More Near field or less?
More Near field or less?
(OP)
Will a patch with very high er (80) bring the near field/far field boundary closer to the antenna by concentrating the radiated field more closely to itself?
Thank you
Thank you
Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
- Talk With Other Members
- Be Notified Of Responses
To Your Posts - Keyword Search
- One-Click Access To Your
Favorite Forums - Automated Signatures
On Your Posts - Best Of All, It's Free!
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.
Posting Guidelines
Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.
Talk To Other Members
RE: More Near field or less?
It's not a concentration due to dielectric that changes the answer to your question, it's just a physical difference in antenna size. Larger antennas have a longer distance inherently to the far field region.
Two antennas of the same physical size have the same near field/far field distance. That distance isn't simply 2d^2/Lambda either, it's much closer. All depends on what you plan to do.
d^2/Lambda has only 1/2 dB inaccuracy compared to 2d^2/Lambda for standard antennas being tested.
0.4d^2/Lambda distance from the antenna is typically the peak power density. Good to know if you are transmitting and worry about burning up a radome or human. i.e. if you make a large radome for a smaller transmit antenna, spacing it away from your antenna might burn it up if you put it 0.4d^2/Lambda away.
kch