The original paper (see IEEE Microwave Guided Wave Lett., vol. 4, no. 2, p. 87-9, 1998) proposed a means of determining the TEM equivalent Z/sub 0/, which is similar to the technique described by this author. While this author assumes the port discontinuity to be a single shunt capacitance, the port discontinuity assumed by Zhu and Wu is more general. Their key figure is repeated. The transmission line under consideration has a width of 0.635 mm, with a substrate 0.635 mm thick with a relative dielectric constant of 9.7. Zero thickness and zero loss are assumed. Although incidental to this letter, it is interesting to note that Zhu and Wu show the same nonmonotonic dispersion in Z/sub 0/. The authors of the original paper suggest that the 2% difference is due to error in Rautio's analysis. In order to check this hypothesis, an error analysis must be performed. The purpose of this paper is to communicate the results of just such an error analysis for Rautio's analysis. The original authors give their reply.
展开▼
机译：原始论文（参见IEEE微波导波通讯，第4卷，第2期，第87-9页，1998年）提出了一种确定TEM等效Z / sub 0 /的方法，该方法类似于这个作者。尽管作者将端口不连续性假定为单个并联电容，但Zhu和Wu假定的端口不连续性更为笼统。他们的关键人物是重复的。所考虑的传输线的宽度为0.635 mm，基板厚度为0.635 mm，相对介电常数为9.7。假定零厚度和零损耗。尽管这封信是附带的，但有趣的是，朱和吴在Z / sub 0 /中显示出相同的非单调色散。原始论文的作者建议2％的差异是由于Rautio分析中的错误所致。为了检查该假设，必须执行错误分析。本文的目的是将这种错误分析的结果传达给Rautio分析。原始作者给予答复。
展开▼
