Yes, and if you let the PC do all the optimization work, what have you
learned? Not much other than how to use the PC for the applications.
Rectangular plots vs. frequency, Bode plots, give you absolutely no
information of the complex portions of impedances. Yea, poles and zeros.
They're like an SWR meter. The VECTOR reflection coefficient gives you far
more information than just frequency response!! Bode plots address
frequency response, and, yes, some additional information. But they are
certainly not as powerful as the Smith Charts when it comes to dealing with
complex sources and loads. By complex, I mean the reactive components of a
circuit, not a "complex" circuit.
Sorry, I live on the Smith Chart and have no intention of letting the PC do
all the work. What have I missed? Everything.....
EXAMPLE: The EE students at CSU up in Fort Collins, Colorado, "learn"
electronics sitting in front of PCs doing simulations. I've worked with a
few of them before retiring. They are useless in both designing and
troubleshooting. If it were up to me, they would not have been hired!
They can't even put Ohm's Law on the white board, let alone use it!!!!
Sure, they learn how to use the modeling applications. But those change.
After a decade or so, they're useless at even running the newer
applications. Then they need to find a new career.
I'll stick with my Smith Charts, thank you.......
Dave - W?LEV
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 11:18?PM Brian Beezley via groups.io <k6sti=
[email protected]> wrote:
I never intended to add a Smith chart to my S-parameter plotter. I can
appreciate how useful they must have been before computers, but I don't see
their value today. A computer program, especially one with automatic
optimization, can make quick work of a complex matching problem. However,
since I see references to Smith charts here all the time, before I dismiss
them I thought I should ask why people use them. What do they offer that
rectangular plots versus frequency don't?
Brian
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
--
Dave - W?LEV
