Hi all,
I am designing a bandpass stripline filter @ 17.2 GHz using parallel coupled lines with Keysight ADS, and I am experiencing problems with schematics simulation vs layout simulation results.
The schematics simulation plots the expected results based on design requirements and equations
while layout simulation results with a frequency response shifted approx. 1.3 GHz below.
It results that I always have to manually tune the substrate dielectric constant quite a lot in EM substrate settings.
For example, for DiClad 880 εr= 2.2, I have to tune it down to εr = 1.875.
I know that εr is frequency dependent, but such variation of -0.147 is too much from what I can see from the Roger's Diclad 880 DS (https://rogerscorp.com/-/media/proj...lish/data-sheets/diclad-series-data-sheet.pdf)
Is it normal such a variation of εr in ADS ?
Is it possible that I am doing something wrong in layout simulation ?
Thanks,
s
I am designing a bandpass stripline filter @ 17.2 GHz using parallel coupled lines with Keysight ADS, and I am experiencing problems with schematics simulation vs layout simulation results.
The schematics simulation plots the expected results based on design requirements and equations
while layout simulation results with a frequency response shifted approx. 1.3 GHz below.
It results that I always have to manually tune the substrate dielectric constant quite a lot in EM substrate settings.
For example, for DiClad 880 εr= 2.2, I have to tune it down to εr = 1.875.
I know that εr is frequency dependent, but such variation of -0.147 is too much from what I can see from the Roger's Diclad 880 DS (https://rogerscorp.com/-/media/proj...lish/data-sheets/diclad-series-data-sheet.pdf)
Is it normal such a variation of εr in ADS ?
Is it possible that I am doing something wrong in layout simulation ?
Thanks,
s
Last edited: