Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T08:51:53.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Compact filtering power dividers with wide upper stopband

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2019

Gaoya Dong
Affiliation:
Beijing Key Laboratory of Work Safety Intelligent Monitoring, School of Electronic Engineering, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, P.O. Box 282, Beijing 100876, People's Republic of China
Weimin Wang*
Affiliation:
Beijing Key Laboratory of Work Safety Intelligent Monitoring, School of Electronic Engineering, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, P.O. Box 282, Beijing 100876, People's Republic of China
Yuanan Liu
Affiliation:
Beijing Key Laboratory of Work Safety Intelligent Monitoring, School of Electronic Engineering, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, P.O. Box 282, Beijing 100876, People's Republic of China
*
Author for correspondence: Weimin Wang, E-mail: wangwm@bupt.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A series of compact filtering power dividers (FPDs) with simple layouts are proposed based on coupling topology. The structure of the presented FPD1 is composed of three resonators and one isolating resistor. These FPDs can be designed based on coupling matrix filter theory. A half-wave transmission line is employed in FPD2 to introduce a transmission zero (TZ) locating at 1.27f0. The FPD3 is designed by replacing quarter-wave transmission lines in FPD2 with quarter-wave coupled lines, which will produce a TZ locating at 1.96 f0 and extend upper stopband bandwidth. For verification, three FPDs centered at 2.45 GHz are fabricated and measured. All measured results are in good agreement with the full-wave simulation results.

Information

Type
Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the European Microwave Association 2019 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Coupling scheme of a second-order Chebyshev bandpass power divider.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Geometries of proposed FPDs. (a) FPD1, (b) resonator 1 in FPD1, (c) resonator 2 (3) in FPD1, (d) FPD2, (e) resonator 1′ in FPD2, (f) resonator 2′ (3') in FPD2, (g) FPD3, (e) resonator 1′′ in FPD3, (f) resonator 2″ (3″) in FPD3.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. The frequency of fTZ2 versus (a) various l9 with g3 selected as 2.8 mm and (b) various g3 with l9 selected as 16.0 mm.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Transmission characteristics (S21) of FPD1, FPD2, and FPD3.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. External quality factors of various resonators, (a) resonator 1 in FPD1 with various values of wm1, (b) resonator 2 (2′) in FPD1 (FPD2) with various values of l0, (c) resonator 1′′′ (1′) in FPD3 (FPD2) with various values of wm3, and (d) resonator 2″ in FPD3 with various values of sc4.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Coupling coefficients versus distances (g1, g2, and g3) between resonators 1 (1′, 1′′) and 2 (2′, 2′′) in three presented FPDs.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Frequency responses of proposed FPDs with various distances between resonators 2 (2′, 2′′) and 3 (3′, 3′′). (a) FPD1 with various values of g1. (b) FPD2 with various values of g2. (c) FPD3 with various values of g3.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Frequency responses of proposed FPDs with various dimensions of resonators (1, 1′, and 1′′). (a) FPD1 with various dimensions of resonator 1. (b) FPD2 with various dimensions of resonator 1′. (c) FPD2 with various dimensions of resonator 1′′.

Figure 8

Table 1. Dimensions (unit: mm) of three proposed FPDs under different cases

Figure 9

Fig. 9. (a) Isolation performances of FPD2 with and without the bridge. (b) Isolation performances of FPD3 with and without the bridge.

Figure 10

Fig. 10. The photographs of fabricated FPDs. (a) FPD1, (b) FPD2, and (c) FPD3.

Figure 11

Table 2. Dimensions (unit: mm) of proposed FPDs

Figure 12

Fig. 11. Simulated and measured results of FPD1. (a) S11 and S21, and (b) S22 and S23.

Figure 13

Fig. 12. Simulated and measured results of FPD2. (a) S11 and S21, and (b) S22 and S23.

Figure 14

Fig. 13. Simulated and measured results of FPD3. (a) S11 and S21, and (b) S22 and S23.

Figure 15

Table 3. Comparison between the proposed filtering power divider and the references