The 300 MHz was for the loop.
But the author did discuss the following:
"Let us digress to discuss "normalised impedance". We find that transmission lines have a property called "characteristic impedance" Zo, which is the square root of the inductance/metre divided by the square root of the capacitance per metre of the cable. The SMITH chart is presented in terms of dimensionless normalised impedance, where the actual impedance of interest is divided by the Zo of the particular line being used. In this way, we can get away with a single SMITH chart calibration for all possible line characteristic impedances. As the reflection coefficient gamma is also a dimensionless number this has the added advantage of simplifying the mathematics and making the understanding easier. Transmission lines having differing values of Zo all behave the same, as far as their normalised impedance properties are concerned." - Dr. David Jefferies
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/D.Jefferies/bio.html
Not that you need to read that, but you might consider it the next time you want to blast someone for posting a normalized Smith chart. Noob?
Anway, I appreciate all the help and insight. Thanks again.
But the author did discuss the following:
"Let us digress to discuss "normalised impedance". We find that transmission lines have a property called "characteristic impedance" Zo, which is the square root of the inductance/metre divided by the square root of the capacitance per metre of the cable. The SMITH chart is presented in terms of dimensionless normalised impedance, where the actual impedance of interest is divided by the Zo of the particular line being used. In this way, we can get away with a single SMITH chart calibration for all possible line characteristic impedances. As the reflection coefficient gamma is also a dimensionless number this has the added advantage of simplifying the mathematics and making the understanding easier. Transmission lines having differing values of Zo all behave the same, as far as their normalised impedance properties are concerned." - Dr. David Jefferies
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/D.Jefferies/bio.html
Not that you need to read that, but you might consider it the next time you want to blast someone for posting a normalized Smith chart. Noob?
Anway, I appreciate all the help and insight. Thanks again.
