UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER
AD069089

NEW LIMITATION CHANGE

TO
Approved for public release, unlimited distribution

FROM
Distribution authorized to U.S. Gov't. agencies and their contractors; Administrative/Operational Use; MAY 1955. Other requests shall be referred to Office of Naval Research, Arlington, VA 22203.

AUTHORITY
ONR memo., 1 Aug 1967

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

tio

ervices echnical nformation A ency

Srei

Reproduced by nOCUMeEBUILDING, DAYTON, CENTER T SERVICE 2, OHIO KNOTT

'"irxloE: WHEN GOVEMENT OR OTHER DRAWSNOS, SPECI)ICATIOrX, OR OTHER DATA ? LTf .D FOR ANY MURPORE OTHER THAN IN CONNECTION WITH A DEFINITELY ELATED ,)VT;RNM~7 PROC UREMENT OPERATION, THE U. S. GOVERNMENT THEREBY INCURS V ) rF-SP0NrJSU3t, NOR ANY OBLIGATION WHAT0O.0EVZR; AND THE FACT THAT THE C; '"'.PXM),A"X HAVE FORMULATED, F7JRnISE, OR IN ANY WAY SUPPLIED THE MAY F, tDRA'WINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, OR OTHER DATA I8 NOT TO BE REGARDED BY , . r '-!"'TON OR (THRWIS AS In Af MANNER LICNSING THE HOWER OR ANY OTHER -ON M.ANUFACTURE. TO PM ,SON OR{ COrIPQRATIOK, OR CONVEING ANY RIC(ETf OR -. 'tj l- OR SP: LL ANY PATENTZfD INteNTION THAT-MAY IN ANY WAY BE RELATED THERETO.

Office of Ndval Roesearch

Contract NS01u-76
*Task

Order No.1

NR- 372-O012

C-,C
UIMPEDANCE

OF THIN WIRE LOOP ANTENNA

James E. Stomrr

Matj 1.19550 Technical. Report No. 2ZI

Cruft Laboratorij lc-lcvrrd Unhvwsity Cambridge, MassacIhuseftk

TRZIZ Office of Naval Research Contract NMori-76 Task Order No. i NK4-372-O lZ

Technical Report on Impe6ance of Thin Wire Loop Antennas

James E.

Storer

may 1, 1955

The research reported in this document was mad; possible through xuppoint extended Cruft Laboratory, Harvard Unf.versity, jointly by the Navy Department (Office of Naval ~e search), the Signal Corpt of the U. S. Army and the U. S. Air Force, uknder ONR Contract N 5ori -76, T..0.

Technical Report No. ZIZ

Cr-ift iaboxatcary Harvard Uiniver sity Cambridge, Massachu-.~etts

The Halle'n integral .qnation for the caurrut wad impedanc.ofai thin wire loop antenxua io solved usin~g a rourier Seyei atensive

tables of theoretical loop anteuna impedanlces are preseted w~ich (ior the one case testea) s--* ia saitsfactorl- agrfrment wituipri meat. Some graphical results are aloSI gve-a which facilitate Okac evaluation of the~ current distribution.

TRZ12 Impedance of Thin Wire Loop Antennas

James E. Storer Cruft Laboratozy, Harvard Univtrzitty

The thin. Wire loop is on~e of th.e first -intennas to receive theoretical coDsidaration, having beeni discusced by Pocklingtou 1l] in 1897. IN- N o treatti a cllowkd loop excited by a pla.ne wave; he obtained an exact solution for the current cm~ the loop in the form of a Fourier sdries. More recently, Halle*n [f] considered a driven loop and obtained a solution, again in the form of a Fourier- series, for the current and the impedance. However, Halle~a pointed out that the coefficients of this series contained a singularity which made the series ouly quasiconvergent and herce useful only for loops small in comparison to u wavelengt h. MorerO-CrP the individual terms were Complicated and their evaluation and a ;uznmation involved a soiiewhat diffircult numerical taisk. More recently, in an effort to obttiniaumerical results, othzr authors have dealt with the problem using approximation methods. Chang [3]. for example, applied the Hall146-Wing -Middleton expaasidoi; Sche'lkuoff (4] has. used a guided-made approximation; and the author (unpublished) has used a varkiational approach. All of these approximation methods have one feature in comision; they yield re sults which are in good agreement qualit4tively with experiment, but poor agreement, quantitatively. * The reabon for this can be explained by noting that all the approximation methods require some assumption as to the cu-raret distribution arouud the loop. Theainas~tcommon
It is quite Possible that all of these methods, particularly ]Chsqsbs ~rould be mnade to yield better results by going to highir degrees of approximation; the resulti~ne numerical labor, however, is likely 0~ be prohibitive,

assumption made is that the current distribution approx~inutes a sinusoidal distribution. As will be shown subsequently, the hinuaoidal assumption L, not satisfactory, particularly for the current near the Oxivning point of tho, antenna. In the present paper the rigorous Fourier series solution obtained by H1all&n it reexamined, and modified so that the convergence difficulties enctountered by Halle~n are avoided. Extensive nuz-,erical results are presented in Appendix 11 for the impzdances of loops for varying wire sizes and circumferences "pto two and one -half wavelengths. Appendix MU pre seats some curvau which aid in the computation of field patterns and current &stributious. For an antenna ha'ving a particular wire s~ise, somoe experimentally measured impedances .~rc presented which agree well with

theory.j
UI Fourier Serieso Solution for the Current Distribution

Integral equations for the current distribution on thin-wire antehm

structures are readily obtained by expressing the electric field as a function of the current, through Helmhloltz integrals, and then equatip~g the total electric fie~ld to zero along the weire surface. r oLLowing tine and with procedure, with harmonic time dependence of the form e, dirnens~ons as indicated in Fig. 1j,'the*int~egral coordinate system, &ad equation for the circular loop antenna

]
21

Zb
XU

2a

Figure 1.1

TR21M
can be written as

-3-

-w where I(s) is the total current at generator exciting t1e I

# on the loop; V is the voltage of the slice

ohms. The kernel of the integral equz.tion,

x.t 0 = 0; 6(6) is the Dirac delta-function; and

k = W/c = ZIW/X; (" -iZ.

(1) is given explicitly by a

1A

K(O-') =

kb coo (-6-)+i

867.

N(,.-

RZa)

RIt-0

4 sin (T-X-)

+ a

(2b)

where a is the radius of the wire and b is the radius of the loop.
The thin-wire assunintion, wkich provides the basis for obtaining this one-dimensional current equation, can be exprss ad explicitly as k 2a 1.

<< b

The resulting solution cannot be more accurate than the order

of these approximations.

since

~'is a bounded, periodic functioa of k. it can

be expanded into a Fourier series, i.e.,

e__L =Ka)jkbR( =
--

Yn e e d6 (4)

"tUing (3)
400

together with (2), it is seen that

I|

~K(O-61)

2: -Ca

a,n eln)

(5)

t*1

ZR) 4f-n el
After expanding ~ into aFuirseries,

(7)

Iod)

nC

'n
i

~!nd

it caui be scan t,&t (71) reduces to

to
V

1=

e_"dV#4()dO =

"iiriLuM ;%i

resuiz into equation (a yeieds

1()

21 e E
-

FX..-

1 +2 comn n 9

E.-

From this, the impedance of the antenna, 4 is found to be

OD
These results, (9) and (10), which were obtaind by Haflln, co~fftit1g a forrmal solution of the loop antenna. From them the transmritting pattern

to

obitained. Howevey, in or~tor mak) them useful, soruze -~ay musl be, founo. to evaluate the series numerically.
-------------U-

re----ri---

pall"--

--

~It can be shown that iinese equativwns, (9) and (10), are in agreement with

Rum,

TRZIZ
the theory cf small loops.

-5Using equation (4), &n the expLicit evaluim.on

of KX given in Appendix I, it is readily shown that for loops small in corn"pa1raonto tWe wavelength the current is nearly a constant, independent off

kb <K 1,

jw CG

.% kbK

4! 4VAirlb~l
This is the usual ^brmulz for the resistance and reactance of a small loop.'

The Fourier Series --. is apparent .rom the preceding derivation that the usestfzesc of this method of solution depends on the evaluation of the series

rco

Haln proved that, for large n, the coefficients approacheasymptotically.

the vQlue

an
It is apparent that becomes
n *o 3, vb a"

where y,= .5772) is Euler's constant.

extremely small for values of n such that

Hence the series (11) has a "singularitycnear n x ro" From this fact Hallen concluded that the series (11) could only be used in an "asymptotic" cince after this fashion, i.e., it must converge satisfactoriiy by a = flie value of the individual terms begin increasing in magnitude. This .zestrictlonmeant that the ceries solution (11) was only urefuL for kb 1on of no/ 2 -i. t!t.-_ 4rn. the -un=zn t small orb /a very large. Even-M-storms of this series in a forzoidatule task aud, at best, )ields relatively

--

'--

-l I

-yJ lrl

ii

TR.Z12-iaaecul'ate revults because of the "singularity." It must be remembered at this point that current is both bounded and continuous (for physsical reasons) and hence the aerie& (11) must converge. Adopting this point of view, the problem then becomes -xxe of treating H-allin's "singularity" in a more rigorous fashion. A derivation of the value of an is given in Appendix A, which is ess~entially identical to that of Heldl~n' a, but which includes the dominant complex term as

wall.

The result for large n ist

z "0 n>>1

wheren

o a

2b a Y.I

It is apparent that the inclusion of the rather negligible complex ter-m in (12) cannot alter significantly the sum of the resulting series. However, with itsincusin aisnvrequal to zr.This fact will be used subzequently to permit a replacement of the series by an integra~l. The following work will be restricted to loops in which kbl 2. -L-i.e., 5 the circumference of the 'oop is iess than two-and-a-half wavelengths.*j Almost all loop antennas of practical iiiterest are contained in this range. The s eries (11) can then be written in the form
4
-

JWr, where ().

a Cosn~.(3 'n

Ths procedure to be used w'Iti sum the first five terms 9f the series explicitly, and replace the remainder of series 4'(46) by an integral. Now, it can be shown by an insertion of numericalalues that for

The derivation can readily be modified-to include valuesa of kb larger than' 2.5 if desired.

IOMM

ITR212
W5kb2.5 and n

-7-

5, the value cis dilJfers negligibly from the asymptotic value given by (12). Hence, to an excellent spproxima.ion, (14) Cox on , kb ()=

The series (14) will now be replaced by an integral. formula to be used is

OD

The particular

GO

de+

W-

d 20+

N-1

a
7 360 etc.

_where

c. = 1/24,c=

This result, (15), is valid provided an is an analytic function of n in a region which includes the real axis for n >N - I - e. Results similar to
(15) have been given by Gumowski [5] . and others. it is essentially a

modification-of the Euler-McClaurin sum formula. Using (15) in connection with (14) yields ..

. ,

cosx IdxL

4. 5

(xz-k 2 b2 )(lnn

inx-j

2wkb [d
(x -k

coo xi
2b2)(lnn

]
-lnx-.)x=

( i

This replacement of the series (15) by the integral is possible only because of the complex term, which makes the argument an analytic function of x along the real axis. Since kb- 2.5, the first (and higher) derivative correction terms in (16) are entall (less than Al comparedto *(j) andcanbe ignored, since 4(4 is at best a minor part of I(Q) in (14). Hence,
00

cosx i'

I()

= -Zwkb

-elnx-jT-

(17)
(Inn, -n

zzzzi77
2_k b I j (k

4.5x

2 -~b 2

TR121-Next, it can readily be shown that the complex term in -ie integral of (17) can also be irgnored. This ,fields

4.5

)(lnno - lnx)

The integral in (18), which is to be interpreted in the "prfrcipal value" sense, can be vewritten as follows: 41()+ 4,2) (19a)

'i()-

Zwkb

45 4.5

corxi
W0 -i

dx *-

(19b)

4.5

Since no is quite large and kbg 2.5, (19c) becomes, to a satisfactory approxi-

&Iz~

Zwkb

4.5 T

k% ,7

osX ,K!%

dx

_____ 3b3Cosxg

iIn(
-'

4.5
2W kb
3

--

This integral,J7(6), can be evaluated-eiplicitly in terms of sines, cosines, and iiii.-_gral sinees.

Uain~g thazzc re sults, an -explicit formula for the current distribation can be written as:

TR212

-9-

~ IW 1 +

ZSJ+~~ Co nA~ I&

jjb
{2.0)

where

~~o.A) = S: con (4,.Sx )d

dx

(2Zia)

x,

xK

no

e- Y and explicit LormUtjas

f&r the %,are given in Appendix A.

Note that the Jk(j) integrals have only appreciable values near =0. O (An asymptotic formula for t.em, when 0 > 1, can readily tA obtainrd.) They cannot be approximated satisfactorily by a sinusoid and are a artial explanation of why approximate methods of dealing with the loop antema do not ytield good quantitative results. The formula for the impedance of the loon anteiina becomes 43

jW

f..+2Z+ -~

+[(~~)~
(22)

Thir :esult, in connection with Appendix A, forms th' bailis for the impedance tables presented in Appendix B. The quantities Jk(o) are explicitly given by. in
T IO)

dx

J 2 (o)

1/3

TXVZL

-1'JIV Results

The imphndance of loop antennas for various values of b/a have been
calculated using equation (22). As a parametr r, the quantity ZAb has been chosen. the antenna. dipole antennas. In Appendix B, values of the impedance are tabuiated for 0 ' kb 4 2.5 and = 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. They are also presented in graphical form. These For laboratory purposes, however, it is sometimes These arc given at the end of impedances are useful for examining the operation oW a Loop antenna as a function of frequency. convenient to have tabtrks available appropriate to holding the f7equency (23)

Note that 2wb/a = c/a, where c is the circumference of

Hence (23) represents a definition analogous to that used for

fixed and varying the size o: !he antenna.

Appendix B and have been obtained by iterpolation from the earlier tables. It is perhaps wozth whtle to comment on some of the more obvious features of these loop antenna impedances. As can be seen, the first antiresonance, occurring when the circumference of the loop approximates a half -wavelength, is extremely sharp. This well-known effect is easily explained by noting that a sufficiently small loop resembler closely a shortcircuited quarter-wavelength transmission line and hr s a correspondingly
sharp autire sonance.

Of e'qualinterest is the rapid disappearance of resonances as the circumference of the antenna increases. point does not even exist. Thus, for (3=9, a second resonance

If one compares these impedances with those The prime difference is that the loop is This can be

for a dipole antenna, it is seen that the two are similar, both qualitatively and quantitatively, for c > X. essentkally more capacitive (by about 130 ohms) than a dipole. than on a dipole.

explained on the basis that charged surfaces are closer together on a loop This shift ii reactance level by 130 ohms permits the dipole to have several resonances and antiresonances, whereas, as noted

II
TRZ12 -11previously, a moderately thick loop (0<9) has essentially only one antiresonance. The resistance curves for the loop and dipole are very similar, with the resaistance mintma hiving almost identical values. It is interesting to compare these theoretical loop impedances with some experimentally measured ones. Miss PhylVis Kennedy of Cruft Laboratory has measured some loop impedances, using a half-loop over an image plane, and driven by a two wire line. The explicit configuration is indicated in Fig. 4;da. One set of the admittances measured by Miss Kennedy appears in Fig. 4. lb together with the corresponding theoretical curves. The agreement between the theoretical and experimental curves is seen to be excelleat. It is seen that the resistance peaks near resonance on the theoretical conductance curves are slightly higher than those on the experimental curve. This could have been anticipate4 as ohmic losses of the loop were uot taken into account in the theoretical solution. The two

Isusceptance curves differ by a slight additive amount thr-uighout the entire

range. This can readily be attributed to the so-called end coupling effect of the feeding line, which arises frpm the fact that the transmission-line excitation differs from the "slice generator" used in the theoretical model. King [6] has calculated this end effect for a dipole antenna. The dominant correction term is a negative capacitance in shunt with the antenna. Quite obviously, the end correction for a loop antenna should be similar, even to the order of magnitude. If such an approximate correction it made to the susceptance curve of Fig. 4.1b, this is changed in the right directiy. in Aptpendix C, values of the quantities l/ak and the functions Jk(4) are presented graphically to facilitate evaluation of the curret. distribution using equations (20) and (21). To obtain an idea of the type of current distributions on loop antennas, some were calculated for the explicit case of 0 = 10. Owing to the fact that the J04) were evaluated by numarical integration, there exists a slight discrepancy betweer. I(o) and the admittance, Since the admittance values arc more accurate, they were used in place of I(o). Ope of the classic assumptions in antenna literature is that a small loop has a constant current distribution. To examine the validity of the assumption, the actual current distribution were calculated for 0 = 10 and

--

Ithe
TRZ12

~.

kb

Zp.2 and .4. These appear in Fig 4.2. It is apparent that for .3,

smallest loop, kb .1, the current varies in magnitpude by about 5 and hence can be considored reasonably constant. ror kb =.2, however, the variation in well over 10 S, On the basis of theme rtx-ilts, one would.~ be led to the cenclusica that loops much larger than kb .2 cannot be considered small.
In order to obtain an idea of how the distribution of current varies as the size loop increased, valuesa of it were c.J1culat.d for D= 10 and kb =z5

1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5. These results appear in Fig. 4.3. PerhAps the most noticeable feature in these curves appears in the plats of magnitude and phase for the larger values kb. For values of ji< 900, it is apparent that the -nirrent distribution is beginning to approximat a traveling wave, in th-3 sense that variations in the magnitude have been redlucidd and the -phase is
becoming linear. This is in agreement with the observation made liU connection with the impedance s, namely, that for larger kb the magnitude
II

of the variation of the resistance is reduced.

V Acknwwledgementz The author wishes to thank Professor R.W.P. King of Harvard University for !Ai help and encouragement with this research, Miss Phyllis Ke-nnecLy for making her measurements available; and to Mr. LeonLevy, whoperformed the numerical computations. The author also wishes to acknowledge the financial support he phae o ths an duingthelaterpartunder the sponsorship rseach of heNvalRr eachtheSigalCorps of the U.S. Armiy, and the f ffie U.Jkr Frce(Contract Noi7) S

*
--

it/6c X-40cm .636cm

FIG.4Io

EXPERIMENTAL DIMENSIONS

700-

)
-EXPERIMENTAL

500-

B1

300-

200

/I

FIG 4.1 b/

04

T7

3.

0-9

0
FI

20

40

60

80

w0

220

I40 260

28

.aRA.AD03NR SML

OPNET

FCRETDSR8TOSO

LOLNTNA 402n2w/)I

pSol

kbI

'-40

70-1
A52

2
2D 40 60 80 .K00
12D 140 IS0

ISO

FK 4.2b MAGNITLID

AM( PH-ASE OF CLIWNT D1STI1BJnCNS ON SMALL L"C ANIME

21n(27rb/o)- 10

5020 4.0

30

'La-

ZD

.Sol
40

60

so~

10

12

140

Pso

ISD

FiG. 4.3O

PEAL. MW OF THE OAIR4

OSTRSUTCN' ON LOOP ANM~I*UZ

2A '2&(2wb 1* 10

kb.IO

CUNOV rIS43b iwMsAP14N

0: CLd

rSTPe$TION ON LOOP MCNNE*AE

0
cyl43C

40 MAGNIUC

SO

8D.~

IM

O 1

40D

ISO

OF CUM0T DSI~SITION ON LOCIP ANTENNAE

L-'S

0--

20

40

60

90

100

120

140

160

ISO

Fr-. 4.3d P~osE OF afff-NT (ASTRJTO)N ON LOOP ANTENNAE

TR21Z

- 13-

R~eferences

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Fl. C. Pockington, Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 9, 324 (197). E. Hallen, Nava Acta Reg. Soc. Uppsala, Ser. IV, vol. XI,,b. 4, November, 1938. Tung Chang, Technical Report No. 16, Cruft Laboratory, Harvard
Univer sity.

-. ^unoff and H. T. Frii,, A~enna Theory and Practice, 5. A. Sect. 13,12; John Wiloy, New Yor.k, 19MZ. 1. Cumowiki, "Summation of 5lowly Converging Series," J. Appl. Phys. 24, 1068 !1953). R. King, "Theory of Antennas Driven from Two-Wire Line," 3. Apivl. Phys. Z0, 832-(1949).

|S

4,

-|-

AppendixA

]n
From (4) it is seen that
A K ! = C -

Evaluation of K

12w a-kRj eJ.(

e J(n+1)O

,nli

r>

Zw e.JkbR(O)
f 0

k~J(n+')o

2J sin 4/2 di

The "thin-wire" approximation is that k 2 a 2 << 1, a2<< b0. Neglecting terms of this order of magnitude yields A : I ejwbr 2sIj sin W2 dO
2 + term of order (a1/b f
w4

S=1

e-Zjkb sin 8 + j(Zn+1)Odg

-Tn+i(X} = 1l--f sin (xsinO

0

(Zn+1)

)O~d

is the Bessel function of order zn+l, jsn+l(X)

0

and
-

(x

cos (Zain

(Zn+1)6)dO

is the Lommel-Weber function of order 2n+1, tabulated in Janke-Emde. Thus, the above result provides a reversion formula for Kn, i. e., An"Ka+i = +K(kb) +JK(2kb), n > 0
U
dI

1(-)+J

2n1

Therefore, all that remains to evaluate is Ko. be writterz as

i ! -14-

This coefficient can

'
--4.

~ ~~i',

iI , ' l "r .,r ,,, -[

I"IA:

... "!

, ,; ," " '

- " i ii-

" - - -! ! l
"

_
. .

"

i_;
; -

TKi

e-JkbR(O)

Now,

I'

2w j
, 0

--r d~ i~ rw

ZrbR Zjkb~i . / 2,

~l

di+ter-mo(a /b

2kbJ

Zkb
--

2kb

It also can be showaz r d =LIn-8? + tormibo(&2 /b 2

So, to the order of approximation consistent with original integral e~quation.

2kb 2kb

XSLIn.b i w a

_ 1/

(x)dx -

3A(" 0

A=K -K =Qnj(Zkb) I j J2(2kb) n d+1 n ~n1. n+I Another expression, useful fur determin -ig K for large n, can also be n found. From the above it is seen that nK K + n 0~
0

TRt212

-16-

Inserting the integral expressions for A yields SK

S0

Z0

eZJkb sin

+ j(Zin+ I

sj

Inserting the value for Ko, 1=. -t + .. 1 jeZjkbsiO + Zjn

::TIn a +z-E[--f][de

Zir
1 a

rJ
0

r e2l,

- 1 ]Jg-
) sin 1 n- i

.-

2kb 2w [sin(x)+n e

This result can be u~ed conveniently to determine the form of Kn for large N. For n~kb, the integral is small, vanishing in the limit. Thus

n-I

k-b

Now, usins Sterling's formub

to evaluate the harmonic series, it can be

n7 >>1 shown that a

0 n-i

kb

lb~n _(.72 is Eue's constant.-z

0.

Similarly, fot nh>'b

I0

1 " SiialIotn%2'
~~~~~~K

TI "

T22-17-1

The Fourier coefficie it,

a,

(4), can be written as

'&

Since 46vani shes for large n, the asymtotic value of % i giveni by (k(kb)(nR %r1 a -W . nn)n> fn >kb

(y impe Finll, nsetin f nmeica vlue).it anbeshown that 5, that the asymtotic value of a nas given above differs frk52. 5, an" n = negligibly from the correct value.

Appendix B Input Impedance of Loop Atitennas

'

In the following tables impedances, Z = R. + ix, are given in ohms andj admittances, Y = Il/Z = G + iS, are given in mhos. The loop radias is designated by b and the loop wire radiu~s by a. The ratio b/a is expressed
*of in terms of the parmv~eter Q= in ;!-.Note that ?irb = c, the circ~unferaticeI = ~ a the loop, and kb r.- where X its the wavelength. Thus kb is simply the circumference of the loop divided by the wavelength. Part I: Gre ohs of the Input Impedance as a. junction of frequenc.5

Figure BI: R vs. kb for 11 = 8, 9, 10, 11, 12; kb 5

Figure BZ: X vs. kb for 0 = 8, 9, 10, 11, 1 Z; kb =2. 5

IFigure

Figure 33: G vs. kb for 11

8, 9, 10, 11, 12; kb

2. 5

B4: B vs. kb for 12=8, 9, 10, 11, 12; !&Z. 5

FiueB:Lcso
Part II:

eoac

niRsnnePit

Tables of Input Impedance and Admittance as a function of frequency.

Table BI: Tabls BZ: Table B3: Part III: Table R4: `;Vble B5:

Zwd Y vs. kb or0=8, 9; kb 1-Z. S 7.and I vs. kb for 0 10, 11; kb=2.5

Z and Yvs. khfor O= 1.; kb5Z.5 Tables of Input Impedance for ka constant Z vs. kbfor a =3/16 in.,~ 1/4 in., 5/16 in. at X =100 cm. Z vs. kb fora = 3!8 in., 1/Z in., 3/4 in., at W 100 cm. =

U-

c;

U.

CL

I.

.0

IC
0SLO

CD
z
4o 00 0 00 0 c 0oL.

0 DVS3

OD

CDC

*ql

00

0 tSW4)

0 INIOV4

KPW4

I,:

LL..

z
mU

C:

U-

_0U
oJ

3NvioONO (sO~)SplX

IS

SF
Vm IC V

4
0 W

L(souw)

OI X 30NVld-.4VqS

rI

4O

II1

1 I
CZm

TABLE B I Impedance of Loop Antennae as a Function of Frequeuen.

8, Zwb/a
. M48 .0402 .,'533
.5939 1.742

54.60 x . "10 3 .0025 .0052 .0078

.0140 .0203

17 9, Zirb/a B. 103 -2a.95 -11.36 - 1.119

- 4.860 - 3.412

900. G.10 3 B-10 3

kb .05 .10 .15

.20 .25

R .0046 .0392 .1538

.5917 1.756

X 51.9.9 107.4 172.0

252.2 360.6

43.57 88.77 140.5

205.7 293.1

.0017 -19.23 .0034 - 9.311 .0052 - 5.814

.0093 - T.964 .0115 - 2.773

6.143 23.72

427.4 675.2
1344.0

.0336 .0520
.0767

- 2.339 - 1.479
.7361

.30 .35
.40

6.327 25.57
162.5

529.1
-3119.4 -1887.9 -

853.2
1776.0

.0226 - 1.890 .0351 - 1.171

.0518 .5662

140.1

7972.7 502.2 169.0 106.6

2189.8 -1677.8 --

.1172 .1638 .2387 .3469 .5054 .7357

.0322 .5471 1.164 1.770 2.392 3.028 3.683

4.335

.45 1168.0 415.0 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .75

.80

.07%6 .1111 .1625 .2380 .3502 .5183 .7744

1.164

.0209 .5054 1.013 1.527

84,56
73.74 72.87
73.28

824.4 544.1 400.2 311.8 250.3 168.4

i.072
1.5

154.3 99.68 80.23 72.58 70.48

71.62

962.0 639.4 471.9 367.1 293.3

2.060
2.622 3.223
3.860

- 204.4 - 141.4

- 237.5

76.02 80.72 87.59 94.81 104.4

2.22"
3.117

4.934
5.376

.85
.90

75.2Z
81.00

- 192.8
- 155.6

1.757
2.633

4.502
5.057

1151.4

115.5 4.193 94.30 5.302 - 77.20 6.193

-63.08

6.672
6.696 6.412

.95 S.274 1.00 4.579 .1.05

2.732 2.011

5.531

89.08
98.94 111.8

3.648 1.10 127.6

.iJ5 147,1 171.2 1.20

3.874 - 122.7 - 95.22 5.247 . 70.25 6.413

- 48.16 6.860
- 29.22 -14.36

5.337 5.050 4.030

2..589

128.0 14Z.0

- 52.23 -44.54

fi.5-r41 5.800

1.300 .4866

ISM4

41.09
.

5.949

1.S3 1.323 1.277

1.382

1.25 1.30 1.35

1.40 1.45 1.50 1.55

200.4 234.0 270.2

302.2 320.5 315.5 287.5 247.0 206.3 172.5

5.4274.986 4.9864.271 3.686

3.232 2.885 2.636 2.462 2.373 2.361 2.437

1350

172.9
188.1
200.7 207.4 207.5 199.8 .86-. 169.5

41.89 4,C.Z

5.462
4.991

.0910
,2394
.4975 .8239 1.186 1.581 1.994 2.423 2.862

60.73 4.565 76.86 4.240 95.54 3.977 3.788 3.684 3.657 3,722

1.571
1.831 2.148 2,497 2.864 3.242

- 17.55 - *6.51 - 91.53 - 142.0 - 184.7

-

152.8 138.7

113.3 126.1 - 132.7 - 133.1

-

1.60
1.65 1.70

207.6

- 21i.7

128.9

3.869

3.595 -19-

1.75

187.8

202.6 - 186.7

2.607

3.293

- 1W'-----

TAB-LE 51 (Continued) *

R 127.8

119.5 115.4 113.2 113.4 114.4

116.8

x -121.6

-112.6 -104.Z - 95.83 - 88.39 - 82.18

- 77.20 - 73.7A

G. 10 4.106

4.415 4.775 5.146 5.485 5.766

5.958 a..o0

3909

4.158 4.310 4.356 4.275 4.142

3.938

1.85 1.90 1.95 2.00 L.05

2.10

kb 1.80

R 130.9

121.7 114.6 114.8 117.0 121.7

128.8

x -168.1

-149.6 -131.4 -115.1 -101.6

Z 10 B.1o3 2.83..3.703
3.273 3.774 4.345 4.915 4.023 4.2-2 4.357 4.226 3.902
3.432

- 87.M5 5.398
- 77.59 5.697 - 70.01 5.776

119.9 123.2
126.2 129.3

- 71.84 - 71.22
-

6.056
6.001 5.903

3.7201 2.15 3.531 2.20 3.385 2.25

3.286 2.30

137.4 148.0
159.1

- 64.94 5.665
-

2.941 2.485
2.163 1.972

63.49 5.421 65.77 5.108

71.99

131.1 131.9 131.7

130.1

73.82 76.29" 79.05

i1.71

5.792 5.681 5.581

5.512

3.263 2.35 3.286 2.40 3.349 2.45 3.461 .2.50

170.4 180.0 186.8 190.6

187.8

72.08 4.788 81.78 4.4yZ 94.78 C.206

4.031

2 091
Z. 24

1.918 1.966

-106.4

ii

-20.

TABLE B2 Lmp eda.ce of Loop Antennae

Q: 10; 2wb]a- 148.41

o=fll, Zfb/a = 244.69 B.103 -15.98 - 7.812 - 4.908 - 3.360

- 2.348 - 1.601 .9963

. .0051 .0410 .1577 .5936

1.777 6.355 2,5.47

x 62.59 128.0 203.7 297.7

425.8 624.4 i003.1

G.103 .0013 .0025 .0038 .0067

.0098 .0163 .0253

kb .05 .10 .15 .20

.25 .30 .35

R .0047 .0411 .1532 .5991

1.744

x 72.24 147.0 233.9 342.7

488.8 713.6 1136.6

.103 .0009 .0019 .0028 .0051

.0073

-13.84 - 6.803 - 4.275 - 2.918

- 2.046 - 1.401 - .8793

6.2263 24.43

.0M23 .0is9 .2Z .0430 .0607 .0892 .1316

159.7 1679.4 468.8 156.6

100.7 80.95

2063.4 -3205.9 -2250.5 -1142.6

756.0

.0373 .0571 .0887 .1177

.1731 .2567 .3842

.481$ .40 14%.1 .0109 .45 263.Z .4258 .50 479.5 .8590 ..!S 167.7 .60 1o.0 1.300
1.762 2.258 2.803 3.407 4.061 4,694 5.093 4.808 .65

2294.6 5631.6 -2768.6 -1360.8 - 891.3

- 650.5 - 500.7 - 394.9 - 314.0 - 248.3 - 192.1 - 141.5 95.57 -

.4339 .0107 .3505 .7238 1.106 1 q!2

1.952

555.7
430.4 341.9

73.25
71.23 72.60 76.57 82.99 91.97 103.7

.5841
.9018 1.416 2.248 3.534 5.214 6.621 6.884 6.067 4.936 3.954

.70 .751

84.42 75.87 73.50

.1962 .2959 .4556

2.448
3.013 3.657 4.342 4.859 4,591

- 274.3 - 219.5 - 173.3 - 132.5 95.58 -

74.78 .80 78.92 .85 85.67 ..90 95.37 .95 1.00 108.1 12:.5 148.3 179.4

.7175 1.162 1.937 3.274 5.192

119.2
138.9

164.8
199.2

244.4
302.2 371.0 438.4

61.60 29.61 12.50 25.90 45.67

3.422 1.05 1.468 1.10 .0046 1.15

51.61

6.816
-

2.804
.3974 .9979 - 1.342

.64161.20 222.4 .73901.25 282.8

.56421.30 .26661.35 .08701.40 .46071.45 .84651:50 1.60 2.070 1.65 2.504 1.70 2.944 1.75 1.651 367.3 480.3 604.5 677.1 627.6 3-5.3 260.3 198.2 162.4

8.771 6.720 33.22 5.389 73.70 4.051

109.6
132.4 12!.7 50.75 - 122.7 - 30b.0 - 412.2 425.4 393.3 346.3 295.3

3.074
2.410 1.956 1.643 1.430

1.292
.8682 .4955 .1379

475.9
455.1 384.9 302.8 23t 4 185.2 153.

53.12 3.210 37.06 2.669 16.75 2.278 1.995 109.9 1.799 214.2 286.2 309.7 299.8 274.2 242.6 1.673 1.614 1.619 1.692 1.863

.2592
.6302 1.002 1.385 1.768

1.234
1.195 1.156 1.170 1.245 1.430

1.244 1.55 491.3

2.175
2.600

-21-

TABLE B2 (Continued)
+

.0~B1
133.7 122.6 118.1 -211.3 -181,7 -154.5 2.139 2.551 3.122 3.380 3.731 4.086

kb
1.80 1.85 1.90

R
138.1 126.3 1Z2.1

X
-253.9 -213.3 -176.4

G. 10
1.653 2.055 2.653

B- 03
3.040 3.471 3.832

118.5
123.2

-129.8
-107.5

3,836
4.610

4.202
4.019

1.95
2.00

124.0
130.5 159.2 182.5 212.8 250.7 295.8

-1.42.6
-111.5

3.471
4.429

3.994
3.786

131.6
143.9
159.8

- 87.41
-

5.272
5.625
5.580

3.500
2.732 1.942 1.335 .9764 .8424

2.05 142.1
2.10
2.15

- 82.63

5.259

3.0-58
1.974 .9598 .3328 .0662 .0730

69.91
55.64 45.83 41.74

179.6 S202.5
227.6

5.228
"4.737 4.226

2.2C
2.25 2.30

5.583 - 56.28 5.307 - 33.00 - 15.14 . 4.678 - 4.160 3.988 6.389 3.380

- 45.36

251.3
269.6 277.5 271.3

- 58.68
- 81.82 -112.5 -144.3

3.T74
3.397 3.094 -2.873

.8812
1.031 1.255 1.528

2.35
2.40 2.45 2.50

342.5
379.2 397.6 381.6

- Z7.26
- 70.53 -132.8 -19(,0

2.901
.2.535 2.263 2.074

.?.309
.,,715 .7559 1.065

-22-

! . .

."-

"

'1

TABLE B,3 Impedance of Loop A2ntenne 17 = .12; ,Zwb/a = 403.43 kb .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 R .0053 .0419 .1548 .596.7 1.721 6.042 23.50 X 81.46 167.0 265.3 386.Z 5. 797.4 L255.6 Q 103 B- 10 3 -12.28 - 5.986 - 3.769 - 2.589 - 1.820 - 1.254 - .7962

."008 .0015 .0022 .0040 .0057 .0095 .0149

.40 .45
.50 .55

131.5 1465.2
588.8 180.6

2446.6 14,782.6
-3&477.0 -1617.7

.0219 .0337
.0474 .0700

.4076 .0340
.2799 .6102

,,.65
.70

.60

104.1

89.32
79.48 76.52

-1011.2

- 7S4.6
- 576.3 - 451.4
-

.1033

.157
.2348 .3650

1.307

.9842

".75
4.85 .80 .90

1.703 2.153

ISS~ 81.63 88.50

356.1
276.4

.95
1.00
1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35 1.40 1.45 1.50 1.55 1.60 1.65 1.70 1.75

98.43
112.0
130.5 155.3 190.7 239.312.5 422.0 584.2 788.1 .926.1 837.1 610.9 414.5 287.7 212.5 168.8

- 151.5
95.32
41.05 13.30 67.58 125.4 i81.,6 -

211.6

3.017

.5839 .9969 1.682

2.6.31I 3.308 4.022

4.642
4.406
-

5.178
6.974 6.393 4.660 3.278 2.392 1.834 1.471 1.229 1.063 .9546 .8899 .8654 .8829 .9503 1.085

2.194 .5478 1.652 1.718 1.390 .9905 5954 .2218 .1332 .4785 .8153 1.157 1.513 1.889 2.291

227.9 236.5 142.3 - 416.0 - 419.6 559.7 $54.2 493.0 422.5 356.6

--

-23-

v1 --

/ .-

i il

i .

I -,

-,--,-,

I-- _ __ I

.,

I. ,

I .

,-

TABLE B3 (Continued)

kb 1,90
1.80 1.85

R
144.0 131.3

x
-297.6 -24,S.3

1o3
1.31? 1.696

3 B 10o

123.8
129.7 137.6

-193.8

2. Za
3.183 4.314 5.,92

2.72Z 3.168

1.95 2.00 .o05

3.s94
3.796 3.571 2.123

2.15 2.20 2.25

2.30 2.35 2.40 2.45 2.5o

I2.10
1 .'t

-1s4.6 -113.9 - 71i20

172.7 195.8

243.0 257.2 ,

- 36.oZ - 38.28

Z6.49 49.43

5.518 4.941

4.067' 3.27T'
2.227 1.912 1.686 1.538

1.223 .09o9 - .4433 - .5340

- .3907 - .1430. .1465

447.1
SZO.0

367.0

552.7 521.o

53.74 28.71 - 39.84 -148.0 -259.2

-2.668

.4522 .7641

-24-

rABLE B4 Input L-npodance for ka Constant a=1/4inat X=lO0 cm a=3/16inat =XO10 cm x B.R X R Kb .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55
.60

a=5/16 in at X100 cm Kb X R .05 Ao As .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55
.60

2 7 25 172 19992 376 170

104

149 Z44 385 625 999 2209 -3998 -2320 -1348

- 905

Z 6 27 167 15202408 152

103

133 217 357 526 908 1986 -5153 -2251 -1200

- 820

23 169 13535 410 129

103

196 313 500 801 1871 -3981 -2094 - 963

- 767

.65 .7G .75 .80 .85 o90 .95

1.00 1.10

85 77 75 76 81 89 98 112 t32
157

670 525 422 342 270 210 155 39

83 75 73 75 80 87 97
110

613 486 391 317 255 197 ISO

95

81 74 72 74 78 86 95c
108

570 455 367 298 242 188 142

95 3

.65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90 .9 I

1.00 1.10

1.05

- 102

129

45
6

IZ6
151

50 1.05 45 95 145 186 191 11.8

"

1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35 1.40

1.45

195 n 245 (12.447)

20 81 152

154

189 238 311 426 589 836

988

60 118 17-29 244 167

- 108

1%,4 231 299 402 547 739

853
-

.15 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35 .1.40

1.45

119 547 553 497 365 309

1.50
1.55 i.60 1.65

918
689 447 (.44.6)

- 448
- 613 - 623

800
600 4 289

-400

1.50
1.55 1.65 1.70 1.75 1.80 1.85 1.90 1.95 2.00 1.60

1.70

21

434

1.75 1.80 1.85 1.90 1.95 -. 00

170 146 134

126
132 141 n

252
200 160 113

2.05 -25-

157 (12494) -

72

2.05

TABLE B5 Input Impedance of Loop Antenna ior ka Constant a =3/8in at X Xb.05 R 100cm X R a=l/2in at X=100cm X R a=3/4inat X X 100 cm ,"Kb .05 .10 .15 2 6 171 1216 400 153 100 81 73 72 73 78 84 94 10f, 124 148 179 27.4 ?87 278 454 1738 -3160 -1959 -1053 -716] 542 -430 -348 - 283 - 230 - 182 - 138 - 95 53 12 33 77 120 6 146 1052 431 157 95 80 73 71 72 76 83 92 104 122 142 M7 21, 268 416 1456 -1821 954 653 495 390 318 6772 513 166 103 82 73 ;1 72 76 82 90 101 115 134 158 192 234 2646 -1660 837 570 435 345 280 232 .20 .25 .30 .40 .45 .50 .55 .6o .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90 .95 1.00

.10 .15
.20

.a5 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .6s .70 .75 .80 .85 .90 .95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1 .20 1.25

-261 - 215 - 170 -133 -95 -

192
158 125 95 67 40 11 13 33 1

60 23 13 48 83

1 05

1.10 1.15 1.k0 1.25

1.35 1.40 1.45 1.50 1.55 1.60 1.65 1.70 1.75

511 661 774 719 552 389

151 80
-

448

560
632 617 492 356

123
353

94 35 - 116 - 295 - 410 - 428 - 404 - 360 310

361 434 487 476 402 316

30 - 15 is - 112 - Z .4 307 337 327 300 263

1. 35 1.-A0 1.45 1.50 1.55 1.60 1.65 1.70 1.75

-497 508
-

280
210 168

460

234
202 164

243
191 159

- 405 - 343

-Z6-

(Continued) Ab R X R X R X Kb

IM13-29!
I s 13-241

140
128

-266
-225

)[36
1Z5

-232
-P.0 -138 -110 - 85 - 60 - 40 18 5
-

1:90

j124

1, 1.80 I..&5
.95 2.00 2.05 2.10 I.1 Z.20 2.25 2.30 2.35 7.40 2.4 2.50

- 93
.. 112 - 75 35 65 80 53 - 25 -174

122
126 134 147 170 193 235 286 353 427 499 E,41 51 (l

-182
-150 -111 - 79 - 45 - 15 15 34 39 16 - 42 -148 -262

118
122 128 139 156 179 209 248 294 343 387 409 Q~ 398 (11.141)

-468 1.90

19 130-155 :13 2.05 5 ZO 112,5 215

2.0 2040

2.25 2.30 2.5 2.40 2. 45 2.50

310 395 489 598 653 (?2;.486)

.9J

8 - 27" - 70 -13i - 01

227

IMMMI

STRZII Appenaix C Graphs to Facilitate Evaluation of the Curront Distribution on a Loop Antenna

The current distribution on a loop antenna is given explicitly by equation (20)

W)l

cos no

_2w-r kj OP

M+ 4.6'n.--

L
where

ii

1n

5'.1

V is the voltage driving the antenna

i0 12 ohms

a = radius of antenna wire

i b = radius of antenna

k =,lnc = ZI.

S.

Iln(n 0 /4. 5) fQ= 2 In 'wba a

following graph&:

3. Z26

To facilitate evaluation of this formnula, the succetding pages cortain the Figure Cl: Re(1iso); 0l= 8, 9, 10. 11, 12, kb<-2.5

Figure CZ: IM(O/a ); Q= 8, 9, 10, 11, 1Z, kb <2.5 Figure C3: RAe(1/al); i= 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, kb 2.5

Figure C4: Im(l/al); 11= 8,9, 10, 11, -.2, kb <2.5 Figure C5: Re(l/a.); a= 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, kb -- .5 Figure C6: Im(l/a 2 ); Q= 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, kb <2.5 ]48

I
'TT11
Od

I
I I
I I

//

VI I
I
IA

I-. I
t'1

I
0

~+-

-goo

0)

-+

LM

-C-

fT

in

Iii 1111111 i* 1!It'

-?

F''''

ii

ii

iii

ii

,II

p
a

IL

Q
10

In
-

0
-

In

(NJN

CD

(DQ

0,0

ODD

C3

LL
E

IS
ob0 WS-

c J I 0

02

/r !

[T~~~In

'

II

l!-:1!{

r , !l1

i[[

1 i

.4-.

N-

/o

MW1

At=

Sr

I-

*F
I-I

Maps

FFTF

E Er
wmMm* -CI

I-4

L.2

10t

GRAPH4S OF THE FUNCTIONS

JI

(0)

ID

.6

200

400

600

80

, 0100

1200

140*

160'

1800

FIG. C10

Il

DISTRIBUTION LIST Technical Reports Chief of Naval Research Department of the NavV Washington 25, C. C. 427 460 421 Director (Code 5250) Naval Research Laboratory Washington 25, 0. C. Commanding Officer Office of Naval Research Branch Office 150 Causeway Street Boston, Massachusetts Commanding Officer Officer of Naval Research Branch Office 1000 Geary Street San Francisco 9, California Contmanding Officer Office of Naval Research Branch Office 1030 E. Green Street Pasadena, Califorvia Commanding Officer Office of Naval Research Branch Office The John Crerar Library Building 86 East Randolph Street Chicago 1: Illinois Commanding Officer Office of Naval Research Branch Office 346 Broadway New York 13, New York 3 Officer -in-Charge Oifice of Naval Research Navy No. 100 Fleet Poet Office New York. New York Chief, Bureau of Ordnance Navy Department Washington 25, D. C. 1 I Re4-I AE-3

2 1 I
6

I SI,

Technical Repo~rts

illI

1 2Chief,

Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics Navy Department Waehington 25, D. C. EL- I EL-4 Navy Departmne~t Washington 25, D. C.

Bureau of Ships (810)

Chief of Naval Operations Navy Department Washington 25, D. C. I 1 Op- 4 13 OP-2O

Op-32

Di:z~ctor Naval Ordnance Laboratory White Oak, Maryland Commander U. S. Naval Electronics Laboratory San Diego, California Commander(AAErL.) Naval Air Development Center John sville; Pennsilvani-a Librarian U. S. Naval Post Gradvate School Monterey, Califfornia

50

Transportation Offiscr Building 151 Squier Signal LaboratWry Fort Monmnouth, New Jersey Attn: DL~ector of Research Commanding General Post Olffice Box 1395 Baltimnore 3, Maryland

3 2 I

RDT.RRP RDDDE Commanding Ge-neral(WC;RR) Wright Air Development Center V.right-FPatterson Air Force Base, Ohio

Technical Reports Commanding General Wright Air Development Center Wright-Patteroon Air Force Base, Ohio I 2 1 2 2 WCRRH WCLR WCLRR Technicai Library Commander Wright Air Development Center Attn: WCR.EO Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio Commanding General

Rome Air Dievelopment Center

I I 2
U

~RCR-lI

Griffiss Air Force Base Rome, New York RCREC-4C RCRW Commanding General

Air Force Cambridge Research Center

6 1 2 230 Albany Street Camnbrid~qe 39, Mas3sachusetts CRR Technical Library

Director Air University Library Maxrivell Air 'Force Base, Alabama Commander Patrick Air Force Base Cocoa, Florida Chief, European Office Air Research and Development Command Shell Building 60 Rue Ravenstein
Brubsels, L~gu

U. S. Coast Guard (EEE) 1300 E Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. Assistant Secretarl, U. Defense (Research and Developnment Research and Development Board Department of Defense Washington 25, D. C.

K-

Technical Reports
5 Armed Services Technical Infcrmation Agency Document Service Center Knott Build;ng

Dayton 2, Ohiio
1 Office of Technical Services Department of Commerce

Washington 25, D. C.

Commanding Officer and Director U. S. Underwater Sound Laboratory New London, Connecticut Federal Telecornmt1-w Technical Library 500 Washington A - -tue Nutley, New Jerst -'-_:z.. Laboratories, Inc.

Librarian Rddio Corporation of America RCA Laboratories Princeton, New Jersey Sperry Gyroscope Company Engineering Librarian Great Neck, L. I., New York Watson Laboratories Library Red Bank, New Jersey Professor E. Weber Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn e,, Livingston Street Bxooklyn 2, New York University of California Department of Electrical Engineering Berkeley, California Dr. E. T. Booth Hudson Laboratories 145 Palisade Street Dobbs Ferry, New York Cornell University Department of Electrical Engineering Ithaca, New York University of Illinois

Department of Electrical Engineering

Urbana, Illinois
-iv-

S7

li

lI

IIii

i'

ii@

,i ,i,,.l.--

dm i,

mhm

..

Technical Reports Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Professor A. von Hippe;. Massachusetts Institute of Ter.hnology Research Laboratory for Insulation Research Cambridge, Massachusetts 1 Director Lincoln Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge 39, Massachusetts Mr. A. D. Bedrosian Room 2ZA-209 Signal Corps !Aaison Office Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambiridge, Massachusetts Mr. Hewitt Massachusetts Institute of Technology Document Room Research Laboratory of Electronics Massachusetts Stanford University Electronics Research Laboratory Stanford, California Professor A. W. Straiton University of Texas Department of Electrical Engineering Austin 12, Texas Yale University Department of Electrical Engineering New Haven, Connecticut 1Mr. James F. Trosch, Administrative Aide Cc" .mbia Radiation Laborator) Columbia University 538 West 120th Street New York 27, New York Dr. J.V.N. Granger Stanford Research Institute Stanford, California Library Central Radio Propagation Laboratory N1ational Bureau of Standards Boulder, Colorado

-.

S.Cambridge,

-V-

.Lechnical

Reports Library of the College of Engineering New York University University Heights Library University Heights 33, New York Documents and Research Info;rnation Section Raytheon Manufacturing Company Engineering Equlpmwit Division Newton 58, Massachusetts Professor Henry G. Booker School of Electrical Engineering Cornell University Ithaca, New York

I
1

M. A. Krivanich, Technical Advisor to

Deputy Chief Ballistics Research Laboratory White Sands Annex White Sands P.G., Now Mexico Doris P. Banter Heed, Document Section Technical Information Division Naval Research Laboratory Washington 25, D. C. Dr. C. H. Papas Department of Electrical Engineering California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California Airborne Instrument Laboratory

MineolaI
Radiation Laboratory Johns Hopkins University 1315 St. Paul Street Baltimore 2, Maryland Mr. Robert Turner General Electric Company Advanced Electronicz Center Cornell University Ithaca, New York

-vi-I

Technical Reports 1 Accuisitions Officer ASTIA Reference Center The Library of Congr-ss Washingtoii 25, D. C. 1 Librarian National Bureau of Standards Library Connecticut Avenue and Van Ness Street, N. z.. Washington Z5, D. C. Secretary Working Group on Semiconductor Devices, AGET 346 Broadway, 8th Floor New York 13, N. Y. Professor R. E. Norberg Washington University St. Louis, Missouri

-Vii-