Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Zenneck wave

A Zenneck wave, also known as a Sommerfeld-Zenneck wave, is a non-radiating electromagnetic surface wave that propagates along the planar interface between two dissimilar media, typically free space (such as air) and a lossy conductor (such as the Earth's surface), exhibiting transverse magnetic (TM) polarization and evanescent field decay perpendicular to the boundary.^[1]^[2] Proposed by German physicist Jonathan Zenneck in 1907 as a solution to Maxwell's equations for vertically polarized plane waves at such boundaries, it features a Poynting vector nearly parallel to the interface, enabling guided propagation with exponential amplitude decay both along and away from the surface.^[1]^[2] Historically significant for explaining long-distance radio propagation beyond the horizon, particularly in the high-frequency (HF) band (3–30 MHz), the wave's theoretical existence sparked controversy following Arnold Sommerfeld's 1909 analysis, which included a sign error suggesting limited practical dominance; this was later resolved through rigorous mathematical clarifications in the 2010s, affirming its validity under specific conditions like high conductivity and appropriate excitation.^[1]^[2] In modern contexts, Zenneck waves have been experimentally realized at radio frequencies using structures like ground-backed impedance surfaces and helical transformers, demonstrating potential for non-radiative wireless power transfer over metal-air interfaces with slow, frequency-independent attenuation and uniform delivery to multiple loads.^[2] Emerging applications include through-soil power transmission for agricultural sensors and decision agriculture, leveraging the wave's ability to sink into lossy dielectrics without significant radiation losses.^[3] Despite these advances, challenges persist in efficient excitation over finite apertures and scaling for long-range terrestrial use, where ionospheric reflections often compete with surface modes.^[1]

History

Discovery by Zenneck

Jonathan Adolf Wilhelm Zenneck (1871–1959), a German physicist and electrical engineer, made foundational contributions to electromagnetism and wireless communication during the early 20th century. As an assistant to and collaborator with Karl Ferdinand Braun, Zenneck's research focused on the practical aspects of electromagnetic wave propagation, building on experimental demonstrations of radio waves.^[4] In 1907, Zenneck published a pivotal paper in Annalen der Physik titled "Über die Fortpflanzung ebener elektromagnetischer Wellen längs einer ebenen Leiterfläche und ihre Beziehung zur drahtlosen Telegraphie," proposing the existence of surface electromagnetic waves along a conducting interface.^[5] This work analyzed plane waves propagating parallel to a flat conducting surface, modeled after the Earth, to address limitations in early radio theory.^[1] Zenneck's motivation stemmed from Hertz's experimental validation of Maxwell's equations through generated electromagnetic waves and Marconi's successful transatlantic wireless transmissions, which demonstrated propagation far beyond optical line-of-sight and raised questions about diffraction over the Earth's curvature.^[5]^[1] He introduced the concept of a non-radiating wave tightly bound to the air-ground interface, where the electromagnetic fields exhibit exponential decay perpendicular to the surface in both media, concentrating energy near the boundary without significant radiation into free space.^[5] This bound mode offered a mechanism for efficient long-distance signal travel along the Earth's surface, directly linking theoretical electromagnetism to the emerging field of wireless telegraphy.^[1] In 1909, Arnold Sommerfeld published a seminal paper that provided a rigorous mathematical foundation for the propagation of electromagnetic waves over a conducting earth, building on earlier conceptual ideas about surface waves. He formulated the electric field generated by a vertical Hertzian dipole located above a lossy half-space, representing the interface between air and the ground with finite conductivity. The solution was derived using Fourier-Bessel integrals, which allowed for the decomposition of the field into distinct components relevant to radio telegraphy applications.^[6] Sommerfeld's approach involved contour integration in the complex spectral plane, where the integrand features branch points corresponding to the wave numbers in the upper (air) and lower (ground) media. A key contribution was the identification of a pole in this complex plane, whose residue yields the surface wave term, now commonly referred to as the Sommerfeld-Zenneck wave. This pole arises from the boundary conditions at the interface and represents a guided mode that propagates along the surface with exponential decay away from it, distinguishing it from radiating components. The analysis emphasized the cylindrical symmetry and radial propagation, with the surface wave amplitude varying as $1/\sqrt{r} at large distances r. However, Sommerfeld's initial 1909 calculations contained a sign error in the formulation of the far-field behavior, leading him to overestimate the dominance of the Zenneck surface wave over other components like space waves and lateral waves at large distances; he corrected this error in a 1926 addendum, clarifying that the surface wave's contribution diminishes more rapidly than initially thought.^[6]^[1]^[7] Sommerfeld's treatment explicitly accounted for the finite conductivity of the ground by incorporating a complex wave number k_2 = \sqrt{\epsilon_2 \mu_2 \omega^2 + i \mu_2 \sigma_2 \omega} in the lower medium, where \sigma_2 is the conductivity, \epsilon_2 the permittivity, \mu_2 the permeability, and \omega the angular frequency. This led to refinements in understanding how losses affect the surface wave's attenuation, introducing the concept of numerical distance to quantify the transition from near-field to far-field behavior. He clearly distinguished the surface wave (from the pole residue) from space waves (direct and reflected geometrical optics terms) and lateral waves (contributions from branch cut integrals, which represent head waves along the interface). These distinctions clarified that the surface wave is a non-radiating, bound mode, while space and lateral waves contribute to diffraction and scattering effects, though the sign error fueled debates on the wave's practical observability and dominance in radio propagation.^[6]^[7]^[1] Sommerfeld's work had a profound influence on early 20th-century radio engineering, providing the theoretical basis for ground-wave propagation models used in long-distance communication and broadcasting. It inspired subsequent refinements, including a 1931 reinterpretation by Balth. van der Pol that further explored the physical realizability of the surface wave through asymptotic evaluations of the integrals, as well as analyses by G.H. Norton in the 1930s that revisited the error's implications. Despite initial debates on its observability due to interference from other field components, the analysis became foundational for standards in radio propagation prediction.^[7]^[1]

Physical principles

Wave characteristics

The Zenneck wave is defined as a transverse magnetic (TM)-polarized, inhomogeneous plane wave that propagates parallel to the interface between two semi-infinite media, with its fields undergoing evanescent decay perpendicular to the interface.^[8] This polarization, also referred to as vertical polarization, ensures that the magnetic field is transverse to the direction of propagation while the electric field has components both parallel and perpendicular to the interface.^[1] The inhomogeneity arises from the wave's phase fronts being tilted relative to the propagation direction, leading to an exponential decay of the field amplitude away from the interface in the direction normal to it.^[9] A key feature of the Zenneck wave is its longitudinal character, where the phase velocity is aligned along the propagation direction parallel to the interface, but the energy flow—given by the real part of the Poynting vector—is tilted relative to this direction.^[1] Specifically, in the upper medium (such as air), the Poynting vector tilts slightly upward, while in the lower lossy medium (such as ground), it tilts downward, resulting in energy transport predominantly along the surface with components directing power into the absorbing medium. This configuration confines the wave's energy near the boundary without significant radiation away from it. The Zenneck wave emerges at a complex Brewster angle of incidence for an incident TM plane wave, where the reflection coefficient vanishes, enabling total transmission across the interface without reflected power.^[10] This condition arises from the pole of the transmission coefficient in the complex angular spectrum, distinguishing the surface mode from ordinary plane waves.^[8] In contrast to radiating electromagnetic waves, the Zenneck wave functions as a non-radiating bound mode, with electromagnetic fields decaying exponentially on both sides of the interface, thereby localizing the wave to the surface region and preventing energy leakage into the far field.^[9] This evanescent behavior in both media ensures the mode remains guided along lossy interfaces, such as those involving the Earth's surface.^[8]

Conditions for propagation

The Zenneck wave requires an interface between two distinct media to propagate, typically consisting of a non-conducting or low-loss upper medium with positive real permittivity, such as air where ε ≈ 1, and a lower medium exhibiting complex permittivity ε = ε' + iε'' with positive real part ε' > 0 and significant imaginary part due to finite conductivity, as found in lossy dielectrics or conductors like soil or seawater.^[1]^[11] This configuration arises because the loss in the lower medium enables the wave to bind to the interface through the Brewster angle phenomenon, where the reflection coefficient for incident waves vanishes.^[11] Without such an interface featuring a low-loss upper medium and a lossy lower medium with finite conductivity, no true surface-bound mode can form.^[1] Propagation is predominantly supported at low frequencies, ranging from radio frequency (RF) to microwave bands, where the wavelength is sufficiently long to interact meaningfully with surface irregularities and the ground conductivity σ remains finite and positive but not infinite.^[12]^[13] At these frequencies, typically below a few gigahertz, the displacement current in the lower medium competes with conduction current, allowing the wave to maintain a guided character without excessive radiation or absorption.^[1] Higher frequencies tend to disrupt this balance, as the permittivity's imaginary part dominates less effectively.^[13] The wave is strictly limited to transverse magnetic (TM) or vertical polarization, where the magnetic field is transverse to the direction of propagation and the electric field has a vertical component perpendicular to the interface.^[12]^[1] Transverse electric (TE) or horizontal polarization modes fail to support surface binding, as they do not satisfy the boundary conditions for evanescent decay on both sides of the interface.^[11] This polarization specificity ensures the electric field lines can penetrate into the lossy medium, facilitating energy transfer and confinement near the surface.^[13] Moderate conductivity in the lower medium is essential, with values around 10^{-4} to 10 S/m typical for Earth's surface materials like soil or seawater, which introduce just enough loss to enable the mode without causing prohibitive attenuation.^[13] Perfect conductors (σ → ∞) suppress the Zenneck wave entirely, as the boundary conditions revert to those of ideal reflection without surface wave support, while overly low conductivity prevents the necessary loss for supporting the surface mode.^[1]^[11] This loss mechanism, tied to finite σ, thus plays a constructive role in sustaining propagation over imperfect interfaces.^[12]

Mathematical formulation

Derivation from Maxwell's equations

The derivation of the Zenneck wave begins with the setup of a boundary value problem for electromagnetic fields at a planar interface. Consider an infinite interface located at z = 0, separating two semi-infinite media: medium 1 (air) occupies the region z > 0 with permittivity \epsilon_0 and permeability \mu_0, while medium 2 (a lossy dielectric, such as ground) occupies z < 0 with complex permittivity \epsilon_c = \epsilon_0 \epsilon_r (where \epsilon_r has a positive imaginary part to account for losses) and permeability \mu_0. The fields are assumed to be time-harmonic with the convention e^{-i \omega t}, monochromatic at angular frequency \omega, and independent of the y-direction, corresponding to a two-dimensional problem in the x-z plane. Transverse magnetic (TM) polarization is considered, where the magnetic field has only a y-component H_y(x, z), and the electric field lies in the x-z plane with components E_x and E_z.^[12]^[14] To satisfy Maxwell's equations in each homogeneous medium, an evanescent wave ansatz is adopted for the magnetic field component, ensuring decay away from the interface. In medium 1 (z > 0),

H_y = A e^{i k_x x - \kappa_z z},

where A is the amplitude, k_x is the wavenumber along the interface, and \kappa_z > 0 governs the exponential decay in the +z direction. In medium 2 (z < 0),

H_y = B e^{i k_x x + \kappa_z' z},

with \kappa_z' > 0 ensuring decay in the -z direction. The transverse decay constants are related to the free-space wavenumber k_0 = \omega \sqrt{\mu_0 \epsilon_0} by \kappa_z = \sqrt{k_x^2 - k_0^2} in medium 1 and \kappa_z' = \sqrt{k_x^2 - \epsilon_r k_0^2} in medium 2, with the square root branches chosen to maintain positive real parts for evanescence.^[12]^[1] The electric field components are derived from Maxwell's curl equations, \nabla \times \mathbf{H} = -i \omega \epsilon \mathbf{E}, under the TM assumption (H_x = H_z = 0, E_y = 0). In general,

E_x = -\frac{i}{\omega \epsilon} \frac{\partial H_y}{\partial z}, \quad E_z = \frac{i}{\omega \epsilon} \frac{\partial H_y}{\partial x},

where the expressions follow from the x- and z-components of the curl. Substituting the ansatz for medium 1 yields

E_x^{(1)} = \frac{i \kappa_z}{\omega \epsilon_0} H_y, \quad E_z^{(1)} = -\frac{k_x}{\omega \epsilon_0} H_y

at any z > 0. For medium 2,

E_x^{(2)} = -\frac{i \kappa_z'}{\omega \epsilon_c} H_y, \quad E_z^{(2)} = -\frac{k_x}{\omega \epsilon_c} H_y.

These forms ensure the fields satisfy \nabla \times \mathbf{E} = i \omega \mu_0 \mathbf{H} as well.^[12]^[14] Applying the electromagnetic boundary conditions at z = 0 requires continuity of the tangential field components: the magnetic field H_y and the electric field E_x. Continuity of H_y implies A = B. Continuity of E_x then gives

\frac{i \kappa_z}{\omega \epsilon_0} A = -\frac{i \kappa_z'}{\omega \epsilon_c} A,

which simplifies to the characteristic equation

\frac{\kappa_z}{\epsilon_0} + \frac{\kappa_z'}{\epsilon_c} = 0

upon canceling common factors (assuming A \neq 0). This equation determines the allowed k_x for the surface mode.^[12]^[14] The Zenneck wave solution emerges as the proper pole of the reflection coefficient in the boundary value problem, corresponding to values of k_x satisfying the characteristic equation with k_x > k_0, which guarantees evanescence perpendicular to the interface (\kappa_z > 0, \Re(\kappa_z') > 0). This mode represents a non-radiating surface wave bound to the interface, distinct from propagating or total internal reflection solutions. The resulting dispersion relation, obtained by solving the characteristic equation, describes the frequency dependence of k_x.^[1]^[12]

Dispersion relation and evanescence

The dispersion relation governing the propagation constant k_x along the interface for a Zenneck wave between two semi-infinite media with complex relative permittivities \epsilon_1 (upper medium) and \epsilon_2 (lower medium) is

k_x = k_0 \sqrt{\frac{\epsilon_1 \epsilon_2}{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}},

where k_0 = \omega / c is the free-space wavenumber, \omega is the angular frequency, and c is the speed of light in vacuum.^[15] This relation arises as the solution to the characteristic equation from applying boundary conditions to TM-polarized fields and determines the phase velocity v_p = \omega / \mathrm{Re}(k_x), which exceeds c for bound modes when \mathrm{Re}(\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2) > 0 and \mathrm{Im}(\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2) > 0.^[15] Evanescence perpendicular to the interface is described by the decay constants in each medium,

\kappa_{z1} = \sqrt{k_x^2 - k_1^2}, \quad \kappa_{z2} = \sqrt{k_x^2 - k_2^2},

where k_1 = k_0 \sqrt{\epsilon_1} and k_2 = k_0 \sqrt{\epsilon_2}, with the square root branches selected such that \mathrm{Re}(\kappa_{z1}) > 0 and \mathrm{Re}(\kappa_{z2}) > 0 to ensure exponential decay away from the interface (z > 0 in medium 1 and z < 0 in medium 2).^[12] For forward-propagating modes, \mathrm{Im}(k_x) > 0 when material losses are present, leading to spatial attenuation along x.^[12] The fields thus vary as \exp(j k_x x - \kappa_{zi} |z| - j \omega t), confining energy near the boundary. The mode exists at the complex Brewster angle for TM incidence,

\theta_B = \sin^{-1} \sqrt{\frac{\epsilon_2}{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}},

where the reflection coefficient vanishes and the transmission coefficient exhibits a pole, corresponding to the divergence that supports the surface-bound solution without reflection.^[16] In the TM field structure, the longitudinal electric field component satisfies E_x \propto i \kappa_z / (\omega \epsilon) H_y, where H_y is the transverse magnetic field; this relation underscores the longitudinal electric field dominance close to the surface, as the evanescent nature amplifies the component parallel to propagation relative to transverse components, binding the wave to the interface.^[12]

Propagation behavior

Over lossy interfaces

Zenneck waves propagating over lossy interfaces, such as those between air and conductive media like soil or seawater, exhibit a modified propagation constant due to the finite conductivity and permittivity of the lower medium. The real part of the longitudinal propagation constant, \operatorname{Re}(k_x), is approximated as k_x \approx k_0 (1 + \delta), where k_0 = 2\pi / \lambda is the free-space wavenumber and \delta is a small complex correction term that incorporates the effects of the ground's relative permittivity \epsilon_r and conductivity \sigma, typically derived from the binomial expansion of the dispersion relation for high-contrast interfaces where |\epsilon_r| \gg 1. This modification results in a phase velocity slightly greater than the speed of light in free space, enabling the wave to follow the interface while decaying evanescently perpendicular to it.^[7] The influence of interface geometry plays a critical role in the wave's behavior. Under the flat Earth approximation, which holds near the source where distances are much less than the Earth's radius, the Zenneck wave propagates as a cylindrical wave with field amplitude decaying as $1/\sqrt{r}, where r is the radial distance along the surface. However, over longer distances accounting for Earth's curvature, diffraction effects become prominent, and the propagation is analyzed using Fock functions (Airy functions adapted for spherical geometry), which describe the transition from the illuminated to shadowed regions and modify the attenuation beyond the horizon.^[1] In comparison to space waves (direct and reflected paths), the Zenneck mode dominates close to the surface, particularly within a height of approximately \lambda / 2\pi above the interface, where its evanescent field provides stronger coupling and less geometric spreading than the $1/r decay of space waves at larger distances. Beyond this near zone, the space wave contributions become comparable, leading to a hybrid propagation regime.^[18] A representative example is propagation over seawater, characterized by high conductivity \sigma \approx 4 S/m and relative permittivity \epsilon_r \approx 80 at radio frequencies. In this case, the elevated conductivity significantly reduces the penetration depth into the medium compared to lower-conductivity grounds, confining the wave more tightly to the air-seawater interface and increasing ohmic losses, with the complex k_x shifting the pole location to enhance attenuation while maintaining guided propagation.^[7]

Attenuation mechanisms

The attenuation of Zenneck waves along the propagation direction is primarily governed by the imaginary part of the propagation constant, resulting in an exponential decay of the amplitude as e^{-\alpha x}, where \alpha = |\operatorname{Im}(k_x)|. For interfaces involving a lossy lower medium with relative permittivity \epsilon_2 and conductivity \sigma, the intrinsic attenuation arises from dissipative losses and can be approximated as \alpha \approx \frac{k_0}{2} \frac{|\epsilon_2| \sigma / (\omega \epsilon_0)}{|\epsilon_2|^2}, where k_0 = \omega / c is the free-space wavenumber, \epsilon_1 \approx 1 is the relative permittivity of the upper medium (air), and \omega is the angular frequency.^[19] This expression highlights how material parameters directly contribute to the wave's damping, with higher conductivity reducing the decay rate for good conductors. Surface roughness at the interface introduces additional scattering losses, which effectively act as increased absorption and elevate the overall attenuation. These losses become more pronounced with greater terrain irregularities, such as variations in the root-mean-square (rms) height of the surface, and are particularly significant over non-ideal ground or rough conductors. Theoretical models treat roughness-induced scattering as an equivalent increase in the effective conductivity or impedance mismatch, leading to heightened Im(k_x) compared to smooth interfaces.^[20] In the lower medium, the electromagnetic fields penetrate evanescently, decaying vertically as e^{\kappa_{z2} z} with \kappa_{z2} = \sqrt{k_x^2 - k_0^2 \epsilon_2}, confining most energy near the interface while allowing a fraction to extend into the conducting region. The absorbed power in this medium is proportional to the conductivity \sigma, as ohmic heating dissipates energy through Joule losses within the penetration depth, contributing substantially to the total attenuation for finite-conductivity substrates like soil or seawater.^[1] The frequency dependence of attenuation follows \alpha \propto f^2 from the approximation for lossy media, stemming from the interplay of the wavenumber and loss tangent, leading to increased attenuation at higher frequencies such as in the VHF band and limiting practical propagation distances. For highly conducting media, the attenuation is very low and appears nearly frequency-independent over practical ranges.^[2]

Applications and experiments

Radio propagation uses

In the early 20th century, Zenneck waves provided a theoretical foundation for understanding ground-wave propagation, enabling reliable over-the-horizon radio communication for AM broadcasting and maritime applications over land surfaces with ranges typically extending 100-200 km depending on terrain conductivity and transmitter power.^[21]^[22] This mode of propagation was essential for medium-frequency (MF) signals in the 0.3-3 MHz band, where the waves follow the Earth's curvature with minimal diffraction loss over moderately conductive soils, supporting daytime coverage for regional broadcasting without reliance on ionospheric reflection.^[23] Vertical monopole antennas, often quarter-wavelength designs elevated slightly above ground, were optimized to excite Zenneck modes efficiently at MF and lower HF frequencies (0.3-30 MHz), maximizing the vertical electric field component that couples to the surface interface.^[24]^[25] Ground conductivity maps, developed from empirical measurements, were used to predict propagation ranges by accounting for variations in soil types—such as higher losses over dry land (conductivity ~0.001-0.01 S/m) compared to moist earth—allowing engineers to site transmitters for optimal ground-wave performance in AM networks.^[26]^[22] During World War II, Zenneck wave propagation via ground waves over seawater facilitated military submarine communication from shore-based stations, particularly in the MF band, where the high conductivity of seawater (~4 S/m) resulted in low attenuation and extended ranges up to several hundred kilometers for surfaced or near-surfaced vessels. This approach leveraged the efficient binding of the wave to the conductive ocean surface, enabling secure, line-of-sight-independent links for tactical updates without exposing submarines to detection risks associated with surfacing for higher-frequency transmissions. While Zenneck waves proved effective for short- to medium-range ground-wave coverage, they became obsolete for long-distance communication due to the superior range of ionospheric skywave reflections at MF/HF, though they remain relevant for reliable, interference-free short-range applications like local broadcasting and navigation aids.^[23]^[27]

Modern demonstrations and technologies

In the early 21st century, analyses such as that by Collin in 2004 resolved longstanding controversies surrounding the observability of Zenneck waves, demonstrating their physical reality through rigorous examination of excitation by a Hertzian dipole over lossy interfaces, where challenges in practical generation had previously led to doubts about their detectability.^[28] A key modern demonstration came in 2016 with experiments by Jangal et al., who observed Zenneck-like waves propagating over a metasurface designed for high-frequency radar applications, using an infrared visualization method to confirm the wave structure in the UHF microwave band (0.8–3 GHz), where the waves exhibited evanescent behavior sinking toward the dielectric interface.^[29] This work highlighted the potential of engineered surfaces to facilitate Zenneck propagation at microwave frequencies, enabling controlled surface wave launching without radiative losses. Further empirical validation occurred in 2020 through Oruganti et al.'s experiment, which realized Zenneck-type waves for non-radiative, non-coupled wireless power transmission over metal surfaces, operating at 27 MHz and 36 MHz to achieve end-to-end efficiencies up to 64% over distances of 8 meters in open conditions and 57% over 15 meters in shielded metal environments, powering multiple receivers without efficiency degradation from coupling interference.^[2] That same year, Raza and Salam provided empirical verification of Zenneck waves for applications in decision agriculture, conducting field tests at 433 MHz over various soil types (sandy and silt loam) to observe low-attenuation propagation along air-soil interfaces up to 1 meter, demonstrating their suitability for low-loss electromagnetic-based underground wireless power transfer to sensors, thereby extending device lifetimes in precision farming without invasive wiring.^[3]

References

[1]
Electromagnetic Surface Waves - MIT
Jun 15, 1996 · This so-called Zenneck wave is simply a vertically polarized plane wave solution to Maxwell's equations in the presence of a planar boundary ...
[2]
Experimental Realization of Zenneck Type Wave-based Non ...
Jan 22, 2020 · Zenneck waves are excited at interfaces, like surface plasmons and have the potential to deliver electrical power to devices placed on a ...
[3]
Zenneck Waves in Decision Agriculture: An Empirical Verification ...
We develop a novel wireless through-the-soil power transfer application using Zenneck surface waves. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work which ...
[4]
Jonathan Zenneck - Engineering and Technology History Wiki
Aug 9, 2017 · Late in 1899, Zenneck turned his attention to wireless telegraphy, conducting experiments along the lines indicated by Braun. These ...
[5]
Über die Fortpflanzung ebener elektromagnetischer Wellen längs ...
Über die Fortpflanzung ebener elektromagnetischer Wellen längs einer ebenen Leiterfläche und ihre Beziehung zur drahtlosen Telegraphie. J. Zenneck,. J. Zenneck.
[6]
Über die Ausbreitung der Wellen in der drahtlosen Telegraphie
Annalen der Physik · Volume 333, Issue 4 pp. 665-736 Annalen der Physik. Article. Full Access. Über die Ausbreitung der Wellen in der drahtlosen Telegraphie. A.
[7]
Full article: The Sommerfeld half-space problem revisited: from radio ...
The branch cut contribution associated with the upper medium (air) is called a lateral wave and it typically dominates the total surface field; the contribution ...
[8]
Surface Plasmons-Polaritons, Surface Waves, and Zenneck Waves
A Zenneck wave is produced at the zero of the reflection coefficient of a plane incident TM wave (at the Brewster angle of incidence) on an air-dielectric ...Abstract · References (57) · Coherent, Nonlinear, And...
[9]
[PDF] Review of Electromagnetic Surface Waves - 1960 Through 1987
Such a wave is often referred to as the radial form of the Zenneck wave. It is an inhomogeneous radial wave and is represented in terms of outward- (or inward-) ...
[10]
Vol. 19 - PIER Journals
Zenneck, J., "Uber die Fortpflanzung ebener elektromagnetischer Wellen l¨angs einer ebenen Leiterflache und ihre Beziehung zur dratlosen Telegraphie (On the ...
[11]
[PDF] the distinction between zenneck waves and surface plasmon
The Zenneck waves are produced at the zero of the reflection coefficient of an incident TM wave on an air-dielectric interface whereas the surface plasmons are ...Missing: polarized | Show results with:polarized<|control11|><|separator|>
[12]
[PDF] Lecture-Surface-Waves.pdf - EMPossible
Jan 30, 2020 · The field decays exponentially away from the interface. It is free to propagate without decay in the plane of the interface. Why Do Surface ...
[13]
[PDF] An Advanced VHF/UHF Short Range, Groundwave Propagation ...
Nov 1, 2006 · One of Braun's colleagues was electrical engineer Jonathan Zenneck who developed a novel approach to solving Maxwell's equations: a wavelike ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[14]
[PDF] Transmission and reflection of electromagnetic waves in the ...
A general analysis is presented for the electromagnetic response of a plane stratified medium consisting of any number of parallel homogeneous layers.
[15]
Excitation of the Zenneck surface wave by a vertical aperture
Excitation of the Zenneck surface wave by a vertical aperture. David A. Hill,. David A. Hill. Search for more papers by this author · James R. Wait,. James R.
[16]
Observation of Zenneck-type waves in microwave propagation ...
Jul 24, 2006 · ... transmitted wave entering the ground plane. For a critical value of the incidence angle (the Brewster angle), there is no reflected wave.
[17]
(PDF) Overview of the Near-Ground Propagation Mechanisms in ...
In this paper we re-examine the solution of the century-old Sommerfeld problem of a vertical Hertzian dipole radiating over planar ground, in the context of ...
[18]
[PDF] arXiv:1301.3715v1 [physics.optics] 16 Jan 2013
Jan 16, 2013 · Similar fields (with a negative attenuation constant, Reκ′ < 0) could ... Then kx ≈ k0 (1 − 1/2ε) and the imaginary part of kx is automatically ...
[19]
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.3715
[20]
Transmission Line Loss - Microwave Encyclopedia
Metal loss varies predominantly as SQRT(f). Metal loss is modeled by the R' component in the transmission line model which is series resistance per unit length.
[21]
The ancient and modern history of EM ground-wave propagation
Oct 1, 1998 · Radio-wave transmission over the surface of the Earth is a subject of enquiry going back to the beginning of the century.Missing: AM maritime
[22]
[PDF] FCC/OET R86-1, Modern Methods for Calculating Ground-Wave ...
Sep 9, 2011 · The van der Pol and Bremmer paper published in 1938 [9] was a complete solution of the radio diffraction problem for propagation over ...
[23]
[PDF] Ground-wave Analysis Model for MF Broadcast Systems
The ground-wave model is valid for path lengths ranging from 1 to 10,000 km (L.A. Berry, OT Technical Memorandum 78-247, January, 1978, limited distribution).
[24]
[PDF] Chapter 9—Vertical Antennas - QSL.net
The radiation pattern of a quarter-wave vertical monopole over perfect ground is half of the figure-8 shown for the half-wave dipole in free space. See Fig 9-1.
[25]
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7768692
[26]
[PDF] Transmission loss in radio propagation / II.
Transmission loss is the ratio of power radiated from a transmitting antenna to the power available at a loss-free receiving antenna.
[27]
Revisiting HF Ground Wave Propagation Losses Over the Ocean: A ...
Mar 31, 2023 · HFR signals propagate long distances over the ocean with low attenuation because the signal couples with the highly conductive sea surface.
[28]
[PDF] AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF HIGH-FREQUENCY GROUND ...
Using a frequency band of 20 to 30 MHz and a portable, broadband, discone antenna, high-frequency ground wave propagation characteristics have been demonstrated ...Missing: Zenneck | Show results with:Zenneck