Correction to Evaluation o Edge-Diffracted f Fields Including Equivalentsfor the Caustic Regions

11. E. Bechtel and J. B. Billingsley have called the att,ention of the authors to an error due to a nlisprint in the integral t,a.blesused in evaluating the extended axial solution expressed by (24) and ( 2 5 ) . Theseequations should have read

(24)

MEASURED ENVELOPE

CALCULATED

Fig. 4. (b) H-plane radar cross section of the cone.

and J n ( u ) is a Bessel functionand 8,(u)is a Stmve function. The corrected equation (24) yields resultsin the H plane in agreement, nit.h measurementover the range 13 < 0 < 70. The result. in the E plane using the correct.ed equation (15) is notinvery good agreement
hianuscript received November 26, 1969. Theauthors are with t.he ElectroScience Laboratory, Depart.nlent, of Electrical Engineering, Ohio State Universit,y, Columbus, Ohio 43212. IEEE Trans. dnfennas and Propagation, vol. A P - l i , ~ p p .292299, Xlay 1969.

with the measured result. The magnitude of the peak is approximately -6 dB, and there are not enough nulls in the region 13 < 0 < 60. Thisindicates that there is a,nother component present n-hich is probably caused by a. creeping wave that is reflected at t,he most distant point on the base of the cone. This effect, is currently being investigat,ed. It is noted that t,he origina.1calculated point shown at approximately 0 = 32 in Fig. 4 (b) is in error. The use of numerical integrationover the illuminated region of the cone protides a smooth t.ransition between the axial andextended axial solutions a shown in s the corrected Fig. 4(b).