I'm not convinced of that. In a truly lossless line,
characteristic impedence Z0 = [ L0/C0 ]^0.5 where L0
and C0 are per length parameters of inductance and
capacitance respectively. So that theoretically, a
2 inch trace should have the same CI of a 20 inch trace.
> When a meander is added, it alters the geometry.
> If the curvature is tight enough, then the AC field
> distribution will be noticeably different in the region
> of the meander than for some distant segment.
I'm in absolute agreement up to here.
> We observe
>this as an increase in the apparent capacitance per unit length in the
>region of the meander.
Here's where I diverge. The lumped parameter model
from which CI is derived (I'm sure you're aware, but
for sake of the discussion) takes on the form
| <----- dx -----> |
For a lossless line, R=0.
What I was suggesting with my drawing in a previous
post is that meandering causes parasitic capacitance
in parallel with the trace is the following model
| L |
| <-- dx --> |
And some shunting of the trace inductance is achieved.
And thus, the reason for reduced CI.
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to email@example.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list ****