Experiment no.

13
Title: To study of the variation of Z0, ℇeff for
Coplanar waveguide with respect to change in the
physical dimensions.
(a) Z0 vs W/h, W/S
(b) Compare the graphs of (TRANSLIN/QUCS).

Submitted by
Name: Nigar Siddique
Roll No:1108
M.Tech (1st Semister)
1. Aim: To study of the variation of Z0, ℇeff for Coplanar waveguide with respect to change
in the physical dimensions.
(a) Z0 vs W/h, W/S
(b) Compare the graphs of (TRANSLIN/QUCS).

2. Equipment used:

QUCS software: 0.0.19

3. Theory:

The Coplanar Waveguide is a planar transmission line. It is widely used for microwave
Integrated Circuit design. As shown in the Fig 1, Coplanar Waveguide consists of a
conductor strip at the middle and two ground planes are located on either side of center
conductor. All these lies in the same plane. In coplanar waveguide, EM energy is
concentrated within the dielectric. The leakage of the Electromagnetic energy in the air can
be controlled by having substrate height (h) twice that of the width (S). The coplanar
waveguide supports quasi-TEM mode at low frequencies while it supports TE mode at high
frequencies. The effective dielectric constant of CPW is same as that of slot line. The
characteristic impedance of a coplanar waveguide is not affected by thickness and depends on
width(W) and space(S). The lowest characteristic impedance of 20 Ohm can be achieved by
maximum strip width(W) and minimum slot space(S). It typically ranges from 200 to 250
Ohm.

Fig. 1 The coplanar waveguide

4. Formulas used:

The characteristics impedance is given as

30π K(k′ 0 )
Zo= -----------------(1)
√εe K(k0 )
The effective relative permitivity as

εr −1 K(k ) K(k′ 0 )
εe = 1 + ∗ K(k′1 ) -------------------------------------(2)
2 1 K(k0 )
Where,
S
k 0 = S+2W -----------------------(3)

k1′ = √1 − k12 ----------------(4)

k1′ = k ′0 ------------(5)
5. Observation:
Table 1.1: Summarize the given details of the Coplanar Waveguide to analyze the
transmission line.
The relative permittivity of the
Given: substrate 𝜀r 12.9 GaAs
Dielectric loss tangent tan𝛿 0.002 GaAs@10GHz
Resistivity of the conductor in ohm
m 𝜌 1.72E-08 copper
Relative permeability of the
conductor 𝜇r,c 0.999994 copper
The roughness of the conductor R 0.1 micron
Strip thickness T 20 micron
Height of the substrate H 1 mm
Gap between the inner conductor
and outer ground plane G or S 0.5 mm
Frequency f 8 GHz
Length of the microstrip line L 10 mm

Table 1.2: Summarize the change in the width of the Coplanar Waveguide with respect
to characteristics impedance i.e. Zo (ohms) versus W/H.
Width of Single
the inner ℇeff mode Angle
W/H
conductor Zo range (Hz- (degree)
,W(mm) (ohms) GHz)
0.2 0.2 68.4453 6.53519 0-17.4 245.584
0.4 0.4 57.5526 6.51324 0-14.9 245.172
0.6 0.6 51.764 6.46673 0-13 244.295
0.8 0.8 48.0184 6.41191 0-11.6 243.257
1 1 45.3387 6.35581 0-10.4 242.191
1.2 1.2 43.2949 6.30231 0-9.49 241.169
1.4 1.4 41.6633 6.25364 0-8.69 240.236
1.6 1.6 40.3144 6.21099 0-8.03 239.415
1.8 1.8 39.1684 6.17489 0-7.45 238.719
2 2 38.1727 6.14544 0-6.96 238.149

Skin depth: 0.737978 micron (constant)

 Zo Vs W/H
2.5

W/H 1.5

0.5

0
30 40 50 60 70 80
Characteristic impedance , Zo(ohms)

Fig.2 Summarize the variation of dimension (W/H) with respect to characteristics

impedance, Zo (ohms) of the Coplanar Waveguide.

When we increase the width of the inner conductor of the coplanar waveguide with
respect to the height of the substrate, then the characteristics impedance of the coplanar
waveguide decreases. Also, we observed the constant skin depth (0.737978 micron). The
variation of W/H vs Zo (ohms) as shown in the Fig. 2.

Eeff Vs W/H
2.5

1.5
W/H

0.5

0
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6
Eeff

Fig.3 Summarize the variation of dimension (W/H) with respect to effective relative
permittivity, ℇeff of the Coplanar Waveguide.

In Fig 3, We observed that the effective relative permittivity of the coplanar waveguide
decreases when W/H increases. We can see the single mode range and angle of the coplanar
wave guide also decreases as shown in the table 1.2.
 Table 1.3: Summarize the change in the Gap between the inner conductor and outer
ground plane of the Coplanar Waveguide with respect to characteristics impedance,
Zo (ohms) versus W/S.

Single
S mode
(mm) W/S Zo ℇeff range (Hz- Angle
(ohms) GHz) (degree)
0.3 3.333333 38.1796 6.39789 0-13 242.991
0.5 2 45.3387 6.35581 0-10.4 242.191
0.7 1.428571 50.8899 6.25767 0-8.69 240.313
0.9 1.111111 55.5784 6.14148 0-7.45 238.072
1.1 0.909091 59.7038 6.02113 0-6.52 235.728
1.3 0.769231 63.4195 5.90305 0-5.8 233.405
1.5 0.666667 66.8155 5.79038 0-5.22 231.167
1.7 0.588235 69.9501 5.68456 0-4.74 229.045
1.9 0.526316 72.8639 5.58611 0-4.35 227.053
2.1 0.47619 75.5869 5.49502 0-4.01 225.194

Skin depth: 0.737978 micron (constant)

3.5
Zo Vs W/s
3
2.5
2
W/S

1.5
1
0.5
0
30 40 50 60 70 80
Characteristic impedance , Zo(ohms)

Fig.3 Summarize the variation of dimension (W/S) with respect to characteristics

impedance, Zo (ohms) of the Coplanar Waveguide.

When we increase the Gap between the inner conductor and outer ground plane of the
coplanar waveguide with respect to the height of the substrate, then the characteristics
impedance of the coplanar waveguide decreases. Also, we observed the constant skin
depth (0.737978 micron). The variation of W/S vs Zo (ohms) as shown in the Fig. 2.
 Eeff Vs W/S
3.5
3
2.5
2
W/S

1.5
1
0.5
0
5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.2 6.4 6.6
Eeff

Fig.4 Summarize the variation of dimension (W/S) with respect to effective relative
permittivity, ℇeff of the Coplanar Waveguide.

In Fig 4, We observed that the effective relative permittivity of the coplanar waveguide
increases when W/S increases. We can see the single mode range and angle of the coplanar
wave guide also decreases as shown in the table 1.3.

6. Results:
In this experiment, we observe the behavior of the coplanar waveguide line by varying
the dimensions such as (W and S). We studied the variation of Z0, ℇeff for Coplanar
waveguide with respect to change in the physical dimensions. We obtained no change in
the skin depth as 0.737978 micron (constant). Also, single mode range and angle
decreases with we increase the W and S in the coplanar waveguide. Here, effective
relative permittivity of the coplanar waveguide is half of the relative permittivity.

******