Analytical Design Procedure for Forward Wave Couplers in RGW Technology Based on Hybrid PEC/PMC Waveguide Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a systematic design methodology of a 0dB and a 3dB forward couplers based on the ridge gap waveguide (RGW) technology is presented. This methodology is based on exact theoretical formulations rather than any approximate or empirical equations. The procedure of the proposed design methodology is mainly to build a virtual equivalent waveguide model. This waveguide has two horizontal upper and lower perfect electric conductor (PEC) walls, while the left and the right walls are made of perfect magnetic conductors (PMC). A detailed analysis for this hybrid PEC/PMC waveguide, a common waveguide for coupling, is introduced as the starting phase for designing the RGW couplers. The equivalent RGW coupler that assures the same operation of the hybrid PEC/PMC waveguide at a specific frequency range is deduced based on detailed theoretical aspects. Moreover, a simple analyzing of transitional bends and phase shifters with accurate calculations is presented in this paper, which are the fundamental building blocks of several mmW components such as the six-port junction and the butler matrix. The possibility of tuning the coupler center frequency is introduced without the need of using any nonlinear elements. The resulting RGW couplers are implemented through well-known full wave simulator (Ansoft HFSS), with verification through prototype measurements in order to confirm the validity of the proposed methodology. A good agreement is achieved between measurement and simulation results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".