to magnetic wall and vice
versa is straightforward enough. There are always at least
two electric walls in the structure, otherwise no TEM-
mode would exist, and the presence of two magnetic walls
means that the dual problem is easily formulated.
However, magnetic walls, axes of symmetry normal to
equipotentials, do not always exist in the original problem
and consequently make the formulation of the dual
problem questionable.
In this paper it is shown that the situation where the
original problem structure either has one axis of symmetry
or indeed no symmetry axes at all can be handled by intro-
ducing boundary layers between conductors across which
the governing potential function is forced to increment.
Both even- and odd-mode problems can be dealt with in
this way, and consequently the range of application of the
dual finite-element technique is extended to a very impor-
tant class of practical problem.
Following a brief Section on the formulation of the
dual-potential approach, developments 'in the finite-
element technique are discussed which allow the solution
of dual-potential problems of interest where symmetry
cannot be guaranteed. This Section deals successively with
the boundary layer, preprocessing of the input data and
conditions to be met on boundaries. There follows a series
of examples of increasing complexity which bring out all
the points discussed in previous Sections.
2 Formulation of the problem
Given a transmission line with metallic conductors (electric
walls) and lines of symmetry (magnetic walls), the potential
(pu satisfies Laplace's equation within the bounded cross-
section.
By a standard formulation of an energy variational
principle [3], both upper and lower bounds to the charac-
teristic impedance may be set up. The capacitance per unit
length, given a potential difference Vo between conductors,
is
C vVl
^u 0 (i)
where K is the dielectric permittivity, n is the relative per-
meability and Cu equals the capacitance per unit length. It
is easily shown that any trial solution to the potential
function always results in a value of capacitance per unit
length which is too high. For this reason, the approximate
351
capacitance per unit length and potential function
resulting from anyfinite-elementformulation are normally
given the subscript u to indicate that an upper bound to
the exact value is computed.
Exchanging electric and magnetic walls results in a
dual-potential problem where the potential (f>l again
satisfies Laplace's equation and is related to (f>u through
the expression
= 0 (2)
e2 x
where ez is the unit axial vector.
A second variational expression [2] for the dual capac-
itance is obtained
-J{
where the subscript 1 is used to indicate lower bound. In
(3)
fact, the two capacitances per unit length can be shown to
have a constant product
CuCt = ei (4)
The dual capacitance resulting in the lower bound may
also be interpreted physically as an inductance per unit
length. In a dual transmission line carrying current / 0 , the
inductance per unit length is given by the variational
expression
(5)
where (CuLl) i = c2 (c equals the velocity of light).
Whether one interprets the dual-potential function as
relating to a dual capacitance or inductance is only of
importance when, as will be seen later, one is looking for a
physical justification for the insertion of boundary layers
to establish the field.
It is well known that a finite-element discretisation of
the continuous field leads to a matrix equation of the form
A<t> = (6)
where O is a column vector of unknown potential values,
A is a symmetric real banded matrix and A is a column
vector of known values. Assuming potential difference <pQ
between bounding surfaces, the capacitance per unit length
can be shown [7] to be
(7)
By using upper and lower bounds, the solution of the
matrix equations resulting from a finite-element formula-
tion of these expressions leads to estimates which are at
least one order of magnitude more accurate than would be
produced by either bound itself.
still be set up because, in this case at least, the central con-
2.1 Orthogonality of dual equipotentials ductor separates the axis of symmetry into two segments
The two dual potentials are related through eqn. 2. on each of which a unique potential can be defined. It
Keeping in mind that fact the equipotentials and field lines should be observed that there are cases where the axis of
are orthogonal, we operate on equation with V(f>1 to find symmetry exists but there is no central conductor to
that
(Kfi V<f>u) = 0 (8)
As the local field is given by the gradient of the potential,
we observe that the dual fields are orthogonal under the
condition that K\L is piecewise constant. It follows that the
equipotentials for the two dual problems are orthogonal
and that the one set of equipotentials represents field lines
for the dual problem. Thus the local field behaviour, which
352
is a crucial quantity in the design of microwave transmis-
sion lines, is obtained as a by product of the procedure for
obtaining the lower bound. This obviates immediately the
need for any numerical differentiation to produce field
behaviour and leads rapidly to a redetermination of the
original mesh division to concentrate points where the
field is large.
3 Finite-element matrices and preprocessing
When dealing with uniform transmission lines, it is clear
that there are at least two conducting surfaces (inner and
outer) on which the potential assumes a constant value. In
the case of multiconductor structures, more than two sur-
faces are at constant potential, but, of course, only two are
allowed to be prescribed independently. Concentrating for
the present on two-conductor transmission lines, the ques-
tion of setting up a dual formulation to the actual problem
resolves finding dual-potential surfaces having inter-
changed electric and magnetic properties of the original
structure.
In many cases the original problem possesses sym-
metries which allow easy identification of the dual poten-
tial surfaces. For example, the coaxial structure shown in
Fig. 1A has two axes of symmetry, equivalent to magnetic
Fig. 1A Rectangular coaxial line with double axial symmetry treated as
a quarter-section geometry and its dual. Boundary equipotententials well
defined
electric walls
magnetic walls
walls, enabling one to reduce the problem to one quarter
of the cross-section on the boundaries of which well-
defined electric walls (equipotentials) and magnetic walls
exist. Setting up the dual problem is very simple because
two separate magnetic walls are easily transformed into
dual equipotential surfaces as shown in the Figure.
Should the original problem only possess one axis of
symmetry, as depicted in Fig. IB, the dual problem can
dual F
Fig. 1B Rectangular coaxial line with single axial symmetry (vertically
offset centre conductor) treated as a half-section geometry and its dual.
Boundary equipotentials well defined
dud
VL=?
Fig. 1C Rectangular coaxial line with no axial symmetry (asymmetrical
central conductor treated as a full-section geometry and its dual. Boundary
equipotentials undefined for dual case
IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985
segment the axis. In this case, and the more general case
shown in Fig. 1C where no symmetry axis whatsoever
exists, it is not possible a priori to identify any lines of
constant potential. Unless one can somehow inject a
source of field into the dual problem it would seem that
the only solution to the problem is that the potential is
zero everywhere.
3.1 Definition of the boundary layer
The analogy between the problem and its dual is clear. In
both cases, a potential function is derived which attempts
to minimise a variational functional. In the one case the
physical problem involved is that of determining the
potential field and capacitance per unit length of a two-
conductor transmission line. In the dual case one can
regard the field problem as relating to either a fictitious
dual capacitance or an inductance per unit length. It is this
recognition which leads us to the resolution of the problem
of defining potential surfaces.
First, we realise that in the dual structure we may define
a magnetic potential which satisfies Laplace's equation and
that dual equipotentials represent lines of electric force
because of the orthogonality of the potentials. Although it
would not be normal practice to compute inductance
through the definition of magnetic potential (f)m, we write
the magnetic field H as
(9)
Using Ampere's rule
H dl=l (10)
and integrating around the central conductor, one easily
demonstrates that the magnetic potential must increment
by the current in the conductor for each full revolution.
Just as in the original problem, potentials are defined on
the conductors in such a way that the difference in poten-
tial must equal the applied voltage, the dual situation
demands that a boundary layer must be drawn between
the two conductors across which the magnetic potential
must increase by the amount of the enclosed current. The
precise routing of the boundary layer from one conductor
to the other is unimportant.
3.2 Preprocessing the input data
In a previous paper [5] the method of implementing the
finite-element technique using a rectangular array of points
was described, and a resume is given here for complete-
ness. Essentially it is sufficient to describe to the computer
the overall dimensions of the problem, the topology of the
current problem, and the precise nature of each point.
Some idea of size and/or scaling must also be incorporated
and can be accomplished point-by-point (rather
inefficient), or by using a scaled irregular grid of points. It
is most important to note that, in the first instance, the
basic structure of the finite-element matrices depends on
topology, in this case which point is connected to which,
and that actual dimensions only determine the nonzero
values of the matrix elements. With this simple idea in
mind, it only remains to program the computer to differen-
tiate between different types of points. For this purpose, a
digital code is used for each point in the cross-section
whose significance to the computer is as follows:
IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985
Code Nature of the point
Value
0 potential at this point is zero
1 potential at this point is +1 (conductor)
-1 potential at this point is - 1 (conductor)
9 potential at this point is unknown
7 potential at this point is unknown
but increments by +1 across the boundary layer
8 potential at this point is unknown
but increments by - 1 across the boundary layer
This potential code is used to define a matrix referred to
later as a P-matrix (point matrix).
The computer begins by assembling the matrix equation
6 from the finite-element base matrices defined over a tri-
angle. This is performed initially as though all points in the
structure were of unknown potential, labelled with the
code integer 9. A straightforward sorting operation is then
carried out on the resulting matrix equation, depending on
the particular label attached to each point (or row and
column of the matrix). Clearly if the label is either + 1 , - 1
or zero the particular row and column of the matrix equa-
tion is removed and the right-hand side of the equation,
column vector b, incremented by the value removed times
the integer label. Points labelled 9 are left intact, as are
points labelled 7 or 8 with the added operation in the
latter case of incrementing the vector A by +1 or 1,
respectively. Other codes have been used to indicate, for
example, that all points with that particular code label are
to assume the same unknown potential. This case arises
when conductors are present in the cross-section but with
no applied potential. Other cases of interest can be
handled in a similar way. The important point is that the
use of labels allows a very flexible approach to
transmission-line problems in general and leaves all the
tedious matrix construction and sorting problems to the
computer. Note also that the formal approach to problem
description is identical for both upper and lower bounds.
The only difference lies in the integers labelling the points,
and several examples of how this is done are given in a
later Section.
3.3 Boundary conditions
It should be pointed out that, in considering the condi-
tions at the problem boundaries, the natural boundary
condition [8] for the variational expressions used is, in
fact, a Neumann condition, the normal derivative of the
potential is automatically zero on the boundary unless
steps are taken to ensure otherwise. This property is
extremely useful because it means that all surrounding
walls are taken to be magnetic unless otherwise stated.
Accordingly, all magnetic boundary walls are simply
labelled 9 (unknown potential) and the valid boundary
condition will automatically be satisfied. Electric walls
must be handled differently by forcing the appropriate
potential there to the particular known value.
3.4 Physical dimensions and properties
Purely from the topology of a particular problem, it is pos-
sible to instruct the computer to work out the final form of
the describing matrix equation, its overall order and band-
width, and which elements are nonzero. All of this infor-
mation can be deduced from the way in which points are
connected to one another. The values of individual ele-
ments in the matrix are determined from the finite-element
base matrices and material properties. The base matrices
are well defined [1] and are easily computed once the posi-
tion of points is known. In our approach this is done by
353
using scaling factors along the two axes of the structure.
Although some inefficency in definition is thereby incurred,
this approach allows concentration of points at the loca-
tion of large fields and also permits arbitrary positioning
and dimensioning of the structure itself. Material proper-
ties of permittivity (K) or permeability (ft) can be defined
for each triangle or globally. In this paper we deal exclu-
sively with media whose permittivity may be allowed to
vary; throughout it is assumed that fi equals unity. Note
that when dealing with triangles within a perfect conduc-
tor, upper and lower bound cases are treated by giving
zero values and very large values of permittivity, respec-
tively.
4 Presentation of results
4.1 Square coaxial line
A problem in transmission-line technology with a well-
known solution concerns the square coaxial line shown in
cross-section in Fig. 2A with a superimposed grid of points
giving an 8 by 8 mesh. It must be stressed that, at this
stage, the Figure should be interpreted in a topological
sense: what is important is (i) which point is connected to
which other and (ii) how the boundaries are described
between points. The Figure also gives the point-description
matrix (P-matrix) for both upper and lower bounds,
informing the computer of the precise nature of each point.
The permittivity is everywhere assumed to be unity, except
within the central conductor where it is set to zero in the
case of the upper bound and infinity (very large number) in
the case of the lower bound. The code for the upper bound
is self-explanatory. In the case of the lower bound, the
boundary layer (labels 7 and 8) is clearly shown. Its actual
position is arbitrary as long as it runs from inner to outer
conductor. The natural boundary condition (magnetic
wall) is automatically enforced. By use of scaling factors
and material properties, the Figure may well represent a
square coaxial line with dual symmetry, but may also rep-
resent an offset rectangular coaxial line containing a
variety of different dielectrics. Equipotential contours for
the two bounds are shown in Fig. 2B for the square
coaxial line with no offset in the central conductor. It is
very important to be able to analyse this type of structure,

P-ma trix (u pper t>ound )

0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0
0 9 1 1 1 1 1 9 0
2 3 A 5 6
0 9 1 0 0 0 1 9 0
even mode, upper bound
0 9 1 0 0 0 1 9 0
0 9 1 0 0 0 1 9 0
0 9 1 1 1 1 1 9 0
0 9 S 9 9 9 9 9 0
0 0 C1 0 0 0 0 0 0

P-matrix (lower bound)

9 9 S> 9 7 8 9 9 9
9 9 S 9 7 8 9 9 9
9 9 S> 9 7 8 9 9 9
9 9 S> 0 0 0 9 9 9
9 9 $) 0 0 0 9 9 9
9 9 S) 0 0 0 9 9 9
9 9 S) 9 9 9 9 9 9
9 9 <) 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 9 <) 9 9 9 9 9 9 even mode, lower bound

Fig. 2A Square array of points (8 by 8 mesh) with inner and outer
conductors defining a square coaxial transmission line or one half section of
side-coupled bars in stripline propagating the even mode. Potential code
matrix (P-matrix) given for the original problem (upper bound) and its
dual (lower bound)
Fig. 2B Equipotential surfaces for the problem described in Fig. 2A and
the orthogonal dual potential contours
CJe0 = 10.8444 CJe0 = 9.7614
where subscript u means upper bound and 1 means lower bound
C/e0 = 10.2341 [2] conformal mapping (exact)

354 IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985

not because the particular coaxial line with offset inner such a structure are the even mode of Fig. 2A with a con-
conductor is so interesting, but because of the need, in ducting plane down the central axis and the odd mode
general, to be able to compute the sensitivity of capac- with axis of symmetry there. The structure with single sym-
itance or characteristic impedance to small changes in metry giving odd-mode propagation is shown in Fig. 3A,
dimension or position. Clearly a displacement of the centre together with the corresponding P-matrices for upper and
conductor removes symmetry, and, as we have seen, this lower bounds. This half-section is an example of a struc-
lack of symmetry in turn forces the use of boundary layers ture whose dual has a single equipotential wall (the mag-
in the dual problem. netic wall) represented in the P-matrix by a single layer of
zero potential points. Clearly one potential surface is not
4.2 Coupled stripline transmission sufficient to define a potential problem, and the secondary
The structure of Fig. 2A may be regarded as one sym- condition, that potential must be discontinuous round the
metric half of a strip transmission line with two centre con- conductor, is again enforced by imposing the boundary
ductors between which coupling may take place, also layer (points with code 7 and 8). It is not important
called side-wall coupling. The two independent modes of whether the single potential surface is taken at unity or
zero potential for the purposes of computing capacitance.
The resulting potential contours for this particular
1 problem are shown in Fig. 3B. As previously stated, the

1 2 3 A 5
odd mode, upper bound
6

P-matrix (upper bound)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0
9 9 1 1 1 1 1 9 0
9 9 1 0 0 0 1 9 0
9 9 1 0 0 0 1 9 0
9 9 1 0 0 0 1 9 0
9 9 1 1 1 1 1 9 0
9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
P-matrix (lower bound)
0 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9
1 2 3 A 5 6 7 8
0 9 9 0 0 0 9 9 9 odd mode, lower bound

0 9 9 0 0 0 9 9 9 Fig. 3B Equipotential surfaces for the odd mode in coupled stripline and
bounds on capacitance
0 9 9 0 0 0 9 9 9
CJe0 = 8.9695 C,/e 0 = 8.1600
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 C/e0 (average) = 8.5648

0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 even mode solution is identical to that presented in

0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
Fig. 3A Square array of points (8 by 8 mesh) representing one half-
section of side-coupled bars in stripline propagating the odd mode. Potential
code matrix (P-matrix) given for the original problem (upper bound) and
its dual (lower bound)
IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985
Fig. 2B.
4.3 Broad-coupled bars in a square conductor
Broad-coupled bars in stripline have been extensively used
[9] in the design of coupling devices such as 3 dB hybrids.
355
The topology of this structure, together with its finite-
element grid overlay, are shown in Fig. 4A, together with
the complete point description matrix for both odd and
even modes of propagation. No advantage has been taken
of any possible symmetry which may exist in practice in
order to preserve the full flexibility and power of the
approach. As a consequence the boundary layers in the
case of both odd- and even-mode lower bounds have to be
defined so as to produce the correct excitation. In the case
of the odd mode the layers between the two central con-
ductors and the outer have the same algebraic sign. For
the even mode the sign of one of the two layers must be
reversed to induce the correct drive conditions. The odd-
mode condition can also be met by having a single bound-
ary layer running between the two central conductors. As
before, the precise location of the layer is not important.
By appropriate choice of scaling factors the positions and
dimensions of the bars can be fixed arbitrarily. It is also
very simple to chose any region of the structure to possess
a permittivity different from unity, for example between
the two bars, in which case the structure would be identi-
cal to a broad-coupled suspended-substrate transmission
line. The contour plots shown for this topology in Fig. 4B
in fact relate to a broad-coupled stripline with uniform
mesh and dimensions as drawn. The coupling coefficient,
K, as computed from the averages for the two modes, is
computed to be 14.2 dB, where K is defined in terms of the

Case 1 upper bound Case 2 lower bound

P-matrix (odd mode) P-matrix (odd mode)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 - 1 - 1
1 - 11 - 11 -- 1 1 --11 - 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 -1 0 0 0 0 0 -1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 - 1 --11 - 1 - 1 - 1 --11 - 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
P-matrix (even mode) P-matrix (even mode)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 7 9 9 9 9 9
0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 7 9 9 9 9 9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 7 9 9 9 9 9

Fig. 4A Square array of points (12 by 12 mesh) defining broad-coupled bars in a coaxial transmission line with no assumed axis of symmetry. Potential
code matrix (P-matrix) given for original problem (upper bound) and its dual (lower bound)

356 IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985

 3 A 5 6 7 8 X) 11
3 A 5 6 7 8 9 11 12

odd mode, upper bound even mode, upper bound

3 A 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
odd mode, lower bound even mode, lower bound
Fig. 4B Equipotential surfaces for broad-coupled bars in stripline and the orthogonal dual potential contours; odd and even modes
C0Je0 = 20.2587 C 0 1 / E 0 = 18.4289 CJt0 = 13.7357 Cel/e0 = 12.5679 where subscript 0 means odd and e means even Coupling coefficient (average) = 14.2 dB

odd- and even-mode impedances, Z oo and Zoe as Table 16: Even mode

K(dB) = 10 lo gl0 (Z 0c - Zoo)/(ZOe + Zoo) Matrix Matrix CPU time, C9/4e0

(11) order bandwidth
4.4 Slot-coupled bars in stripline upper 57 7 0.48 3.7737
Coupling between broad-coupled bars through a finite lower 59 10 0.58 3.4422
thickness slot has recently been used in the design of inter-
ZOe (average) = 26.104 Q
digital linear-phase filters [10, 11]. In this case we use the Coupling coefficient (average) = 38.8 dB
two-fold symmetry of the structure to produce results for Coupling coefficient (measured) = 39 dB (Reference 6)
capacitance per unit length and orthogonal contour plots
over a quarter section of line. These plots are shown in
Fig. 5, together with the computed coupling coefficient, It is possible to deduce from these types of results the
which is in very close agreement with the measured value absolute magnitude of the maximum error incurred in
quoted in Reference 6. This result is achieved by using a using dual potentials. This is done by simply halving the
mesh of 10 by 10 points with the important parameters of difference between upper and lower bounds, in the above
the finite-element formulation summarised in Tables la example around 5%. An important advantage is gained
and \b over the use of either bound itself as the error is difficult to
estimate and can only be reduced by successive mesh sub-
Table 1a: Odd mode division. This implies the use of much larger matrices,
longer CPU times and some assumption concerning the
Matrix Matrix CPU time, C0/4ec way in which the solution converges. The use of dual finite
order bandwidth s
elements removes these difficulties. It is also interesting to
upper 57 7 0.48 3.8469 note that the use of dual finite elements with a modest
lower 59 10 0.58 3.5367 investment in CPU time results in very accurate figures for
Z o o (average) = 25.511 O coupling coefficient. The reason for this is to be explained
IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985 357
as follows: although the even- and odd-mode impedances 5 Conclusions
themselves are subject to the usual errors, in this case
around 5%, the coupling coefficient is dependent on the Dual finite elements have been applied to a range of prob-
first difference between these two impedances. The first dif- lems of concern to the designer of transmission-line cir-

-w

A = 1.99 mm
B = 15
C = 23
D=6
H=4.5
T=6
W=8

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 odd mode, upper bound

4 5 6 7 8 10 11
even mode, upper bound

3 A 5 6 7 8 10 11
odd mode, lower bound

Fig. 5 Two rectangular bars coupled through a finite-thickness slot.

Equipotential surfaces over a quarter section (10 by 10 mesh)
C0Je0 - 15.3877 C01/e0 - 14.1470
CJE0 - 15.0947 Cel/e0 = 13.7687
where subscript 0 means odd and e means even
Coupling coefficient (average) = 38.8 dB 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Measured coupling coefficient [6] = 39 dB even mode, lower bound

ference essentially cancels out the leading error term in the
finite-element expansion leaving a higher-order error term
which is rather small. As a result, it is possible to predict
coupling very accurately with relatively small matrix
dimensions, especially when the coupling is small itself.
358
cuits. By a dual formulation of the variational principle,
upper and lower bounds to the large-scale parameters of
interest have been computed in structures where no a
priori assumption concerning symmetry needs to be met.
The lower-bound case requires special treatment because
IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985
of the difficulty of defining equipotential surfaces. The
answer lies in the insertion of boundary layers between
conductors across which the potential increments by a
known value.
In any case the advantages of using dual methods rather
than a single upper bound, as is usual, are clearly enor-
mous, in that (i) the error bounds on the large-scale par-
ameter of interest are tightly defined the user is certain of
the maximum absolute magnitude of the error, (ii) an order
of magnitude improvement in accuracy is obtained by
averaging the results from the two bounds, giving smaller
matrices and shorter CPU times and (iii) equipotential
plots automatically provide field-strength contours and
thereby the ability to adopt adaptive methods.
The dual finite-element approach described in this
paper maintains maximum flexibility in that a structure is
first defined in general terms, allowing all the tedious
matrix manipulations to be carried out by the computer.
Only after the crude outline of the problem has been
drawn in is the fine structure determined by the simple
expedient of a point description matrix which identifies for
the computer the nature of each point in the cross-section.
From this the computer can readily resolve the form and
detail of the final matrix equation whose solution deter-
mines the parameters of interest. The final numerical
entries in the defining matrices are calculated on the basis
of scaling factors and material constants. In the simple
manner described, upper bounds and lower bounds, odd
and even modes, dielectric regions or conductors are able
to be defined in a particularly simple way.
Orthogonality of the dual fields leads to potential con-
tours representing equipotentials and electric field
strength, respectively. This is the first step in implementing
IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. H, No. 6, OCTOBER 1985
an automatic adaptive mesh scheme, whereby mesh refine-
ment occurs iteratively and depends on where field
strength is largest.
Further developements in the area of dual finite-element
methods as applied to the solution of transmission line
problems are expected to concentrate heavily on pre-
processing techniques and the implementation on small
desk-top machines.
References
1 SILVESTER, P.: 'High order polynomial triangular finite elements
for potential problems', Int. J. Eng. Sri., 1969, 7, p. 857
2 CARSON, C.T., and CAMBRELL, G.K.: 'Upper and lower bounds
on the characteristic impedance of TEM mode transmission lines',
IEEE Trans., 1966, MTT-14, pp. 497-498
3 DALY, P.: 'Singularities in transmission lines', in J.R. WHITEMAN
(Ed): 'The mathematics of finite element and applications' (Academic
Press, 1973), pp. 337-350
4 HAMMOND, P., and TSIBOUKIS, T.D.: 'Dualfinite-elementcalcu-
lations for static electric and magneticfields',IEE Proc A, 1983, 130,
(3), pp. 105-111
5 DALY, P.: 'Upper and lower bounds to the characteristic impedance
of transmission lines using thefinite-elementmethod' COMPEL Int.
J. Comput. Math. Electr. & Electron. Eng., 1984,3, (2), pp. 65-78
6 NORTIER, J.R., and McNAMARA, D.A.: 'Application of a general-
purposefinite-elementcode to microwave transmission line problems',
Microwave J., 1984, 27, (11), pp. 109-125
7 DALY, P. and HELPS, J.D.: 'Direct method of obtaining capacitance
fromfinite-elementmatrices', Electron. Lett, 1972, 8, (5), pp. 132-133
8 WEXLER, A.: 'Computation of electromagnetic fields', IEEE Trans.,
1969, MTT-17, (8), pp. 416-439
9 HOWE, H.: 'Stripline circuit design' (Artech House, 1974), Chap. 4
10 RHODES, J.D.: 'The generalised interdigital linear-phasefilter',IEEE
Trans., 1970, MTT-18, (6), pp. 301-307
11 CLOETE, J.H.: 'Coupling between rectangular bars through a finite
thickness slot', European Microwave Conference Proceedings, Sep-
tember 1981, pp. 713-718
359