-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'; George Stults
Subject: Re: rayleigh criterion and farfield
The derivation of this formula involves considering a position in front of
the antenna, on the line in the direction of radiation. The distance from
this point to the edge of the antenna will be slightly more
the Rayleigh criterion for farfield
conditions based on antenna (or EUT max dimension) size as
dist for farfield conditions2*(max antenna dimension)^2/lambda
When I look at this, it says that the required distance for far field
conditions increases as the square of the dimensions of the antenna
it only to
Mr. Stults.
--
From: George Stults george.stu...@watchguard.com
To: 'Ken Javor' ken.ja...@emccompliance.com,
'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: rayleigh criterion and farfield
Date: Thu, Nov 21, 2002, 2:37 PM
As I understand it, your analogy
: Re: rayleigh criterion and farfield
The fact that an aperture antenna's (horn/dish) gain increases with
increasing frequency DOES seem intuitively obvious to me. Consider an
optical analogy. Lenses. If you are familiar with 35 mm photography, you
will recognize that a short lens like a 28 mm
...@watchguard.com
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: rayleigh criterion and farfield
Date: Thu, Nov 21, 2002, 11:59 AM
Hello Group,
A book I've been reading gives the Rayleigh criterion for farfield
conditions based on antenna (or EUT max dimension) size as
dist
5 matches
Mail list logo
