You are on page 1of 11

ECNG3022 (EE30C) 2007-2008 Exam Solutions

Q1 a)
An electric conductor is a solid that contains many free electrons, that is electrons,
which are not bound to their nuclei but are free to move anywhere within the crystal
lattice. Here, we are considering metals rather than electrolytes or semiconductors.
If electric field is applied to the conductor (metal), huge numbers of electrons are set into
motion. In the electrostatic case, the electrons will stop their motion after the electric field
inside the conductor is everywhere zero. This happens, after the electrons arrange
themselves on the surface of the conductor in such a way that they fully compensate the
external field inside the metal. This takes place in a small fraction of a second (for a
perfect conductor, this process is instantaneous). In metals, the electrons arrange in a
surface layer of 1-2 atomic sizes. Inside the metal, there is no uncompensated charge!
Ideal Conductors
Inside the conductor, there is no charge, because if there were any, it would create field
and set the free electrons into motion until they compensate for it.
Charge Relaxation and Relaxation Time
Consider an isolated conductor whose initial total charge is zero. If it comes into a
contact with charged source, it will accumulate charge. The Coulombic forces due to the
excess charge in the conductors volume will push the highly mobile charged particles
away from each other until they reach the conductors surface. They will accumulate
there because they cannot leave the surface. In a perfect conductor (which is an
idealized case), this process happens immediately. In real good conductors, it takes some
finite time, typically s. This process is called charge relaxation, and the time required for
its completion is called relaxation time.

Q =0

We assume homogeneous region. We start with Gauss law in differential form:
( )
E D c = - V = - V
Besides, from the current continuity,
( )
= - V = - V

it follows that
0 = +


The solution is ( )
e t


The constant is determined from the initial condition (the initial charge injected into the
at t = 0 ,

Thus, the charge density inside the volume of a conductor decreases exponentially in time
with a time constant, = / seconds

This time constant is called the charge relaxation time. The relaxation time is the time,
for which the charge density decreases e=2.71 times (down to approx. 37%) from its
initial value. After a time of approximately 5, the charge relaxation can be considered

b) & c)

Ore separation of charged materials may involve utilization of Lorentz force equation.
Electrostatic deflection can be used to separate between differently charged particles.
Alternatively if the particles are in motion then it may be possible to deflect the particles
using appropriately applied magnetic fields.
In contrast magnetic separation relies upon the attractive/repulsive forces that can be
applied to magnetic materials. This can be used to selective exert forces on magnetic
materials to produce selective displacement in the magnetic materials while leaving non-
magnetic materials untouched. Magnetic material may not be otherwise deflected or
moved through the mechanisms based upon Lorentz force equation.

As in case 1 mass separation can be based upon the principles of the Lorentz force
equation. In this case Electric fields can be used to apply equal forces on different
particles. Since the acceleration would vary with respect to the masses of the particles,
the particle acceleration would depend upon the actual particle masses. Additionally
particles can be deflected through the use of magnetic fields in accordance with the
Lorentz force law. The actual deflection would vary based upon the mass, which impacts
upon the acceleration and hence the ultimate deflection for the time each particle is
exposed to the field.
(The student answer from this point may be a bit open-ended, so the only requirement for
the student to qualitatively treat with the question is that the student links their knowledge
of the electric and magnetic properties of materials, Maxwells equations, and the Lorentz
force rule to the context of their answer.)

Q2 a)
In unbounded media, when energy is emitted by a source, such as an antenna, it expands
outwardly from the source in the form of spherical waves. Even though the antenna may
radiate more energy along some directions than along others, the spherical wave travels at
the same speed in all direction and therefore expands at the same rate. To an observer
very far away from the source, the wavefront of the spherical wave appears
approximately planar, as if it were part of a uniform plane wave with uniform properties
at all points in the plane tangent to the wavefront. A homogeneous medium is one in
which the constitutive material parameters, , , and are constant throughout the


c) i) Answer excerpted from Electromagnetics for Engineers by F. T. Ulaby
The propagation properties of an EM wave, such as its phase velocity (u
) and
wavelength (), are governed by the angular frequency (), and the three constitutive
material parameters (, , and ). If the medium is non-conducting ( = 0), the EM wave
does not suffer any attenuation as it travels through the medium, and hence the medium is
lossless. In this case it can be shown that
= in the general wave equations and the
general solution of the resulting equation produces a harmonic waveform of constant
amplitude, in the monochromatic case.
The solution takes the form, E
(z, t) = A cos (t z +
) + B cos (t + z +
) ,
where A & B are constants determined by boundary conditions, angular velocity, = 2f
(rad /s), frequency, f = 1/T (Hz), and phase constant (or wavenumber), = 2/ (rad /m).

The above figure illustrates the wave behavior for the general equation outlined.
A similar expression exists for E
(z,t). E
= 0 as this is the direction that the wave
propagates in. The same applies to the solutions for H
(z, t) and H
(z, t).

If the medium is conducting ( 0), the EM wave is attenuated as it travels through the
medium, and hence the medium is lossy. In this case it can be shown that
is a complex
parameter in general as shown in the solution for part b previously. The general wave
equations and the general solution of the resulting equation produces a harmonic
waveform of decreasing/increasing amplitude, depending on the direction of wave travel,
in the monochromatic case.

The solution takes the form, E
(z, t) = A e
cos (t z +
) + B e
cos (t + z +

) , where A & B are constants determined by boundary conditions, angular velocity,
= 2f (rad /s), frequency, f = 1/T (Hz), phase constant (or wavenumber), = 2/ (rad
/m), and is the attenuation constant (Np/m).

The above figure illustrates the wave behavior for the general equation outlined.
A similar expression exists for E
(z,t). E
= 0 as this is the direction that the wave
propagates in. The same applies to the solutions for H
(z, t) and H
(z, t).

From the wave equation, k
. It can be shown that u
= dz/dt = / k = 1/()

By analysis of a plane wave, it can be shown that there are no electric and magnetic field
components along its direction of propagation. Observing the derived equations for the E
and H fields, it can be seen that they are orthogonal to each other and both are
perpendicular to the axis of propagation of the electromagnetic wave. Hence the TEM
properties of the wave follow.

Using the results of the previous solution, it would be seen that h can be expressed in
terms of H or vice versa. This can be done by taking the expression of E and taking its
curl, according to the relevant Maxwell equation. This can alternatively be done for H.
In either case the resulting expression would demonstrate the orthogonality property as
per the previous question (iii), but it would also show that |E|/|H| = (/). The
proponality is known as the intrinsic impedance of the medium and this can be combined
with the orthogonality property for a transverse EM wave to produce the expression
H E a
~ ~

= .

There are a variety of phenomena that occur when an electromagnetic wave is incident on
a surface. These phenomena depend upon the polarization of the wave, the geometry of
the surface, the material properties of the surface, and the characteristics of the surface
relative to the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave.
o Reflection: Whenever an electromagnetic wave is incident on a smooth surface (or
certain sharp edges), a portion of the wave will be reflected. This reflection can be
thought of as specular, where the grazing angle and reflection angle are equal.
o Scattering: Scattering occurs when an electromagnetic wave is incident on a rough or
irregular surface. When a wave is scattered, the resulting reflections occur in many
different directions.When looked at on a small scale, the surface can often be
analyzed as a collection of flat or sharp reflectors. The determination of when a
surface is considered rough is usually based on the Rayleigh roughness criterion.
o Diffraction: Diffraction occurs when the path of an electromagnetic wave is blocked
by an obstacle with a relatively sharp edge (as compared to the wavelength of the
wave). The effect of diffraction is to fill in the shadow that is generated by the
o Refraction: Is the alteration of the direction of travel of the wave as the transmitted
portion enters the second material (i.e., penetrates the surface).
o Absorption: Anytime that an electromagnetic wave is present in a material other than
free space, there will be some loss of strength with distance due to ohmic losses.
o Depolarization: As shown previously, the effects of transmission and reflection
depend upon the orientation of the incident waves polarization relative to the plane
of incidence. This can have the effect of altering the polarization of the transmitted
and reflected wave, particularly if the incident wave is circularly or elliptically

Q3 a) Answer excerpted from - Introduction to RF propagation by J.S. Seybold
Few subjects in electrical engineering evoke as much controversy as the debate over safe
levels of exposure to electromagnetic energy. There is considerable misunderstanding
about the known effects of electromagnetic energy on humans, and public perception can
be an important factor in system deployment. While there is still much to be learned
about the effects of prolonged exposure to low-power-density electromagnetic waves,
sufficient empirical data on moderate power density levels exist to set reasonably safe
exposure limits that balance cost and risk. A set of conservative standards has been
developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). The
development of the FCC limits that are used in the United States was heavily influenced
by these standards.
Systems used in Europe and many parts of Asia are required to meet the European
Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) standards rather than FCC standards.
Information about the ETSI standards can be found on their web site, The
ETSI guidelines use a volume of Health Physics and relevant CENELEC, IEC, and ITU
standards or recommendations for the specific exposure levels.
Any system that is designed to radiate RF energy should be analyzed and/or tested to
verify that the RF exposure of the user and the public is within safe limits. Unsafe levels
can be reached due to high transmitter power, high antenna gain, close proximity to the
transmitting antenna, or any combination thereof. RF safety is a significant concern for
many commercial communication systems due to higher power densities sometimes
involved and the potential for public exposure. For consumer products, various potential
uses and misuses must be considered when performing an RF safety analysis.

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) has adopted the IEEE human safety
standards for exposure to electromagnetic radiation.These standards apply to non-
ionizing radiation and are set to keep exposure well below thermal-hazard levels. The
actual standards are available from the IEEE standards group, ANSI, and other
sources.The FCC uses a hybrid of these standards and the results of a report by the
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP). Due to the
geometric spreading of electromagnetic waves as they radiate from a source, the strongest
fields and highest exposure levels occur in close proximity to the transmitting antenna.
When highly directional antennas are used, the safe distance will be a function of the
angular location relative to the beam direction, with the sidelobes and backlobes
requiring less distance. There is also a potential shock hazard (including possible arcing)
at the antenna surface, which cannot be ignored. For the purpose of safety analysis, the
standard defines two types of exposure called controlled and uncontrolled exposure,
which will be discussed shortly.
The ANSI/IEEE (and FCC) standards are based on large amounts of scientific data,
represent a relatively broad consensus, and are conservative, but they are not absolutes.
At the time of this writing, adherence to these standards represents good engineering
practice in the United States. The steady improvement of digital modulation methods
may well reduce the applications of these standards as lower power devices replace
todays technology. Ongoing research may also provide more insight into the effects of
electromagnetic radiation on the human body and lead to changes in the standards.
Studies to date have failed to provide a conclusive link between athermal effects due to
mobile phone use and cancer development or promotion.
While there was a heightened concern in the early to mid-1990s as cell phone use grew,
that the radiation from cell phone handsets in close proximity to the head was responsible
for some cases of brain cancer, the sheer number of mobile phone users guarantees that
some victims of cancer will be using phones. Other sources of electromagnetic radiation
in the home actually provide greater exposure and are also believed to pose minimal risk.
In the ELF range, the magnetic fields from appliances such as hair driers, waterbed
heaters, and electric blankets are likely to pose a greater risk than electromagnetic fields
at higher frequencies, due to the intensity of the fields and the close proximity of their
operation. Even so, the risk is minimal and a policy of prudent avoidance (avoiding
exposure when the cost or inconvenience of doing so is minimal) is all that is
recommended at this time.
The FCC emphasizes that these safety limits are exposure limits and not emission limits
[1] and that the exposure limits only apply to locations that are accessible to workers or
members of the public. Emissions are regulated separately based on application and
licensing. The station operator is responsible for maintaining a safe environment for the
public and for workers. The FCC requires station RF safety evaluations, with exemptions
for certain low-power applications. Guidelines are provided for estimating field intensity
based on antenna geometry and transmit power. These guidelines are relatively easy to
apply and tend to overestimate the field intensity. If the guidelines indicate a concern,
then a more detailed analysis or testing should be performed. That is, the guidelines
provide a quick and dirty analysis that is conservative. If the station does not meet the
safety standards based on these calculations, a more detailed (precise) analysis should be
performed before altering the station design.

The Biological Effects of RF Exposure

As indicated earlier, RF radiation is non-ionizing radiation. This is due to the fact that the
photonic energy at radio frequencies is insufficient to cause ionization. The figure below
shows the electromagnetic spectrum and indicates the delineation of ionizing radiation.
For non-ionizing radiation, tissue heating (thermal effect) is the only verified mechanism
for tissue damage. Non-thermal or athermal cell damage and mutation is attributed only
to ionizing radiation and has not been associated with non-ionizing radiation. Other
possible athermal biological effects of non-ionizing radiation have been postulated, but
remain unproven. In OET-56 [8] the authors provide an assessment of the state of
research on electromagnetic wave exposure:
At relatively low levels of exposure to RF radiation, i.e., field intensities lower than those that
would produce significant and measurable heating, the evidence for production of harmful
biological effects is ambiguous and unproven. Such effects have sometimes been referred to as
non-thermal effects. Several years

ago publications began appearing in the scientific literature, largely overseas, reporting the
observation of a wide range of low-level biological effects. However, in many of these cases
further experimental research was unable to reproduce these effects. Furthermore, there has been
no determination that such effects might indicate a human health hazard, particularly with
regard to longterm exposure.

One of the potential effects of electromagnetic wave exposure that is often discussed is
cancer. Here again the authors of OET-56 provide some insight.

Some studies have also examined the possibility of a link between RF and microwave exposure
and cancer. Results to date have been inconclusive. While some experimental data have
suggested a possible link between exposure and tumor formation in animals exposed under
certain specific conditions, the results have not been independently replicated. In fact, other
studies have failed to find evidence for a causal link to cancer or any related condition. Further
research is underway in several laboratories to help resolve this question.

The authors of OET-56 also indicate that research is continuing and is being monitored.

In general, while the possibility of non-thermal biological effects may exist, whether or not
such effects might indicate a human health hazard is not presently known. Further research is
needed to determine the generality of such effects and their possible relevance, if any, to human
health. In the meantime, standardssetting organizations and government agencies continue to
monitor the latest experimental findings to confirm their validity and determine whether
alterations in safety limits are needed in order to protect human health.

It is important to appreciate the distinction between a biological effect and a biological
hazard. A small amount of localized tissue heating is a measurable effect, but may not be
a hazard. The frequency of the electromagnetic wave and the part of the body exposed are
important considerations. The two areas of the body that are most vulnerable to damage
from tissue heating are the eyes and the testes as they lack adequate means (blood flow)
to rapidly dissipate heat. So while tissue heating is an effect, above a certain level it can
become a hazard.
Since tissue heating is the focus, in addition to the electromagnetic field intensity, the
duty cycle of the electromagnetic emissions is incorporated into exposure calculations.
The result is an averaged power density over time and body surface. Thus the spatial
distribution of the time-averaged power density is the unknown that must be determined
for a safety analysis.

b) i)
In a controlled environment, also called occupational/controlled environment, persons
must be aware of the potential for exposure and be able to exercise control over their
exposure. The required awareness can be achieved by posting warning signs and by
providing training programs. The controlled exposure limits apply to the workplace and
to amateur radio operators and their immediate families. Examples include workers at
transmitter facilities, cellular tower repair and installation workers, and workers at RF test
and development facilities.
The exposure limits for uncontrolled environments apply in situations where persons may
not be aware of their exposure. They also apply in situations where persons are aware of
their exposure but cannot do anything to limit it. Examples include nearby cellular
towers, wireless office networks, and living or working next door to a radio station
(including an amateur radio station). Note that these are examples of applications where
the uncontrolled exposure limits apply and are not necessarily hazardous environments.

In the situation it may be reasonable to assume that since the exposure cannot be
controlled, for the general population, the uncontrolled limits can be used.

Based upon FCC guidelines, in an uncontrolled environment the power density at 4GHz
should be less than 1mW/cm
Now assuming the ground is reflective, the power density is given by

S = [0.64PG]/[d
] where,

P = 100, 000mW
G = 30dB = 1000 (linear gain)
d is in cm

based upon this d > 45.13m approximately. Thus the minimum safe distance is going to
be approximately 46m from the antenna. Please note that this calculation uses the
maximum gain of the directional antenna, noting that it may be pointed upwards and is
already located on a building. Thus the minimum distance would be less than this.

A similar calculation can be carried out assuming that the antenna is mounted on a 10 ft
tower. The minimum distance would be calculated using pythagoras theorem. Thus it
would be seen that the minimum distance from the foot of the antenna tower would be
less than the distance assuming that it would not be mounted on a tower. This is because
of the extra distance provided by the tower.

In addition to elevating the satellite transceiver, or reducing the gain in the downwards
direction, where people are most likely to be exposed to the emissions, precautionary
measures may involve erecting structures such as fences to restrict access to the antenna.
If people are in the building then it is not feasible to do this, and some other solutions
such as warning signs to inform the population of concern, or ever changing out the
technology to something such as free-space optics, may be considerations, if they can be
justified in the context of the problem. However, this question has no simple answers,
and the student would be awarded credit based upon his or her ability to respond in
context of the results of their analysis.