John thanks, 
 
I am aware that the boundary is a smooth transition and the main reason for
wanting to know is to do with some subjective analysis of powerline
telecommunications measurements that I have completed.
 
There are various papers that state that the attenuation of E with distance is
1/distance(d) in the far field and some combination of 1/d, 1/d^2 and 1/d^3 in
the near (or very near) field.
 
I have conducted measurements from 1-30MHz in a densely populated housing
estate, in a semi rural college and at a semi rural house that has no objects
to reflect the field strength back. I have plotted all of the graphs and
included curves for 1/d^0.5, 1/d, 1/d^2, 1/d^3 and I am now in the process of
correlating them. 
 
What I'd like to know is how large the measurement errors are. eg I have used
a loop (which is the recognised method) and then converted to E for comparison
to others results by using E/H=377 which is only true in the far field. I
though it would be useful to determine what the results might be if E/H
approached 3000 or 30 say and for that  thought I'd use the point source
formula lambda/2*pi and also 2*D^2/lambda to determine how near or far the
boundary might be.
 
Sorry that is a bit of a ramble but that's the background to it.
 
You mentioned that D might be an area which was my initial thoughts as it is
quoted for use as an aperture and therefore may not be wholly appropriate to
use in the instance of the source being a large loop in the horizontal plane.
 
The overall aim of my PhD is not to come up with any answers per se but to
explain to others who quote EMC theory in relation to PLT measurement. There
are lots of assumptions but no one aver states "the answer is x and by the way
that is + or - 50%". There are lots of people measuring E in dBuV to 2 decimal
places with no mention of the errors in their measurements. This is fine for
compliance if everyone does the same thing but some people are trying to
predict interference based upon these results.
 
Thanks,
Iain  
 
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Woodgate" < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>
To: < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: Near field/Far field what is D.


In message < <mailto:001c01c6b604$c0ed2810$6401a8c0@homepc>
001c01c6b604$c0ed2810$6401a8c0@homepc>, dated Wed, 2 Aug 
2006, Iain Summers < <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]> writes
>There are various references and opinions as to what constitutes the 
>near field far field boundary. The common one from antenna theory is 
>2D^2/lambda where D is defined as the largest aperture of the antenna.

There isn't a sharp boundary. What you take as the boundary depends on 
why you want to know where it is, and you don't tell us that.

For example, you might decide that you want to know where the phase 
angle between E and H is only 1 degree. Or is 45 degrees. Or more.
> 
>Has anyone researched what the limitations of this formula are? I am 
>interested in the far field boundary between 1-30MHz for large loops of 
>wire.

Large compared with the wavelength at 1 MHz? That's large indeed!

>In terms of a loop if this formula is applicable is D the circumference 
>or diameter of the loop.

Or maybe the area?
-- 
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try  <http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk>
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and  <http://www.isce.org.uk> www.isce.org.uk
2006 is YMMVI- Your mileage may vary immensely.

John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.    Website:   <http://www.ieee-pses.org/>
http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to  <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]

Instructions:   <http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html>
http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules:  <http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html>
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

     Scott Douglas            <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]
     Mike Cantwell            <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]

For policy questions, send mail to:

     Jim Bacher:              <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]
     David Heald:             <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

     <http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc>
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

- ---------------------------------------------------------------- This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] 


Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 


List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 


For help, send mail to the list administrators: 


Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] 


For policy questions, send mail to: 


Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 


http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 


Reply via email to