1991
DOI: 10.1109/22.81658
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Terahertz attenuation and dispersion characteristics of coplanar transmission lines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
160
1
1

Year Published

1996
1996
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 292 publications
(164 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
2
160
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The effect of diffusion of quasiparticles from the central strip at the antenna feed is therefore negligible. Furthermore we checked that for this geometry radiation losses are a factor 10 lower than absorption in the superconductor 39 . The measured energy gap in the FTS response occurs at 324 GHz, corresponding to a T c of 4.4 K, assuming 2∆ = 3.52k B T c .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effect of diffusion of quasiparticles from the central strip at the antenna feed is therefore negligible. Furthermore we checked that for this geometry radiation losses are a factor 10 lower than absorption in the superconductor 39 . The measured energy gap in the FTS response occurs at 324 GHz, corresponding to a T c of 4.4 K, assuming 2∆ = 3.52k B T c .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From 500 GHz, α R increases in these two transmission lines. In CPW, α R reaches 0.43 dB/mm at 1 THz following a cubic relation with the frequency as in [10], and in microstrip, α R equals 1.48 dB/mm at 1 THz. This originates from the shock wave radiation when a V p mismatch exists between the main propagating mode and the substrate wave.…”
Section: Radiation Losses α Rmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…These limitations can be overcome by planar waveguides such as: microstrip [7][8][9], coplanar waveguide (CPW) [10][11][12], coplanar stripline (CPS) [10,13,14], slotline [15,16] or the planar Goubau line [17]. But all these waveguides have much more losses than metallic and dielectric waveguides.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The antenna presented here has some distinct advantages over thin membrane antennas: the metallic-slit based antenna has lower conductor loss due to increased conductor surface area, it is less delicate due to the material and thickness, and the manufacturing process doesn't require harsh etchants (EDP, HF, etc). Other substrate-based antennas [2][3][4] which closely model coplanar strip/slotline configurations can have a total loss of ≈17dB/mm at 1 THz [24], whereas the free-space metallic-slit geometry has a loss of <1dB/mm at 1 THz [16]. To note, these numbers are not representative of all designs, but they illustrate the possible large difference between the expected losses.…”
Section: Designmentioning
confidence: 94%