This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.

Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES 1

Five-Wave Equation for Small-Signal Analysis of

Traveling-Wave Tubes Considering the Effects of
Axial Periodicity of the Interaction Structure
Hooman Bahman Soltani and Habibollah Abiri

Abstract— The conventional Pierce theory is used to analyze

traveling-wave tube (TWT) amplifiers. This theory is a convenient
method to design helix TWTs. However, in some cases such as
coupled-cavity TWTs and folded-waveguide TWTs, this approach
yields nonphysical results. In fact, backward-wave excitation may
not be ignored for high-power wideband coupled cavities as well
as for devices operating near the band edges. The Pierce-type
equation is modified to include both backward and forward
RF waves simultaneously. A fifth-order algebraic equation is
derived that yields TWT small-signal gain in approximately Fig. 1. Staggered slot CCTWT structure [1].
the entire frequency band, including near cutoff frequencies.
This approach is based on the coupling between two fast and
slow space-charge waves and three RF space-harmonic waves, transmission line. The isotropic cold (noninteracting) transmis-
using independent space-harmonic approximation. The obtained sion line supports two forward and backward waves having the
equation may be used to analyze the coupled-cavity folded
following propagative forms:
waveguide and ladder TWT structures.
+
−
Index Terms— Backward-wave interaction, coupled cavities, ψ(z, t) = B − exp( j (ωt+ βz)) (1)
periodic structures, traveling-wave tubes (TWTs).
where B + (B − ) is the amplitude of the field component of the
forward (backward) traveling wave, ω is the signal frequency,
I. I NTRODUCTION and β is the propagation constant.

T RAVELING-WAVE tubes (TWTs) are relatively wide-

band RF amplifiers that use RF-beam synchronism in
electromagnetic slow wave structures (SWSs) to convert part
of the kinetic energy of moving electrons into RF power [1].
Coupled-cavity TWT (CCTWT) [2] (Fig. 1) is a special kind
of these structures, which may provide more than one hundred
kilowatt of pulsed RF power in X-band and several hundreds
of watts in the millimeter-wave regime. They use electromag-
netic cavities coupled to each other through slot regions. They
are periodic structures that support RF propagation in their
passband.
Since their invention, different methods have been used to
analyze their beam–wave interaction. Equivalent circuit [1],
Pierce model [3], coupled resonators [4], radiation relation
in periodic structures [5], and coupled transmission lines [6]
(to analyze relativistic backward-wave oscillators) are some of
these approaches.
The Pierce model is a general approach to describe the
RF–beam interaction in TWTs. The conventional Pierce model
deals with the interaction between the beam and an isotropic
Manuscript received December 14, 2015; accepted March 18, 2016. The
review of this paper was arranged by Editor M. Thumm.
The authors are with the School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz 71946-84759, Iran (e-mail:
hoomanbsultani@gmail.com; abiri@shirazu.ac.ir).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TED.2016.2544783
0018-9383 © 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Forward and backward waves with the same frequency have
the same wavenumber magnitude, but with opposite signs.
The conventional Pierce theory neglects all space harmon-
ics except the most effective one. The wavenumber of this
space harmonic is β0 . Other space harmonics have different
wavenumbers. For helix TWT structures, the outcomes of this
model are fairly accurate in nearly the whole helical SWS
propagation band [7]. However, a fully nonlinear model should
be used in the presence of spurious oscillations and other
nonlinear phenomena [8].
In TWTs, the beam–wave interaction impedance is repre-
sented by the following relation:
2
E peak
K int = (2)
2β 2 P
where E peak is the amplitude of the longitudinal electric field
of an RF traveling wave in (1) and P is the corresponding
RF power flow, which is the product of group velocity and
the average stored electromagnetic energy per unit length in
the structure
dω
P = v g U  = U 
dβ
where U  is the average stored electromagnetic energy per
unit length and v g is the group velocity.
Forward-wave interaction with the electron beam amplifies
the RF signals in conventional Pierce theory for TWTs.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES

is not unique. Circuit elements and their values may have to

be changed for different frequencies to approximate the real
CCTWT cold parameters more accurately.
Our study develops a 1-D small-signal relation for the
first-step analysis and design of periodic structures used in
TWTs. It is obtained using a Pierce-type equation, which
is modified to involve both forward and backward waves
simultaneously. An approximate fifth-order equation based
on the independent space-harmonic approximation will be
described in the following. The initial design obtained by this
equation should be finally checked by more accurate but time-
consuming large-signal multidimensional analysis.

II. D ERIVATION OF THE F IFTH -O RDER E QUATION

The wave growth equation for interaction between the
electron beam and the fundamental RF wave with exp(− jβ0 z)
dependency (1) is obtained using the inhomogeneous Maxwell
equation [8], [10], which in the 1-D form may be written as
d B0 1 (0)
= − β02 K int Ie exp( jβ0 z) (3)
dz 2
where B0 is the electric field complex amplitude [including
magnitude and slowly varying phase of the electric field
(0)
expressed by (1)], β0 the RF propagation constant, K int the
interaction impedance of the forward wave, and Ie the complex
amplitude of RF current at position z.
The above relation may be extended to include the interac-
tion between the beam and backward wave space harmonics
in our independent space-harmonic approximation. That is,
we let
d B1 1 (1)
= − β12 K int Ie exp( jβ1 z)
dz 2
d B2 1 (2)
Fig. 2. SWS and beam dispersion diagrams. (a) Main interaction is with the = − β22 K int Ie exp( jβ2 z) (4)
forward wave. (b) Both the forward and backward waves are excited by the dz 2
electron beam. 2π 4π
β1 = − β0 ; β2 = − β0 (5)
Lc Lc
(1)
The beam–backward-wave interaction does not change the where L c is the cavity length, B1 , β1 , and K int are parameters
backward wave amplitude. for the backward space harmonic in its first Brillouin zone, and
(2)
This model also applies to CCTWTs and folded waveguide B2 , β2 , and K int correspond to the backward space harmonic
TWTs at frequencies away from their propagation band edges in the second Brillouin zone. The interaction impedance of
[Fig. 2(a)]. However, for beam voltages in which the beam line each space harmonic is calculated similar to (2) for the
approaches to the band edges, beam–backward wave interac- backward space harmonics. The electric field amplitude of
tion is strong and is comparable to the beam–forward-wave each space harmonic in the numerator of (2) is calculated from
interaction [Fig. 2(b)]. To describe the interaction over the the gap profile g(z) (Fig. 3) by taking its Fourier transform
whole band correctly, the backward wave must be considered for that space-harmonic wavenumber as
at these regions.  
i 1  
The backward wave interacts with the beam through its Bpeak = dzg(z)exp( jβi z); i = 0, 1, 2.
space harmonic for which its phase velocity approximately Lc Lc


equals the beam velocity. This space-harmonic wavenumber
has the same sign as that of the forward wave, but its effective
interaction impedance has a negative sign because of the
negative group velocity. As a result, assuming an isotropic
transmission line to model both the forward and backward
waves is wrong in this case.
This restriction is removed using the equivalent circuit
approach [9]. This model considers all effective space har-
monics simultaneously. The coupled-cavity equivalent circuit
Forward and backward waves are independent modes in
the absence of the beam. However, space harmonics of the
backward wave are not independent. It may be shown that
independent harmonic approximation introduces an insignif-
icant error in a periodic TWT and may be accepted for its
analysis. For the beam voltage in which n = −1 space
harmonic is in fair synchronism with the beam [point A
in Fig. 2(b)], the n = −2 backward wave space harmonic
(point C) has a minor effect since it is far from synchronism.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

BAHMAN SOLTANI AND ABIRI: FIVE-WAVE EQUATION FOR SMALL-SIGNAL ANALYSIS OF TWTs 3

of a single mode. One of them, which has a minor effect on

the wave–beam coupling, has a propagation constant that is
different from that of the coupled mode, β, by a previously
mentioned amount (2π/L c ). Assuming that space harmonics
are independent waves results in equal propagation constants
for both space harmonics coupled with the beam, even though
this equality is not physical. The obtained equation and the
final results show that it does not make serious errors in the
five-wave results. It is a small error because the possible beam
interaction is effective with the forward wave and with just
one of the near-synchronism space harmonics of the backward
wave, as mentioned before. The resulted equation takes into
account the effective components automatically as will be
Fig. 3. (a) Longitudinal field strength in CCTWT (the field amplitude is mentioned in the following. The backward space harmonic
maximum at the red regions and is approximately zero at the green regions)
and (b) its averaged 1-D profile distribution (g(z)) as a function of the axial for which its cold propagation constant is far different from
position normalized to the cavity length (L c ). the coupled mode propagation constant β introduces a minor
effect on the interaction, whether its propagation constant is
considered accurately or not.
This statement also holds in the inverse condition. When the In this way, by inserting the coupled mode solution into the
plasma wave on the beam is approximately synchronous with mentioned set of equations the following matrix equation is
the forward RF wave [point B in Fig. 2(a)], the backward-wave obtained:
space harmonics [points A and C in Fig. 2(a)] do not have ⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
1 0 0 M14 B0 0
an effective interaction with the beam. There is no regime in ⎢ 0 1 0 M B
24 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 0⎥
which both backward wave space harmonics are synchronous ⎢
⎣ 0 =⎢ ⎥ (7)
0 1 M34 ⎦ ⎣ B2 ⎦ ⎣0⎦
with the beam simultaneously. They are treated as independent
M41 M42 M43 1 Ie 0
waves interacting with the beam in our approximate model.
Equations (3)–(5) represent the effect of the field on the with
RF equation, called circuit equation. The effect of the field 2
on the beam, the electronic equation, should be considered to − jβi−1 (i−1)
Mi4 = K int ; i = 1, 2, 3
complete the interaction equations. With Eulerian analysis, the 2(β − βi−1 )
electronic equation is a 1-D second-order differential equation and
in linear regime [7]
2 jβq2 I0
d 2 Ie d Ie  2 M4i = ; i = 1, 2, 3.
+ βq − βe2 Ie

+ 2 jβe βe (βq2 − (β − βe )2 )V0
dz 2 dz
2 jβq2 I0 The eigenvalue equation using independent space-harmonic
= × (B0 exp(− jβ0 z) + B1 exp(− jβ1 z) approximation is obtained by setting the determinant of the
βe V0
+ B2 exp(− jβ2 z)) (6) matrix in (7) equal to zero. The result is
κ0 κ1 κ2
where V0 is the beam voltage and I0 is the beam current. + + + ((1 − x)2 − a 2 ) = 0 (8)
The wavenumbers are u0 − x u1 − x u2 − x
ω ωq with
βe = βq =
ve ve 2
−1 I0 (i) βi βi
in which v e is the beam velocity and ωq is the reduced plasma κi = K , ui = i = 0, 1, 2,
4 V0 int βe βe
frequency. The homogeneous solutions of (6) are called slow β βq
and fast space-charge waves [2], which are now coupled to the x = ; a= .
βe βe
SWS field through the inhomogeneous part of the equation.
Equations (3)–(6) form a set of coupled linear equations. The validity of independent approximation is now clear
In the linear regime we are looking for wave solutions in this formalism. If one of the RF propagation constants
with exp(− jβz) dependency, called the coupled mode. The approaches to βe , the related denumerator in (8) is closer to
imaginary part of β represents field growth/attenuation aris- zero and the corresponding term is larger than the other two
ing from the interaction. One β is obtained for all wave terms. Since β1 < β0 < β2 , there is no condition in which the
components of the coupled mode, including both backward- two backward space-harmonic terms have the same magnitude.
wave space harmonics. However, in reality, the amplitudes However, in special cases, the forward wave and one of the
and the propagation constants of the backward-wave space backward wave terms may be comparable. One of the roots of
harmonics are linearly dependent in the periodic structures, the five-wave equation is a far from synchronism nonphysical
and their propagation constants differ by an amount (2π/L c ). solution (with a real part far from βe ), which should not be
They are not independent modes, but are Fourier components considered.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES

TABLE I
CCTWT PARAMETERS U SED IN S ECTION III

The eigenvalue equation (8) reduces to the third-order

Pierce-type equation for the special case of beam–forward-
wave interaction
κ0
+ ((1 − x)2 − a 2 ) = 0. (9)
u0 − x
For beam currents lower than a threshold value, the three
roots of the above equation are real, which correspond to
nongrowing waves. For higher beam currents, however, there
are two complex conjugate roots for which one of them
corresponds to RF amplification [1].

III. E FFECT OF B EAM –BACKWARD WAVE

I NTERACTION IN A T YPICAL CCTWT
The third- and fifth-order equations are solved for a typical
coupled-cavity structure. The growth rate is calculated from
the imaginary part of x, the eigenvalue of the system.
In the third-order equation, the effect of backward wave is
ignored. In the fifth-order equation, however, the backward
wave is included. The difference between these two solutions
reflects the effect of the beam–backward wave interaction.
The interaction parameters used in simulation are presented
in Table I.
The importance of the beam–backward wave coupling in
the five-wave model depends on the beam current. Fig. 4
shows the small-signal gain for three different beam voltages
and a 2-A electron beam, as the high beam current condition.
Fig. 5 is for the same structure driven by a 0.2-A beam as the
low beam current condition. The beam voltages in each case Fig. 4. High current small-signal gains for (a) 17-, (b) 14.5-, and (c) 11-kV
are tuned so that the maximum gain occurs at low, midband, beam voltages.
and high frequency regions of the SWS band of propagation
corresponding to high, moderate, and low beam voltages for distinct peak. The beam voltage is far from backward-wave
a staggered CCTWT structure, respectively. synchronism, however, even in this condition inclusion of the
Fig. 4(a) shows the high voltage–high current state. The backward wave removes the singularity. The upper band edge
third-order equation gives a singular solution at the lower has no effect on the interaction process and inclusion of the
band edge, the so-called π point, because of vanishing the corresponding term has a negligible effect in this case.
group velocity and increasing enormously the forward-wave Fig. 4(c) shows the low voltage condition. Solutions to the
interaction impedance in this region. However, solution of the third- and fifth-order equations have the same differences as
fifth-order equation results in a maximum gain near the π point before, here also at the upper band edge near the 2π point.
frequency, but with no singularity at this point. This is due to The beam is far out of synchronism with RF signals in the
inclusion of the backward wave, which transports the power low-frequency part of the SWS passband, and therefore, there
in an opposite direction to the forward wave, thus removing is no RF gain for these frequencies.
the singularity. Fig. 5 shows the results for the low current case. Band edge
Fig. 4(b) is for the moderate voltage condition. The singularity behavior at high voltage [Fig. 5(a)] is similar to the
fifth-order equation predicts a distinct peak, as before. high voltage–high current case. Therefore, the beam–backward
The third-order equation shows a singular behavior with no wave coupling should be taken into account for any high
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
BAHMAN SOLTANI AND ABIRI: FIVE-WAVE EQUATION FOR SMALL-SIGNAL ANALYSIS OF TWTs
Fig. 5. Low current small-signal gains for (a) 16.5-, (b) 12.5-, and
(c) 10.3-kV beam voltages.
voltage, near π point application, either at low or at high beam
currents. At moderate beam voltage [Fig. 5(b)], contrary to
the high current case, the third-order solution predicts a clear
peak at midband, though it has low-frequency singularity as
before. The fifth-order solution shows the same peak without
any low-frequency singularity. In the low voltage condition
[Fig. 5(c)], the two solutions are in good agreement. However,
this condition is not widely used in TWTs. This region is
near to the SWS 2π point, and the 2π oscillations may be
excited when the beam voltage is lowered to amplify the
high frequency region. In addition, inserting the loss buttons
in some CCTWTs to prevent this oscillation results in high
RF loss in this frequency range, which makes this region less
advantageous for amplification.
5
Fig. 6. Dispersion and interaction impedance curves as a function of phase
shift per single cavity.
Fig. 7. Total CCTWT structure modeled in the PIC solver.
Fig. 8. Velocity modulation due to beam–RF interaction in small-signal
regime. Red electrons are the fastest and blue electrons are the slowest ones.
Fig. 9. RF field amplification due to interaction with electron beam. RF field
is maximum in the yellow regions.
Fig. 10. Output signal (in volts) versus time (in nanoseconds) in CST-PIC
simulation.
High-current CCTWTs are usually used for high-power and
wide-bandwidth applications. Therefore, the backward wave
should essentially be involved for this condition. For low-
gain and narrow-band CCTWTs the backward waves may
or may not be considered, depending on the interested part
of the propagation band of the SWS. For applications near
the π point, inclusion of the backward wave is necessary.
In other regimes the third-order equation yields approximately
the correct answer (at moderate- and high-frequency parts
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES

Fig. 11. PIC and five-wave gains obtained for beam voltages. (a) 14 kV (PIC)/13.6 kV (three-wave and five-wave). (b) 13 kV (PIC)/12.6 kV (three-wave
and five-wave). (c) 12 kV (PIC)/11.6 kV (three-wave and five-wave).

of the SWS passband) and determines an accurate frequency TABLE II

corresponding to maximum gain. S TAGGERED S LOT CCTWT PARAMETERS OF THE S IMULATED
S TRUCTURE U SED IN S ECTION IV
IV. C OMPARISON OF THE F IVE -WAVE AND
PIC S OLUTIONS FOR A T YPICAL CCTWT
For the sake of comparison, a typical CCTWT structure
is analyzed using the five-wave equation for different beam
voltages. It is also simulated by the CST-PIC solver.
The CCTWT SWS structure is designed to have an
RF bandwidth of at least 3 GHz in Ku-band. The π point,
midband, and 2π point frequencies of the finalized structure
are 12.01, 13.6, and 15.48 GHz, respectively (Table II). This
structure is analyzed by both the HFSS software and the CST
software using their eigenmode simulators. The two simulators
give nearly the same results. The dispersion and interaction To work in the small-signal (linear) regime, the RF input power
impedance curves of the structure are shown in Fig. 6. The is lowered. In this regime, the velocity modulation of the
longitudinal field profile g(z) is also obtained by eigenmode beam, the amplification of RF field through the tube, and the
simulation. No loss button is used in SWS to check the upper amplified output signal are shown in Figs. 8–10, respectively.
band part of the frequencies without external RF attenuation. PIC, three-wave, and five-wave results are shown in Fig. 11.
The structure shown in Fig. 7 consists of 26 coupled cavities Three-wave results show considerable differences with that
and is simulated by the PIC solver in the CST package. of the PIC, as predicted before. However, the PIC and the
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
BAHMAN SOLTANI AND ABIRI: FIVE-WAVE EQUATION FOR SMALL-SIGNAL ANALYSIS OF TWTs
five-wave results show general agreement in nearly the whole
SWS RF bandwidth if beam voltages have a 0.4-kV (≈3%)
difference. Fig. 11 shows the CST and five-wave results
for 14/13.6, 13/12.6, and 12/11.6-kV beam voltages. The first
value is the beam voltage used in PIC simulation.
This voltage shift (the PIC beam voltage is always higher
than that of the five-wave) originates from different sources in
RF and beam modeling such as meshing used in simulations,
1-D simplified models of dc and RF space charge forces
used in the 1-D code, and the independent space-harmonic
approximation used here. However, this voltage difference is
small. We have found it to be in the range of 1%–6% in
different case studies and 3% for the case in this paper, which
may be neglected for most applications.
The PIC and five-wave results are in good agreement in
nearly the entire SWS propagation band. Adjacent to the
band edges the SWS-port coupling is weakened because of
the standing wave nature of the RF field at these points.
As a result, the differences between the PIC and the five-wave
results are larger near these points. This difference is the
largest near the 2π frequencies. However, this region is rarely
used for RF amplification.
V. C ONCLUSION
The conventional Pierce approach does not account for the
interaction between the electron beam and the space harmonics
of the backward wave, resulting in nonphysical gains and
singularities, especially near the SWS band edges. A fifth-
order equation is derived which yields the linear gain of a
periodic TWT for nearly the entire SWS propagation band.
The role of backward wave excitation is investigated by
comparing a fifth-order and a reduced third-order equation,
which shows that the backward wave excitation may not
be ignored for high power–wide bandwidth coupled cavities,
or for those operating near the band edge frequencies.
The results of the fifth-order equation are compared with the
PIC outcomes for a typical CCTWT, indicating that they are
in good agreement for different beam voltages.
R EFERENCES
[1] J. F. Gittins, Power Travelling-Wave Tubes. New York, NY, USA:
American Elsevier, 1965.
[2] A. S. Gilmour, Jr., Klystrons, Traveling Wave Tubes, Magnetrons, Cross-
Field Amplifiers, and Gyrotrons. Norwood, MA, USA: Artech House,
2011, pp. 324–325.
7
[3] D. M. Park and J. J. Choi, “Three-dimensional simulations of an
X-band coupled-cavity traveling-wave-tube amplifier,” J. Korean Phys.
Soc., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 1105–1111, Dec. 2003.
[4] A. P. Kuznetsov, S. P. Kuznetsov, A. G. Rozhnev, E. V. Blokhina, and
L. V. Bulgakova, “Wave theory of a traveling-wave tube operated
near the cutoff,” Radiophys. Quantum Electron., vol. 47, nos. 5–6,
pp. 356–373, 2004.
[5] D. J. Connolly and T. A. O’Malley, “A contribution to computer analysis
of coupled-cavity traveling wave tubes,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices,
vol. ED-24, no. 1, pp. 27–31, Jan. 1977.
[6] V. A. Tamma and F. Capolino, “Extension of the Pierce model to
multiple transmission lines interacting with an electron beam,” IEEE
Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 899–910, Apr. 2014.
[7] R. J. Barker, J. H. Booske, N. C. Luhmann Jr., and
G. S. Nusinovich, Eds., Modern Microwave and Millimeter-Wave
Power Electronics. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2005.
[8] T. M. Antonsen, Jr., and B. Levush, “CHRISTINE: A multifre-
quency parametric simulation code for traveling-wave tube amplifiers,”
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, DC, USA, Tech. Rep. NRL/FR/6840-97-
9845, 1997.
[9] H. P. Freund, T. M. Antonsen, E. G. Zaidman, B. Levush, and
J. Legarra, “Nonlinear time-domain analysis of coupled-cavity traveling-
wave tubes,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 1024–1040,
Jun. 2002.
[10] G. S. Nusinovich, Introduction to the Physics of Gyrotrons. Baltimore,
MD, USA: The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 2004, pp. 405–436.
Hooman Bahman Soltani is currently pursuing
the Ph.D. degree with the Faculty of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz,
Iran.
His current research interests include millimeter
wave and terahertz vacuum electronic sources.
Habibollah Abiri (M’05) received the B.S. degree
in electrical engineering from Shiraz University,
Shiraz, Iran, in 1978, and the D.E.A. and Doctor
díIngenieur degrees from the National Polytechnique
Institute of Grenoble, Grenoble, France, in 1981 and
1984, respectively.
He has been with Shiraz University, since 1985,
where he is currently a Professor.
Dr. Abiri is a member of the Iranian Association
of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.