Sie sind auf Seite 1von 105

(

I

BURIED

ANTENNA

PERFORMANCE:

AD-783

274

DE~lELOPMENT OF SMAL L RESONP~NT

BUPIED

ANTENNAS

Howard

E.

Buss ey,

e

t

aI

Nation al

Bureau

of

5t and ar ds

Prepared

for:

Rome

Air

Develop men t

Cent er

Ju ne

1974

DISTRIBUTED BY:

Develop men t Cent er Ju ne 1974 DISTRIBUTED BY: National Technical Information Service U. S.

National Technical Information Service U. S. DEPAR!MEHT OF COMMERCE

5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield Va. 22151

COPYRIGHT GUIDANCE

The Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC ® ) is a U.S. Government agency and provides information on this Web site as a public service of the U.S. Department of Defense. THE COLLECTION INCLUDES BOTH MATERIAL THAT IS AND IS NOT PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT LAW.

U.S. Government works prepared by officers and employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not protected by copyright in the U.S. These works may be copied and distributed in their entirety without permission. Users should note and attribute the U.S. Government agency and private author when incorporating works of the U.S. Government in a copyrighted publication.

CAUTION: Government works may contain copyrighted material (e.g., quote, photograph, chart, drawing, literary works etc.) used with permission. Copyrighted material incorporated in a U.S. Government work retains its copyright protection.

Contractors and grantees, and other non-Government organizations, including foreign governments and international organizations, generally hold copyright to works they produce for the Government and in their own works, which may be distributed on DTIC’s Web site.

DTIC provides these copyrighted materials under a nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up royalty-free worldwide license which permits the U.S. Government to use, modify, reproduce, release, perform, display or disclose these works by or on behalf of the U.S. Government. The Government license in copyrighted materials is non-transferable to the public.

THEREFORE, you must carefully review and respect the copyright notices and other legends on all documents that you download from DTIC’s Web site and obtain permission from the copyright holder if you wish to reproduce and distribute the copyrighted material separately in another context.

-May 2011

 

UNCLASSIFIED

 

A.1>--. ?-~~~ 7 'I-

S£CUltITY CLUSIFICATIOIC Of' THIS ~AGI:r-- Del. ~

 

-

 

-

-

     

READ DlSTRUcn0N3

 

REPORT DOCUMENTA~ P-AGE'

 
 

-

 

BEFORE COIIPLETI!(G FORM

I.

'r:;:~O"~T NU

B'!1l

 

-

.r t:;OVT-ACCUIION NO

1.

ItECI~IENT'SCATALOG NUMBEIl

RAoc-TR-74-169

   
 

-

-

 
 

-

 

4. T'TLEJ~~l".J

S.

T~E Of' IlIE~OllT~E"'OD COVEllED

.

"~H::r AiiIENHA PEIlOIDWICE; DEVEI.OPHEIri OF SKALL

Final Report

 

Hay

72

 

Aug 73

 

-

RESONA.'fT BURIED AH'I'EINAS

 
 

.

 
 

I. ~EIlf'OIbiINGOIlG. IlE~OllTMUM.EIl

Project 2727438

 

7.

AUTHOIt(.'

 

••

c.>NT'UlCT Oil G;tANT MU"'E"C.,

Hovard E.

Bussey

 

F30602-72-F-0332

 

. Ezra B. Larsen

,. PIERFO

,NG

OllGANIZATION MAIlE AND ADDRUS

 

IC.

National Bureau of Standards Electromagnetics Division Ba~lder. Colorado 80302

 

,.~ ELEilEMT.PIlOJIECr. TASK It£A • WOIlJt UNIT NUNBEIlS

JO fi92B0304

I"'

cc.iiO-:-=! '·'!:IG OFFICE

!'.::;, AND ADDRUS

 

I:. RIE~RT DATE

 

I-~ 1

44-

"

;

1

~ r.p.nter

 

i'June 1974

 

u--

-r---

   

Griffiss Air Force Base, Nev Yor~ 13441

 

11.

NUN'ER OF PAGii>'!-

II

••

MONITORING AGENCY NAIIIE •

ADDIlUIC" ~1It

, "- e-III

c. 'Ie.,

IS.

SECURITY CLASS. (0' ~/. ,_",

Same

 

Unclassified

 
 

15 DECLAS5IFICA"'ON/OO.~;C."ADING

N

IlCHIEOULE

 

16.

DISTRIBUTION STATENENT (ollJl'. If•

.",

Approved for public release.

Distributi~nunlimited.

 
   

17.

DISTRIBUT':>N STATEMENT (01 ,,, • ".'tac'

 

,.,.d'lt ./oc" 20, II Ill".,

,I.-If_,,,

 

Same

 

'1.

SUPPLEMEIlTARV NOTES

 

None

 

.,.

KEV WOIIDS (Conl/nu. on , • .,.,. • 'd. "n.c ••• ary

d 'd.nl/,y Ily "'ocl< n

".r'

 

Antenna

Efficiency

 

Buried Antennas

Depth Attenuation Interface Loss Resonant Antennas

[<'.prMuel'd tv

NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE

U S Oep:lrlm,.nt of C(j,y,m~rce

 
 

Sl.'"nr,f,d1 VA 22151

 

20.

A8ST!'ACT (Conllnu. on ,

,

•• 'd. "n.e

 

ary

d Id.n"f)' "1' "'ocl< num".,'

 

--Small resonant dipole antennas at 145 MHz were developed suitaJ1e to be

buried for concealment.

Theory of the pattern and the loss of buried dipoles

is summarized.

Experiments are described that confirm the th~o~y.

The cir-

cuit ~epresentationof a resonator is'ti~~lized in

measuring and analyzing the

Q. bandwidth. and impedance of

the antennas.

The field strength performance

of buried candidate antennas was measured and agreed with expected losses due

to burial and inefficiency.

Theoretically a reRonant horizontal magnetic

DO

FORM

   

I JAN

73 1473

EDITION OF

I NOV "S IS OBSOLETE

 

UNCLASSIFI'::D

SE~URITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE ("".n n.l. Enl~,r"J

,

"J

lIN{:i.ASSIFIED

lIN{:i.ASSIFIED loss in practice beca~se its I I dipole has the lowest burj~l loss for the

loss in practice beca~se its

I

I

dipole has the lowest burj~l loss for the fulJy buried condition. A resonant

horiz~ntal electric d~pole may have equally low

effi~ler.cy is better (for the size allowed). Lov (ten centimeter) proil1~ vertical electric dipoles. not fully ~uriedt exhibit ever. ssalleT l~sses and vculd be useful. The performance of these buried ante~~ could be icF~oved by allowing a larger encapsu!3tion.

and vculd be useful. The performance of these buried ante~~ could be icF~oved by allowing a

UNCLASSIFIED

S£CU~ITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(W'll.n D.,. Enl.,.")

FOREWORD

This Final Report is by the National Bureau of Standards,

Electr~agneticsDivision, Boulder, Colorado, for Rome Air Develop- ment Center, Griffiss Air Fo~ce Base, New York, under Contract

F30602-72-F-0332, Job Order 692B0304.

Mr. Russell A. King (DCCN) was the RADC Project Engineer.

The xeport describes a study performed from Hay 1972 to August

NBS Project Number is 2727438.

1913.

authors ackn~Mledge the helpful advice and contributions as

readers of R.C. Baird, C.F. Stuben Rauch, and R.G. ~ltsgeI:el. ~.A. Hufford gave helpful explanations. M.L. Crawford and A.C. Wilson gave information on antennas and with J.E. Chultosld aided lor~i:h cali- bration and f1eld measurements.

This report ha~ been reviewed by the RADC Information Office (~:\ and is releasable to the National Technical Information Service (NTl').

The

This technical report has been reviewed and is approved.

APPROVED:

APPROVED:

RUSSELL A. KING Project Engineer

FRED I.

Communications and Navigation Division

DIAMOND, Technical Director

FOR THE C<J1MANDER:

,. ~:

J

~HN P.

"

/-

HUSS

/""")

/-/-

~

Acting Chief, Plans Office

11

Evaluation

This

effort was a study to

investigate,

theoretically

and experimet~ally, the possibility of Burst Communication

by radio transmission frem an antenna buried for conceal- ment. low transmitter power, 1 watt, maximum antenna

width

The emphasis was on antenna design and not communications

of the study indicate theoreti-

of 5 inches and VHF frequency were major parameters.

The results

feasibility

system design. cally useful

ground to airborne communications.

and experimental

In view of the theoretical

indicate~an expansion of the effort is recommended. It should include further experimentation and fliqht testing to explore the more practical a~pects of adapting the experimental antennas to existing buried transmit devices. An experimental buried antenna/transmit combination unit should be constructed for this purpose.

tv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section

Title

Page

1.

INTRODUCTION--------------------------------------

1

2.

THEORETICAL FIELD CALCULATIONS--------------------

2

A.

Introduction---------------------------------- 2

 

Gain Pattern in Air of a Buried Dipcle--------

2

 

C. Theoretical Derivation of Pattern Gain--------

6

D. Ptysica1 Optic.s of Buried Antennas------------

8

E. Ground Wave----------------------------------- 10

F. Calculation of Fieid From Equations (1)------- 11

G. Efficiency------------------------------------ 17

3.

EXPERIMENTS COMPARED TO EQUATIONS

(1)-------------

18

A. Introduction---------------------------------- 18 B. Transmitted Power----------------------------- 18 C. Field Strength Calibration-------------------- 22 Comparison of Theory and Experiment for a

23

II Re fe ren ce II

~fonopo1e - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -

E. Far Field Pattern Versus Elevation Angle------

25

F. Measured Loss of Rather Ideal Buried Dipoles--

25

G. Effect of Shallow Burial----------------------

30

H. Summary--------------------------------------- 32

4.

DEVELOPMENT OF MINIATURE

RESONANT ANTENNAS--------

34

A. Introduction---------------------------------- 34

B. Construction Uetai1s-------------------------- 34

C. Impedance Measurements with the Network Analyzer-------------------------------------- 42

D. Ci rcui t Representation and Q Analys is - - - - - - - - -

43

E. Antenna Effil.:iency----------------------------

46

F. Coupling Coefficients,

Theory,

and Experiments

for One Antenna-------------------------------

51

G. Coupling,

and Radiation Resistance

Discussion

of All Ante"ilnaS-------------------------------

56

H. Interaction with Burial Medium---------------- 61

v

Section

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title

(Concluded)

Page

 

I.

Bandwidth Improvement-------------------------

62

J.

Additional Modification of Antennas; Resulting Bandwidth and Interaction with Media----------

64

K.

Conclusions for Section 4---------------------

67

5.

FIELD TESTS OF BURIED ANTENNAS--------------------

69

A. Introduction---------------------------------- 69

B. Theoretical and Practic~l Considerations------

69

70

C. Field Site Performance of Small Antennas------

D.

Summary of Resonant Antennas------------------

76

6. PREDICTED DISTANCE OF CO~~NICATION---------------

77

A. Introduction---------------------------------- 77

B. Assumed Transmitter Power and Receiver

L~aracteristics------------------------------- 77

C. Gain PattE:rn Over a Spherical Earth-----------

78

D. Field Strength Versus Distance----------------

78

7. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS------------------------

81

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS----------------------------------- 84 REFERENCES---------------------------------------- 85

BIBLIOGRAPHY ON BURIED ANTENNAS-------------------

87

vi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1.

Title

(a)

The ray

at

critical

angle

Rays

6 c becomes hori- outsid& of the

zontal after refraction.

cone 6 c suffer total

internal reflection.

(b)

Illustrating the divergence of the refraction

from a buried point source.-----------------------

Page

5

2. Interface and

pattern loss of the TM wave,

E e wave,

of a buried horizontal magnetic dipole (depth

attenuation omitted).

from a buried HED has this loss olus the small additional end fire pattern loss~shown in figure 4. 13

The TM wave

(end fire)

3. Depth attenuation, dB, at 145 MHz versus e' with

The ordi-

cond~ctivity, a, Sim, as

a parameter.

nate is nearly linear in S except at lowe'. Elevation angle is 2°, but results are accurate for the range )f 1 to 10° to within approximately 0.01 dB.------------------------------------------ 14

Loss

end fire direction from a buried horizontal dipole, and for a buried vertical dipole. The

elevation angle of the fi~ld point in the air is

4.

due to

the underground pat tern

factor

for the

1°; however,

at any angle below 10° elevation the

results are accurate to 0.1 dB.------------------- 15

s. Interface and pattern loss

)f the TE wave,

E~

wave, of buried horizontal electric dipole (HED) broadside (depth attenuation omitted). The TE wave (end fire) from a buried HMD has this loss plus ~he small additional end fire loss shown in

figure 4.-----------------------------------------

16

6. (a)

Equipment arrangement

(b)

for measuring gain pattern Showing the main measure-

of buried antenna.

ment paramet~rs,

powers, attenuation. The

cluded as

and cable

frequency,

forward and reverse

lengths u and u r which contribute

attenuation due to u r was in-

part of the

calibration.-------------------------------------- 19

an

integral

FIM sensitivity

7. Attenuation of the

transmitting RG-9B cable versus

frequency

curve

at

32° and 72°F,

and an

interpolated

at SO°F.------------------------------------

20

vii

Figure

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

(Continued)

Title

Page

Field strength conversion factor

for Field Inten-

sity Meter (FIM), as measured/by NBS standard field method. The factor in dB is added to the ~oltmete~ indication to give the electric field 1n the a1r.---------------------------------------

11

Theoretical far erence monopole

wavelength diameter ground plane set on the earth's

su~face).----------------------------------------- 26

Measured field

field power gain pattern of ref- (quarter wavelength Whip on a one

1

strength

in

dB

>

1

pV/m at

and reference

R =

MHz.

W;

E'

~

Antenna power,

P a of equa-

10;

a ~ 0.06 S/m.---------

strength

in

dB

>

uV/m at

F

is

=

1

R =

300 MHz.

W;

30.5 m distance of sleeved dipole

monopole at 145

tion

I

Measured field

(21)t

is

28

30.5 m distance, of a folded dipole,

Antenna power,

P

a of equation

(21),

E'

~

10;

conductivity ~ 0.06 S/m.-----------------

29

Measured field

30.5 m,

F

= 300

strength

in

dB

~lliz, P a = 1 W,

>

I

~V/m at R =

from antenna A3,

which is

~ED, measured as

Antenna A8,

asymmetric vertical

tn

a miniature

a coil

vertical

electric dipole,

a function of antenna height.----

and a capacitor excited as

an

dipole.

Also may be

referred

as

a monopole on a base plate.-----------------

31

3S

An·~enna C4,

a resonant h()lix partially

imaged by

36

Antenna B3,

capa~itor.------------ .---------------------------

Antenna B4, HED formed by coil and capacitor.------ 38

Antenna D3, HMD, a loop approximately 10 cm square resonated by a capacito~, C = 6 pF.--------------- 39

37

the base.-----------------------------------------

HED formed

by

a resonant

coil

and

Antenna D4,

coupled;

horizontal

coil, probably much over-

see section

4F for

coupling adjustment.--

40

viii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

(Continued)

Figure

TitIe

Page

19.

Antenna D5, self resonant helix with diameter and

Lumped circuit

representation of a resonator ter-

41

20.

pitch to make HMD equal to HED.-------------------

minating a transmission

line.

(a)

Represents

a

series resonant circuit.

(b)

Transforms

to

(c),

a

parallel resonant circuit, which agrees with

experiment.--------------------------------------- 44

21.

Impedance plot and Q analysis of impedance points

flot and Q analysis as in figure 21

except that

47

22.

measured at 0.2 MHz intervals, in the rectangular impedance plane for antenna D3 (10 cm diameter leop) enclvsed in a copper. cavity (radiansphere). Points are fitted by a circle.--------------------

the ~ntenna D3 is radiating into an anechoic chamber.------------------------------------------ 48

23.

Impedance plot for

antenna model D3-2 with

length of coupling link d = 6.7 cm.---------------

54

24.

Impedance plot for model D3-4, d = 4.5 cm.--------

54

25.

Impedance plot for model D3-6, d = 2.5 cm.--------

5S

26.

Impedance plot for model D3-8, with coupling d = 4.5 cm as in D3-4, and firmly soldered in

place.--------------------------------------------

5S

27.

Impedance plot for model D3-8, buried in con- crete, permittivity ~ 6.5, loss tangent ~ 0.01.---

57

28.

-

'pedance plot for antenna AS in anechoic room.---

57

29.

Impedance plot for antenna C4 in anechoic room.---

58

30.

Impedance plot for antenna B3 in anechoic room.---

58

31-

Impedance plot for antenna B4 in anechoic room.---

59

32. Impedanc~ plot for antenna D3 in anechoic room.---

59

33. Impedance plot for antenna D5 in anechoic room.---

60

34. Circuit used for analyzing change of resonant

frequency due

to burial.--------------------------

60

ix

Figure

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

TitIe

(Concluded)

35. Field strength versus elevation angle of various

buried antennas,

pole, normalized to 1 Wpower accepted by the an-

tenna. Burial is in distance is 30.5 m. are e' = 12, a = 0.05

and the unburied reference mono-

Range

Estimated ground constants

concrete,

e'

~

6.5.

S/m.------------------------

Page

71

36. Field strength versus elevation angle of modified antennas; as in figure 35, burial is in concrete.

Ground is

drie~, estimate e'

= 7,

a = 0.03

S/m.

Antellnas AS and C4 are at the i_nterface, par- tially buried.------------------------------------

74

37. Electric field strength, dBV/m,

from various

an-

tennas accepting I W power. The curves marked ~~lD

are

for a buried horizontal magnetic dipole.

Curve

M is for a low

profile VED with efficiency = 0.4.

space

field of an isotropic source.

E f is the free

79

x

LIST OF TABLES

Table

Short Title

Page

1. Power gains

2. Theoretical and measured fields

of various antennas.-------- c --------- 4

of "reference"

monopole.----------------------------------------- 24

3. Comparison of low-angle

losses

of "r~ference"

monopole

and buried antennas with interface

loss

only.--------------------------------------------- 27

4. Measured Q, resistance, and efficiency of antennas. 50

5. Theoretically estim~ted resistances and ef- ficiencies of antennas.--------------------------- 52

6. Change of resonant freq~~ncy due to burial.-------

63

7. Measured bandwidths of antennas.------------------

65

8. Characteristics of changed antennas.--------------

66

9. Conversion factor to obtain field strength from

voltage measured by FIM.-----~-------------------- 73

xi

1.

INTRODUCTION

The ~bjective of this effort is to provide engineering services to study the feasibility and practicality of low power radio fxequency t~~Lsmissions from antennas chat are buried just below the surfoce of the e~rth. Burial is for concealment only.

The main purpose is to predict the communications range to m~ assumed receiver from a buried trans~tting antenna. In doing t~is the theory of buried antennas; which is av~ilable in the literature~ is outlined; experiments were performed to con- firm the theory; and small resonant antennas f~T burial were developed and tested. Construction details are given fOl som~ candidate antennas. Compromises and trade-offs are describ~d for various types of antennas J e. g. J vertical and horizontal ,ij poles. The r~ain factor in the research is the requirement of a small antenna to allow convenient burial deployment. This requirement was ac- complished by the use of resonant antennas at the assigned fre- quency, 145 MHz. The theory of emission fr~m a buried source to the air space is discussed in section 2. The general properties of resonant antennas arc described in section 3. The effects of burial on impedance, bandwidth, efficiency, and pattern are described in section 4, and a series of candidate antennas is described. Experimental results for the candidates are given in section s. The maximum communication range is predicted in section 6.

1

2. TIlEORETICAL FIELD CALCULATIONS

A.

INTRODUCTION

A theoretical discussion o! Lhe effect of burial in the ground on antenna performance consists of three main aspects:

one aspect is the change of the efficiency of the antenna; the second aspect is the exact field pattern calculation; and the third aspect is the ch~~ge in i~pedance, and especially the change in the resonant frequency of resonant antennas. The determination of efficiency of buried antennas by theoretical methods has been done only for certain antennas, e.g., for a spherical dipole [1]. Theoretical TA'ork on efficieIlcy was not done in the present con- tract. Experimental determinations of efficiency are discussed in a lateT section.

The field

at

a recelvlng poin~ in the air may be compared

the

radiation emerges from the buried antenna. This method makes it

clear how much loss arises from the burial. A more rigorous method is to sLate the los~ relative to an isotropic sourc~. This method shows the total effect of the burial and the propa- gation. Both presentations will be used.

to that from a monopole set on the ground at the

place where

B. GAIN PATTERN IN AIR OF A BURIED DIPOLE

The

field

in the air space

is

greatly influenced by the

burial. The notation TM and TE waves will be used to denote*

the wave components with horizontal magnetic vector and hori-

some

characteristics of the waves

reference quarter wavelength monopole set on the earth. The

latter is a useful basis for comparison.

-3 dB gain with respect to

zontal electric vector respectively.

Table 1 indicates

and

from buried dipoles

from a

It has approximately

isotropic at 10° elevation angle.

*Another nota~ion for TM and TE is polarized respectively.

2

vertically and horizontally

Dipole antennas, including a small loop which is a magnetic dipole, are considered almost exclusively. The following nota- tion will be used:

VED,

vertical electric dipole;

VMD,

vertical magnetic dipole;

HED,

horizontal

electric dipole;

HMD,

horizontal

magnetic dipole.

A buried vertical dipole gives a weaker field throughout the

air space than does a buried horizontal dipole, other things

being equal, and the dielectric constant, E', of the ground being greater than 2, which is almost always the case. This is due to the cone of emission from the ground into the air space (fig. 1).

For

give no emission straight up and at 24° the underground pattern factor of the dipole is 8 dB weaker than the m~ximum, which

occurs in the broadside direction. The buried horizontal dipole sends maximum energy straight

up. The horizontally traveling surface wave is emitted at 24° from maximum of the dipole, for both the TE and TiM polari- zations, causing at most 0.7 dB loss due to the underground pattern factor of the dipole at 24° from broadside, £ being 6.

E' = 6 the cone angular radius is 24°. The vertical dipoles

For any antenna system the

field strength decreases

at low

elevation angles, as indicated in table 1. At low angles the buried antenna exhibits an approximately constant loss compared to an antenna on the surface, see last line of table 1. This extra loss due to burial is explained in sections C and D below.

The loss is about 30 dB for TM wave and 40 dB for

TE waves at

1° elevation angle,

E'

being 6.

The TM wave

is

almost

always

stronger than the TE wave and is therefore more useful. Also it gives a ground wave, useful for nearby on-the-ground

reception. Power gain is

defined in the

footnote

of table

1.

3

Tabl€ 1. Fields of a monopole~ and various dipoles buried in

earth~ with dielectric constant

stated relative to an isotropic emitter. Depth is assumed zero.

The eighth line shews the depth attenuation per meter.

= 6 and conductivity = 0.003 S/m,

!MITE

Power Gain (a)

Antenna

Character 10 0

Elevation 1 0

Elevation 2 0

 

Elevation

} /4

monopole

TM

'"

-3

dB

'"

-18

dB

'"

-14 dB

with }"/2 radius

 

metal ground plane

Buried

VED

TM

-21. 8 dB

-38.7

dB

-33.0 dB

Buried VMD

TI;

-25.9 dB

-46.1 dB

 

-40.2 dB

Buried HED

TIl

-14.6

dB

-31.7 dB

 

-26.1 dB

TE

-19.0

dB

-38.3

dB

'"

- 32.6

dB

Buried HMD

TM

-13.8 dB

-30.9 dB

 

-25.4 dB

TE

-19.8 dB

-39.1 dB

-33.3 dB

1 meter depth absorption

TE,TM

-2.19

dB

-2.20 dB

-

2.20

dB

Buried HED re- lative to surface monopole

TM

-11.6

dB

-13.7 dB

 

-12.1 dB

(a) The power gain of an antenna at

any angle

is

the

ratio

of

the power density observed to the

that would have been furnished by an isotropic emitter in

free

theoretical power density

space at the

same distance.

4

AIR

JLo

I

f EARTH

(T

1.0"

= of. I Wi" == n

o

2

;

Be = arcsin {I/n}

DIVERGENCE

POINT SOURCE

(0 )

I

SOURCE-

n sin 9, =sin 9) (Snell)

(b)

Figure I,

a.

Ra.ys at critical angle;

b.

divereence.*

*Lot"Jg captions

for all figures are

given in the

"List of Figures ".

accompanying each figure will

usually be abbreviated.

5

The cnptioi1

C.

THEORETICAL DERIVATION OF THE PATrE~~

GAIN

A convenient summary of buried antenna theory .i5 that of

Hufford

Sommerfeld method for a dipole in a half space is used. The

final results are given below.

[1].

Earlier results include

[2],

[3],

[4].

as

The

The notation is

follows:

space.

EO'

In the ground

lI a are

the constitutive parameters of frN:.

lJ I

=

11 0 ,

and the

complex refractive

index,

n,

is

given by

n 2

= El/E O :

E'

+

i

a = conductivity,

al(w£O); also E* = EjiEO. S/m.

loss

k O = =

k

l

W(lJOEO)~' Zo = IlJO!E O '

nk O '

Zl = Zo/n,

sin

8 1

= sin

9/n

(~omplex Snell's law),

8 1 tangent = E"/E'

cos

= (n2-sin2e)~/n,

= al(E'EOw), W = 2nf.

A ray

at

the

critical angle of

In

incide~ce

emerges horizontally with sin

sin

e

= 1

in the air,

I

cos

a

=

 

c

a

c

= lIn,

the ground,

e

c ,

figure

la,

thus

The equations

for

the

far fields

in the

air at

a

height

greater than a few wavelengths, due to dipoles buried

in

a flat

earth (half space), for 1E and TM waves Lespectively,

are stated

relative to the field of an isotropic emitter in free follows [1] :

space as

where

Ee/E f

E

m t

'E

= L

=

L

C e

D A

e

C m

D A

m

 

I

f

L

D = exp

= 2/(Re n)~

(i

k o hen cos

aI-cos

C e

C

m

=

cos

a/en cos 8l+cos

a)

= cos

a/ (cos alTn cos

a) ,

6

an

(1)

A

e

m

A

= 0"

VED

J

= -i(3!2)'i sin 8 1 ,

VED

A

e

= i (3/2j~ cos ¢,

A :: i(3/2)~ cos

m

8 1

HED

sin

~"

A e

Am

= i

= 0,

n/lnl

x

J

(3/2)'i sin

VMD

HED

8 1 ,

VMD

A e :: -i n/lni x (3/2)~ cos 8 1 sin 9.

Am

= i

n/lnl

x

J

(3/2)'i

cos

$,

Hl-fD

HMD

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

$ = the azimuth angle measured from an axis that is perpendicular to the horizontal dipoles.

Equations

(2)

to

(5)

are equations

(7.18),

(7.19),

(7.23),

and (7.24) of [1]. The p.~duct LCD of equation

used for a buried isotropic point source. The factor A repre- sents the effects of coupling the dipole pattern to the angular cone of emission. The field E f of an isotrop~c emitter of power

Wwatts in free space is

(1)

would be

E f

=

J

(W ZO/4nR2)~ Vim, rms

1

= (30 W);ZIR.

(6)

The range R is measured in meters. The simplicity and utilit~· of HuffordJs normali~ation (to an isotropic source) should be not~d. Many of the theoretical

formulations ghre the fi~ld pattern for a dipole with a speci- fied current or ~ specified dipole moment, which Ie l'lTf:;S the reader

wi th

power. By che

some wor:\. to do,

to find the current or moment from the

from Wand R,

the

Ii

preser.t method [1]

fie 1d of

an isotropic source is found from equation (6), assuming 100 per- cent efficiency. Then one applies the gain pattern of the buried source, equations (1)-(5), and ge~s the predictecl fi~ld in the air.

7

The predicted ground wave is

found in the

equations

(18)-(20),

section E, below.

D. PH'i. I.CAL OPTICS OF BURIED ANTENNAS,

(9]

sam~ way using

It is instructive to try to obtain the transmitted far field based on physical optics. There are three main steps:

one step is to find the power transmission factor of the inter- face using plane wave concepts; a second step is to obtain the change in the spnerical wave divergence factor at the interface, considering the poiilt source aspects; and the third step is to calculate the absorption in the ground.

found from

Fresnel's equations and conservation of energy. The refrac·

tive index is temporarily assumed to be real, and losses are added later. The power transmission coefficients for a plane

wave in

The

interface

transmission coefficient may be

the dense medium refracted into the vacuum (air)

are:

4n cos

(n cos

8 1

cos

8l+cos

8

6)2

,

(7)

4n cos

6 1

(cos

6 l +n

cos

cos

0

8)2

,

(8)

where e and m denote TE and 1M waves respectively. These are obtained from Fresnel's field equation, section 9.5 of [5]. taking into account changes of the impedance and the area of

a beam

an Considering the spherical wave

at

interface.

from an elementary doublet

as

to refraction

angles

a bundle

are

of rays we

find

the

change

in

into the air space,

figure

the solid angle due

The spherical

1.

dD l

= sin 0ldOld. l ,

dD = sin

OdOd.,

in

in

the air.

the earth

(9 )

8

It

is

true that

From Snell's

law

and by differentials

cos

is true that From Snell's law and by differentials cos sin ada 6 = n =

sin

ada

6

= n

= n

sin

cos

6

1 ,

a l d6 l

(10)

(11)

(12)

Using equation (10) and equation (12) in equation (9) we have

dO = sin

ad~l n

cos

61del/cos

6.

(13)

The power par solid angle

in the air relative

to the

power per solid angle in medium ]

is

the power gain of the

 

interface transmitting into the air.

Denoting this

as P12

e

 

,

for

a TE mode wave

P

l2,e

II;

en cos

6 l +cOS

Po

Po

4n

6)2

a TE mode wave P l2,e II; en cos 6 l +cOS Po Po 4n 6)2

cos

sin

6 1

cos

6d~1 n

4

cos 2

6

6

cos

6 l dS l /cos

6

6 1 cos 6d~1 n 4 cos 2 6 6 cos 6 l dS l /cos

Likewise

for the TM case

4

cos 2

9

P = -------

12,m

(cos

6 l +n

cos

6)2

n

(14 )

(15 )

Equations (14) and (15) are identical to (L C e )2 and (L C m )2 of equations (1) using a real refractive index. The inclusion of complex nand 6 1 requires that the squares be replaced by absolute values squared.

9

1!Tl,

The pattern factor A of a dipole

and sin

6 1

for vertical

in the ground includes

dipoles, cos 6 1 for horizontal

dipoles, end fire, and a sine or cosine of $ appears, see equations (2) to (5). Finally the attenuation in the ground may be obtained approximately from the propagati.on factor in the ground and the ray optical distance,

ik1d/cos

Dl

= e

6i

,

(16)

6i is

where k 1 = kOn

angle defined as

ground using the velocity in the ground, c/n'. Snell's law with this assumption is

sin 6i

where n t is the real part of the complex refractive index of th~ ground. The attenuations given by D of (lquations (1) and by D' of equation (16) are ne4r1y the same in spite of the different forms. The attenuation exponent in equation (16) becomes 1 percent greater than in equations (1) when the 10ss*

is

the complex wave number and

a real

the direction of a plane wave refracted by the

= n' -1

sin

6,

An approximate

(17)

tangent is 0.6. A correct electromagnetic treatment of equation

(16)

is given in section 9.8 of reference

E. GROUND WAVE

[5]

as well

as

in

[1].

type

The

nf theory.

ground wave

(8 = 90~) is obtained from a Sommerfeld

(1)

are ~eplaced by [1],

Equations

where

R is

Ee/E f

EmlE f

= SeUe DAel (-ikOR)

= S U

m m

DAml (- ikOR) ,

the horizontal

distance

to the

field point,

Se

S

m

=

21 (CRe

n)~ x

Cn 2

-1)),

=

2

n 3 /(CRe n)~ x Cn 2

-1)),

WIrrovided arso~' > 5.

and

(18)

(19)

10

U

e

Urn

= 1

= 1

-

-

i

i

k O z

k O

z

Zo cos

Sc/Zl'

Zl cos

Sc/ZO'

(20)

where z is the height of the field point above the intertacej z is restricted to a few wavelengths. At greater heights the space wave approximation, equations (1), are used. Equations (18) state that the ground wave field decays at IIR relative to the reference field E f which already decays as IIR, equation (6). The ground wave is not important when the receiving station is an aircraft. There is evidence of the ground wave in the field

trials described below. The receiving tower was

tally from the point of burial. The theoretical loss at low

30.5

m horizon-

angles is greater than that observed at low angles. For example, the gain at 2° elevation angle should be approximately 12 dB less than the gain at 10° elevation angle. The experiments show ap- proximately a 6 dB difference. We therefore usually discuss results at 10° elevation angle. Another evidence of the ground wave occurs in figure 11. With no ground wave the results for the two reference monopoles would nearly coincide, as in figure

9.

The

ground wave,

stronger at lower frequencies,

shows

clearly

as a difference in the fields at low angles.

F. CALCULATION OF THE FIELD FROM EQUATIONS

(1)

A computer program was written to evaluate the field in the air of a buried dipole, from equations (1). The import~nt factor from these equations for low-angle reception is LC which, as we have seen in section 2D, arises from divergence and from the Fresnel transmission. The power gain due to LC combined with the broadside power gain of a dipole, 1.5, will be denoted as the interface gain, I. However, the term interfa~e loss will also be used for I. Figure 2 shows the TM wave interface loss in dB, at certain angles, versus £' of the earth. Specifically the curves give the value in dB of

I

~ 1.51LC1 2

= 6

cos 2

e/Cn'lcos

11

el+n cos

01 2 ).

The transformation fr':;'!1 t.·e t·t'!'" ed dipole 'to the air space

often adequately reprl :';Ill:~d l~Y J., since depth attenuation anJ underground pattern J- .(';'1.\: ~ ~f be -:aken as zero dB.

is

The next facto:.' l·VJl

:h~)'ed is depth attenuation computed

from IDI 2 in equations (1:, Figure 3 shows the depth attenuation in dBlm for a range of ground conditions. There are some simple factors remaining to obtain a

complete evaluation of equations

1. The azimuthal variation of a horizontal dipole is either sin $ or cos $ as indicated in equations (2)-(5).

2. The vertical dipole has an important factor Isin 8112, see figure 4. (This factor is sufficient to remove the full~r buried vertical dipcle from consideration fer high E'; how- ever, partial burial will be discussed.)

3.

(1):

The horizontal

dipole

has

a factor

Icos 2 811

for the

end fire compor-ent. This is of interest

wave

usual conditions (fig. 4).

In summary,

factor

for

under

the T~t

from the HED.

figures

It

2,

is

3,

a small

4 can

be

used to

determine

the

loss (neglecting inefficiency) of the TiM wave from a buried

horizontal elementary dipole,

or a buried YEO.

The

graphs, which concentrate on low elevation

angles,

are

based entirely on equations (1). For the TE wave emitted end fire from a HMD use figures 3, 4, a~d 5. The TE and TM waves

emitted broadside from the horizontal electric and magnetic

dipoles do not suffer the underground pat~ern factor, figure 4.

An example of using the

curves may be useful.

Consider the

TM wave of a horizontal

electric

dipole

buried 0.1 m deep in

ground with E t = 10 and

a = 0.01

S/m.

The

receiving point

is

at 2° elevation angle.

We

sum the

following

losses

Interface

Depth attenuation

loss

(fig.

2)------------27.0 dB

3)--------- 0.55 dB

(fig.

Underground pattern

(fig.

4)-------

0.45 dB

Total

loss

28.0

dB

12

r-

-r----r--r--., ---r-~ fI , 40---r-

,

-

,

38 36 Elevation angle = 34 32 . t:. 5" 22 10° 8 6 4
38
36
Elevation angle =
34
32
.
t:.
5"
22
10°
8
6
4
2
0
-I' ,

al

on

~

z .~4

Q

3 ~

z

UJ

t-

~

UJ

(J

<l

t!.

cr:

UJ

t-

~

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

15

20

25

E

I

Figure 2. Intcrface.divcrgc,,~.:: of TM way"~.

ss

13

E

co

·0

z

0

!i

:J

z

lLJ

I-

I-

<l

:c

t-

o

W

0

=0.03 S/m

f

·0 z 0 !i :J z lLJ I - I- <l :c t- o W 0

21 ~'"

20 .015 S!m ~. 10 5
20
.015 S!m
~.
10
5

J =:,

O.OO3S/m

I

1 )
1
)

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

15

20

25

E

I

Fig'.lre 3

Depth Attenuation

14

m

"'0

en en

9

z

0:

w

~

u

0

z

::::>

0

0:

(!)

a:::

w

0

z

::::>

4

16

VERTICAL DIPOLE SCALE RIGHT 8 2 6 HORIZONTAL DIPOLE 4 SCALE LEFT 2
VERTICAL
DIPOLE
SCALE
RIGHT
8
2
6
HORIZONTAL
DIPOLE
4
SCALE
LEFT
2

°2

J

I

I

0

3 4

5

6

7

8

9

10

15

20

25

£

I

Figure 4.

Underground pattern lo5~.

15

44r----r--r--r----r-~-

--~---J1---

-------

-

Z

o

~

::::>

z

LLJ

t-

~

W

U

~

~ a::

w

t-

Z

Figure 5.

8

I

«

9

10

15

20

Interface-divergence loss of T E wave.

16

25

At an elevation angle of 10°.

Interface less (fig. 2)------------16.0 dB Depth Attenuation (computer)------- 0.54 dB Underground pattern (computer)----- 0.44 dB

16.98 dB

Total loss

The main factor during shallow burial will be the interface loss, and it depends strongly on the elevation angle. The TM wave from a horizontal magnetic dipole (HMD) has ~ small advantage over that from the HED in that the underground pattern factor is zero dB. Figure 4 shows that the vertical dipoles have more loss than the horizontal dipoles. This is because the vertical dipole is working mainly end fire in exciting the interface within the critical angle a •

c

G.

EFFICIENCY

The received field strength also depends on the efficiency

of the antenna, which is

be treated experimentally, below.

influenced by burial.

17

Efficiency \ii!!

3. EXPERIMENTS COMPARED TO EQUATIONS

A. INTRODUCTION

(1)

Experiments were carried out initially mainly to verify the theory contained in equations (1). Later, the main purpose was to develop resonant antennas where the focus is on eificienc1, impedance, Q f&ctor, and ground effects on these. The compari- son with theory was quite satisfactory, thus allowing the main

emphasis to be on the resonant antenna development in the later work which is described in sections 4 and s. The agreement of the experiments with the theo~y contained in equations (1) occurs mainly in two areas:

(1)

(2)

The predicted absolute value of the fields relative tv an isotropic source are approximately correct, including the fact that the TE waves are weaker than TM waves. The gain pattern as a function of elevation angle is approximately correct.

The

measurement method and illustrates above conclusions.

remainder of this

section describes the experimental

results

that yield the

Figure 6 shows

r8]

the main elements of an experimental system field strength and antenna gain.

for measuring

B. TRANSMITTED POWER

Direction couplers measure the

P z respectively.

forward and reverse power,

The attenuation

denoted as PI and

the RG-9 cable of length u was measured at 72° and 3ZoF using

a network analyzer. The curve shown for SOoF was interpolated.

(fig.

7)

of

Assuming that

the

directivity of the

two couplers

is

infinite, the power delivered to the antenna is

P

a

= P

1

-dB /10

+dB /10

10

c

-

P z 10

c

 

18

,

(Zl)

9m TOWER

)./2 DIPOLE-

9m TOWER )./2 DIPOLE- (0) FREQUENCY METER PI P 2 ---l X SOURCE L X~~ u

(0)

FREQUENCY METER PI P 2 ---l X SOURCE
FREQUENCY
METER
PI
P 2
---l
X
SOURCE

L

X~~

u

(0) FREQUENCY METER PI P 2 ---l X SOURCE L X~~ u ~r-1 FIM :I u,

~r-1 FIM :I

u,

Figure 6.

( b)

Experimental system for field measurements.

19

N

o

3.41

I

I

I

1

1

1

lit

I

2 . 8 2.4 I L _ 1 1 110 120 130 140 150 160
2 . 8
2.4
I L
_
1
1
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190

200

~

l±!

8

ffi

a-

m 2.6

"0

FREQUENCY I

MHz

Figure 7.

Measured on~'-way attenuation of cnblu.

2or---~r----r-----"----

a::

o

t>

<t

U.

Z

o

en

ffi

>

z

o

u

W

J

o

~

o

~O~O~-------:I=50=----"":'2J OO-----3 JOO-----4 J(jO

Figure 8.

FREQUENCYt

MHz

Field strength conversion f.a.ctor of receiver.

21

where dB

tionless

c is the one way attenuation of the cable with reflec- terminations.

The radiated power, P r ,

J, of the antenna

is

P a multiplied by the efficiency,

P

P

(22)

r The efficiency of an antenna is

the total input power, which consists of ohmic heating power plus radiated power

=-

J

a· the ratio of radiated power to

J = Pr/P t = Pr/(Pr+Pcu)~

(23)

where P

denotes ohmi.c heating power.

cu The efficiency of the

antennas was measured and estimated,

as will be discussed in section 4E.

C. FIELD STRENGTH CALIBRATION

The field intensity meter (FIM) at the rece1v1ng terminal consists of a calibrated rf voltmeter and its associated antenna and cable of known characteristics and calibration factors. The rf voltmeter had an internal calibration system. This was re- calibrated and corrected where necessary.* The antenna and impedance factvrs were measured by the NBS standard field method [6], with results as shown in figure 8. At 145 MHz the factor is 9.3 dE, which can be approximately explained as follows:

1. The effective length conversion factor, from the fie Id in VIm to the voltage across an open circuited half wave

dipole

is

A/",

or

-3.63 dB at

145 MHz.

2.

The conversion from an open circuited generator to a matched load, the receiver, is 0.5 in voltage or -6 aBo

3.

A conversion factor, arising from the mismatch of the antenna and receiver tn the cable, and consequent inter- actions, is unknown.

*This

calibration

includes

the

loss of the cable.

----

22

The sum of factors I and 2 nearly equals the measured conversion factor, -9.3 dB, which implies that the third factor was small.

D. CmfP ARISON OF TIIEORY AND EXPERIMENT FOR A "REFERENCE" ltlONOPOLE

A quantiLative comparison using the ratheT predictable field of a "reference" monopole adds considerable confidence to the evaluation of unknown HF and VHF antennas. (The term reference is in quotes. The gain pattern of this type of antenna has shown good agreement between theory and experiment.) The so- called reference monopole is a quarter wavelength slim wire antenna on a ground plane one wavelength in diameter set on the earth. Available well-developed theory [7] is then applied to predict the space wave over an earth with dielectric param- eters E' and G. The use of a reference monopole in c0mpact range experim~nts, as in the present work, thus provides a check on the transmitted power calibration and the FIM cali- bration described above. Figure 9 exhibits the theoretical far- field power gain pattern of the reference monopoles at two frequencies, for certain ground constants. Measurements to be c0mpared with theory were made at a rented alfalfa field site, 5 miles east of Boulder, Colorado. The horizontal distance from the monopole antenna to the re- ceiver tower (fig. 6) was 100 feet (3~.S m).

Table 2 gives

the

steps

in comparing the

theoretically

calculated field and the measured field of reference monopole antennas at 145 and 300 MHz. The comparison is made at an eleva- tion angle of 10° where the field is less dependent on surface imperfections and surface waves than at low angles. The predicted and measured voltmeter readings with all

conversion factors taken into account are seen to agree te:

,vi thin I dB.

23

Table 2. Theoretical and measured field strengths of the

reference monopole antennas at 145 and 300 MHz. The ground

was dry, E' = 5.0 ± 1.0 receiving point is 10°.

at the surface.

Elevation angle of

"Frequency

145 MHz

300 MHz

Theoretical field(a)

at

30.5 m

105.1

105.1

of

1

W isotropic sources

 

dB

>

1

lJV/m

 

Resonant dipole

field strength

-9.3 dB

-16.0

dJ3

conversion factor

(fig.

8)

Theoretical(b)

factor

-3.1 dB

- 3.0

dB

at 10°,

E'

= 5,

gain pattern = 0.05 Sim

a

 

Predicted voltage of receiver,

92.7 dB

86.1 dB

dB

>

1

uV

(theoretical).

 

Measured voltage

at 10° elevation

101.5 dB

90.7

dB

Conversion to 1 W source (c) -11.0

dB

-7.0

dB

Transmitter cable and VSWR factor,

+1.5

dB

+2.1 dB

Experimental

10~ reading converted

92.0

dB

85.8 dB

to 1 W radiated

(a)

From equation

(6).

 

(b)

Reference

[7].

 

(c)

At

145

~iz PI

is

12.56 W;

5 W were

the

direc-

tional

coupler was

-4

dB from the

indicated but rated value at

145 Mc.

At 300

Mc

PI

is

5

W.

Values of P 2 are

0.32 Wand 0.19

W

at 145 and 300 MHz respectively.

24

From this

close agreement we conclude that the transmitted

power,

the FIM voltage,

and

the

cable attenuations have been

accurately determined.

to the antenna and the field strength at the receiving antenna

are being measured with an accuracy of ± 1.0 dB.

It is estimated that the power delivered

E. FAR FIELD PATTERN VERSUS ELEVATION ANGLE

The height dependence of the field pattern is quite similar for a b~ried source and for the monopole set on the interface. As shown in table 3, the theoretical pattern5 differ by nearly a constant ratio (constant number of dB), and the difference is

due to interface loss plus depth attenuation. We may say that the buried antenna becomes, to a good approximation, a weakened virtual monopole on the surface. The presentation in table 3 makes it clear that loss due to burial at low angles is mainly an interface loss, plus depth attenuation if present, and not a change in shape of the space

wave pattern compared to

the pattern of a monopole at the

inter-

face.

F.

MEASURED LOSS OF RATHER IDEAL

BURIED DIPOLES

Experiments were done to check the loss of a buried horizon- tal dipole against the theory [1]. A sleeved dipole was constructed using handbook values of length and diameter to attain resonance at 145 MHz and an im~ pedance of SO ohms. The dipole diameter was 2.5 cm and the length was 98 cm. The dipole was contained in a 10 cm diameter lucite tube to reduce the effect on the resonant frequency of

the

surrounding ground.

The

dipole was buried as

a received in the end fire

HED IS

cm below

the

The TM wave was

direction.

surface.

25

90'r--r----,r--==~- eo 70 GROUND E ' =12 rr =.165 mho/m 300 MHz -20 -10 0
90'r--r----,r--==~-
eo
70
GROUND
E ' =12
rr =.165 mho/m
300 MHz
-20
-10
0
10

Figure 9&

POWER GAIN, dB

Theoretical far

field pattern of monopole.

26

20

Table 3.

TM-wave

gain pattern of a "reference" monopole set on

the interface and of a buried horizontal magnetic dipole

face gain only, depth loss

£' = 10, a = 0.03 81m; frequency = 145 MHz.

(inter-

is zero).

Ground constants are

 

dB Gain,

Interface

Elevation

Reference

dB Gain

Angle

Monopole (a)

of HMD~b)

dB

Difference

2

-12.28

-27.01

14.73

4

-7.16

-21.86

14.70

6

-4.46

-19.14

14.68

8

-2.75

-17.38

14.63

10

-1.53

-16.13

14.60

(a) Reference

(b) Only the interface

[7], by an approximate calculation.

gain is

given.

Depth attenuation would

be neaTly constant versus

angle, see