4.6 Article

An RF Design of Biperiodic Multimode Interaction Circuit for $\textit{G}$ -Band Extended Interaction Klystron

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES
卷 70, 期 7, 页码 3872-3877

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TED.2023.3274622

关键词

Bandwidth; Couplings; Loading; Impedance; Electron beams; Voltage; Q-factor; Amplifier; broadband; extended interaction klystron (EIK); multimode operation; particle-in-cell (PIC) simulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an RF design of a biperiodic multimode interaction circuit for G-band extended interaction klystron (EIK) to overcome the bandwidth limitation of conventional EIK operating in a single mode. The operating modes of the input and output cavities are chosen as the p-mode and its adjacent ladder mode. The effect of beam loading and the presence of the waveguide port on the cavity characteristics of the output cavity operating in the multiple modes are investigated.
An RF design of biperiodic multimode interaction circuit for G-band extended interaction klystron (EIK) is presented to overcome the bandwidth limitation of conventional EIK operating in a single mode. The p-mode and its adjacent ladder mode are chosen as the operating modes of the input and output cavities. The effect of beam loading and the presence of the waveguide port on the cavity characteristics of the output cavity operating in the multiple modes are investigated, including the coupling coefficients, the frequencies, and the hot quality factors. The bandwidth of the gain section is broadened by the staggered tuning method. The 3-D particle-in-cell (PIC) simulation predicts a constant drive bandwidth of 4.5 GHz (exceeding 2% relative bandwidth) for the designed power amplifier around 220 GHz. Driven by a 21.4-kV, 0.25-A pencil electron beam, the amplifier can provide an output power of 195 W when the input power is 70 mW. The corresponding gain and electronic efficiency are 34.5 dB and 3.6%, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据