4792 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 67, NO.
7, JULY 2019
A Generalized Physical Optic-Based Diffraction
Mechanism Analysis of Transient Scattering
From Perfectly Conducting Surfaces
Hsi-Tseng Chou , Fellow, IEEE
Abstract— This paper presents a general quasi-analytical
analysis of time domain (TD) electromagnetic (EM) scattering
from a perfecting conducting object when it is illuminated by the
radiation of a relatively arbitrary EM source with a transient-
step TD response. In particular, the EM scattering mechanism
is interpreted by using TD physical optic (PO) approximation to
result in a contributing (integration) contour for the radiation
integral. A fast numerical algorithm is also developed to find
the EM scattering field. This TD-PO solution can be further
applied via a time convolution to derive the early-time transient
fields scattered from the same scatterer when it is illuminated
by a realistic astigmatic finite-energy pulse. Practical numerical
examples are presented to demonstrate the physical phenomenon
of scattering mechanisms.
Index Terms— Electromagnetic (EM) scattering, general scat-
tering objects, time-domain physical optics (PO), transient
analysis.
I. I NTRODUCTION
A GENERAL time domain (TD) quasi-analytical analy-
sis of electromagnetic (EM) fields scattered from a
finite perfect electrically conducting (PEC) object is devel-
oped by using the approximation of TD physical optic
(TD-PO) [1]–[9]. In this analysis, the PEC surface is illu-
minated by a transient-step spherical wave radiated from a
realistic source that can be located very close to the object.
The field point can be in either near or far zone of the scatterer
when its PO-induced currents are considered to radiate the
scattering fields. This paper can be applied to EM scatter-
ing analysis in recent interested areas of ultra wideband or
short-pulse target identification [10]–[12] and remote sensing
applications. It may provide a direct TD analysis with a better
physically appealing interpretation of wave phenomena and
scattering mechanisms. The analysis remains valid when both
source and field points are located close to the scattering target.
A variety of works have been performed in the past to solve
this classic problem. It is well known that the direct TD full-
wave analysis, such as using finite difference TD (FDTD) [13]
and TD integral approaches [14], [15], is accurate but suf-
fers severely from computational inefficiency to treat EM
Manuscript received November 2, 2018; revised February 20, 2019;
accepted March 23, 2019. Date of publication March 29, 2019; date of current
version July 3, 2019. This work was supported by the Ministry of Science
and Technology, Taiwan.
The author is with the Graduate Institute of Communication
Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan
(e-mail: chouht@ntu.edu.tw).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAP.2019.2908111
0018-926X © 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
scattering problems of electrically large objects, and most
importantly, it falls short of physical phenomena interpretation
mechanisms. On the other hand, quasi-analytical TD solu-
tions [1]–[12], [17]–[23] have the advantages of providing
relatively closed-form solutions with the abilities to provide
physical interpretations of wave behaviors. Typical examples
are the development of TD uniform geometrical theory of
diffraction (TD-UTD) [17]–[21] and physical theory of diffrac-
tion (TD-PTD) [22], [23] that were obtained by using either
a direct inverse Laplace transform [4]–[6], [17], [18], [22],
[23] or an analytical time transform (ATT) [3], [19]–[21],
[24]–[26] of the corresponding FD formulations. However,
those solutions still retain the limitations of their FD coun-
terpart. Thus, TD-PO [1]–[9] and TD aperture integration
(TD-AI) [27], [28] techniques remain attractive in many
practical applications because they may overcome many diffi-
culties encountered in TD-UTD and TD-PTD. Like TD-UTD
solutions, these FD high-frequency approximation-based TD
solutions are valid for “early-time” EM transient responses.
Validity and accuracy in comparison with numerically exact
simulation by commercial software on a canonical structure
were also performed in [5] with good agreement in the early-
time response estimation. In addition, it can be hybridized
with a direct TD full-wave technique to perform the transient
analysis of sophisticated objects consisting of both canon-
ical and noncanonical structures as it was frequently used
in FD.
The past works most related to the current one are the devel-
opment of TD analytic solution of scattering from a parabolic
surface in [4] under the illumination of plane waves and its
extension to treat ellipsoidal and hyperbolic surfaces [5], [6].
Thus, the structure under analysis is first decomposed into
substructures [29] in these formats which are afterward treated
by each solution when the original structure is illuminated
by a plane wave. This type of analysis may treat a class
of TD scattering problems, but it is still insufficient to treat
the increasingly sophisticated structure that cannot be locally
approximated by the second-order surfaces or in the cases
when the incident field is not plane wave or when the field
source locations are in the near zone of the scatterer.
This paper advances the progress by considering a general
TD-PO analysis and presents the TD scattering mechanism.
Similar to previous studies, the solution is obtained by analyt-
ically inverting the corresponding FD formulation [30], [31]
based on a PO approximation. In contrast, instead of
CHOU: GENERALIZED PO-BASED DIFFRACTION MECHANISM ANALYSIS 4793

where s = j ω with ω being the angular frequency, v is the

speed of light, and Z 0 is the free space impedance. In (1),
(r f , θ f , φ f ) is the spherical coordinates of incident field with
its origin located at r s , and F(θ f , φ f ) is the pattern function,
which is assumed to be independent of frequency. Also the 1/s
frequency dependence is chosen to provide a transient time-
step spherical wave for the feed’s radiation. Thus, the electrical
field in TD obtained via an inverse Laplace transform over (1)
with respect to s can be expressed as
 r 
U t − νf
E f (r f , t) = F f (θ f , φ f ) (2)
Fig. 1. Illustration of PO-induced current for EM scattering analysis. The rf
currents are defined on the surface in the lit region to the incident fields.
where U (·) is the Heaviside step function defined by
 
1, ξ ≥ 0
considering a far-field plane wave illumination, a transient-step U (ξ ) = . (3)
spherical wave is considered, which allows one to examine the 0, ξ < 0
situation when the source is near the scatterers as occurred in As illustrated in Fig. 1, PO considers a set of induced
many antenna radiation problems for near or far field focusing currents on the PEC scatterer’s surface in the lit region, Sa ,
radiation purposes. An important contribution of this paper visible to the incident field by
is that the TD EM scattering mechanisms are discovered by
considering a time-varying equal-path-length (TEPL) ellipsoid J po (r  , s) = 2n̂ × H i (r f , s)|r f =r  −r s (4)
for a pair of source and field points, which interprets well the where r  = (x  , y  , z ) is a position vector on Sa and n̂ is the
instant EM responses of the scattering field. Contrary to TD unit vector normal to the surface at r  . The EM scattering field
integral methods, which are short of physical interpretation of at r (denoted by Q) arising from the radiation by the electrical
scattering mechanism, a contributing contour of radiation inte- current in (4) can be found by
gral radiation at any instant time on the scatterer’s surface is
thus defined in this TD-PO to provide the EM scattering fields. E s (r , s)
This determination of instant time contributing contour on the    e− svR
s Z0
scatterer’s surface may also interpret well the phenomenon of = R̂ × R̂ × J po (r  , s) ds 
4πv Sa R
impulse-radiating fields by a reflector antenna. This is the first 

e− v (r f +R)
s
time for TD-PO to definitely interpret the transient scattering 1
= R̂ × R̂× n̂ × r̂ f × F(θ f , φ f ) ds  (5)
mechanism through this contributing contour. 2πv Sa Rr f
This paper is organized in the following format. Section II
describes the TD-PO formulations for a transient-step inci- where R = R R̂ = r −r  . As a result, the corresponding format
dent spherical wave. In Section III, the TEPL ellipsoid and of electric field in TD can be found by
the characteristics of the instant time contributing contour u
E s (r , t)
for EM scattering field analysis are presented to show the   

∼ 1 R̂× R̂× n̂ × r̂ f × F(θ f , φ f ) r f +R

scattering mechanism interpretation. Section VI presents the = · δ t− ds 
evaluation of the TD-PO radiation integral, where the rigorous 2πv Sa Rr f v
mathematic derivation of instant time contributing contours (6)
is presented. Field phenomena regarding some special situa-
tions of contributing contours are discussed. The fast integra- where δ(t) = dU (t)/dt is the Dirac delta function. This delta
tion technique is also proposed. A numerical demonstration function may reduce the surface integral in (6) to a line integral
of the applications of this TD-PO technique is shown in by using the following conditions:
 
Section V for antenna radiation analysis and EM scattering rf + R
problems. Finally, some conclusive remarks are discussed δ t− = 0 (7)
v
in Section VI.
which occurs at

II. F ORMULATIONS OF THE T RANSIENT S TEP R ESPONSE r f + R = vt, or |r  − r s | + |r − r  | = vt. (8)

Consider a PEC body in Fig. 1, which is illuminated by This expression shows that the transient responses of scattering
an incident field, (E i , H i ), radiated from an antenna source field at an observation time t is attributed to the radiation from
located at r s (denoted by Q s ), and expressed by the currents on a particular part of surface. This part of surface
forms a line contour.
F(θ f , φ f ) e− v r f
s
1 It is noted that the time-step response in (6) can be differ-
E i (r f , s) = ; H i (r f , s) = r̂ f × E i (r f , s)
s rf Z0 entiated with time to find the impulse response and afterward
(1) convolute with a realistic time waveform of excitation for
4794 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 67, NO. 7, JULY 2019
Fig. 2. (a) Variation in TEPL ellipsoid surfaces produced by (9) with respect
to the change of time. In (b), the TEPL surface will intersect with the scatterer
to find the contributing contour, Ct .
a general transient waveform analysis [4], [32]. It may also
directly convolute with the derivative of the excitation time
waveform [5], [21] to find the same results if desired.
III. C HARACTERISTICS OF THE C ONTRIBUTING C ONTOUR
Equation (8) describes a contour on the scatterer’s surface,
on which the induced currents contribute to the transient
responses of scattering field in (6). This integration contour
of radiation integral is referred as the contributing contour
(denoted by Ct ) of transient responses. Through a mathe-
matic manipulation, it can be shown that (8) mathematically
describes an ellipsoidal surface of revolution with its two focus
points located at Q s and Q, i.e., the source and field points,
respectively, if r  is relaxed to a free variable of position. This
ellipsoid is referred to the TEPL ellipsoid for a pair of source
and field points, whose shape varies at any instant time for
field’s transient responses. Fig. 2(a) illustrates the variation
of this TDPL ellipsoidal surface with respect to instant time
change, where a 2-D cut is shown for an easy illustration. This
TEPL surface starts with a very thin longitude ellipsoid at the
early time and will become a sphere or parabolic at very late
time because the radii significantly increase at the late time.
Thus, the ellipsoidal surface can be described by
  
ze2 x e2 + ye2
+ =1 (9)
( (t))2 ( (t))2 − C 2
where C = |Q s Q|/2 and (t) = vt/2. Here, the coordinate
system of (x e , ye , ze ) is defined so that Q s = (0, 0, −C) and
Q = (0, 0, C) on the ẑe axis, which is used to distinguish from
the (x  , y  , z ) coordinate system to represent the scatterer’s
structure.
In the current application of EM scattering field transient
analysis, r  is restricted to be on Sa . Thus, r  is located
on the intersection of Sa and the TEPL ellipsoid in (9) as
shown by the relation of this ellipsoidal surface to the scatter’s
surface, Sa , in Fig. 2(b), from which the scattering fields
are radiated from the induced currents on the lit region of
surface. In the numerical computation of the radiation integral
in (6), the fields are evaluated from the induced current source
positions on the intersection of this ellipsoid’s surface and Sa ,
i.e., the contributing contour, Ct . As a result, it is easy to
determine the initial and final radiation time by examining the
intersection of these two surfaces. As illustrated in Fig. 2(b),
the earliest rising time of transient response, t1 , occurs at
when the TEPL ellipsoid first touches Sa , while the latest
time, t2 , occurs at when the TEPL ellipsoid leaves Sa to
loss the contact. This time frame between t1 and t2 defines a
finite pulse-type transient response to the EM scattering field
when the radiation of feed exhibits a time-step response of
spherical wave. It is noted that above discussion fails when the
scatterer is an ellipsoidal surface and the field point is located
at the second focal point of this ellipsoidal surface, where the
scatterer’s surface will exactly adhere to the TEPL ellipsoid
surface in (9). In this case, a TD impulse field response
appears, which needs to be found by a surface integration
in (5) because an infinite number of contributing contours
exist.
With the above observation in mind, several characteristics
can be summarized.
1) If this TEPL ellipsoidal surface touches the scatterer’s
surface at a single point on the smooth part of the
scatterer’s surface with a continuous surface curvature
(i.e., they are tangent to each other), then this point is
identical to the point of reflection in the geometrical
optics (GO) point of view. This is apparent because all
rays launched from a focus of an ellipsoid will reflect
from the ellipsoidal surface and confluence at the other
focus. Thus, these two surfaces share the same tangent
plane at the reflection point.
2) This reflection point can be located at either inside
or outside Sa (the extended of Sa ). By considering a
virtual extended surface from Sa with a smooth surface
curvature continuation, if there is only one reflection
point, and it is inside Sa , then the earliest response
time, t1 , occurs at when the ellipsoidal surface touch this
point. Otherwise, the ellipsoidal surface will first touch
the boundary contour on the virtual extension of Sa .
Also, if there exist multiple reflection points on the
scatter’s surface and its extension with a smooth surface
curvature continuation, the one with shortest time should
be considered for the above argument.
3) A similar argument can be established for the edge dif-
fraction points with respect to the intersections between
the ellipsoidal surface and the boundary contour of Sa .
In this case, the diffraction points occur at the condition
that both the contributing contour, Ct , and the boundary
contour of Sa share the same slope tangent vectors from
the geometrical theory of diffraction’s (GTD’s) point of
view.
CHOU: GENERALIZED PO-BASED DIFFRACTION MECHANISM ANALYSIS
Fig. 3. Contributing contours projected onto a plane, where points of GTD
reflection and edge diffraction are also illustrated by Qr and Q c , respectively.
Cjn is the interface formed by the intersections of contours associated with
different reflection points.
4) The shape of the TEPL ellipsoidal surface can be
approximated according to the locations of source and
field points. In the case that both Q s and Q are in the
far zone of Sa , the ellipsoidal surface near Sa can be
approximated by a plane [4]–[6]. On the other hand,
if either one is in the far zone, while the other one is in
the near zone, then the TEPL ellipsoidal surface can be
approximated by a parabolic surface.
With these observations in mind, the variation in contribut-
ing contours is illustrated in Fig. 3, where an example of
two reflection points is assumed and they are projected onto
a plane in the lit side of incident field. The contributing
contour, starting as a point at the reflection point, Q R , will
become a closed loop at a later time until they meet the
aperture boundary or another contributing contour associated
with another reflection point. When the contributing contour
touches the aperture contour at a single point, as illustrated
by Q e , where the tangent direction of the boundary curve is
also tangential to the ellipsoidal surface at Q e , this point is
4795
Fig. 4. Relation of integration variables with the TEPL ellipsoid and the
projected contour.
from subsurfaces to obtain the total field responses if multiple
reflection points exist, which will not affect the analysis since
the analysis is based on the PO-induced currents in the lit
region to the incident field.
Thus, to reduce (6) into a contoured line integral, one
changes the integration variables to new coordinates, ( , ϕ),
and transforms (6) to
 
. . . . . .ds  → . . . . . . J A ( , ϕ)d · dϕ (10)
Sa
where J A ( , ϕ) is the transformation Jacobian. In (10), ( , ϕ)
are illustrated on Fig. 4 and are related to the polar coordinates
on the projected plane in the lit region of incident field with
the center, = 1 = ct1 /2, located at the reflection point,
Q r (a plane tangent to both surfaces at Q r ). This coordinate
transformation is uniquely existed because each value of
determines a contributing contour, and the variation in ϕ
allows the position vector on the surface changing along this
contour.
Using this transformation, the delta function in (6) can be
alternatively expressed as
the edge diffraction point in GTD because the incident and  
rf + R δ( − t )
diffracted rays satisfy the condition of Keller’s cone. δ t− =  
(11)
v ∂ r f +R

It is noted that the contributing times for different reflection ∂ t − v

= t
points are different because of different propagation path
lengths incurred in these reflection points. A junction curve is where t = (t) = vt/2 and r f + R = 2 t . The substitution
formed by the intersecting points of the contours at different of (10) and (11) into (6) will reduce the surface integral to a
times associated with different reflection points as illustrated contoured line integral by
by C j n in Fig. 3 (indicated by the gray line). In this case, 1
E s (r , t) ∼
u
= [U (t − t1 ) − U (t − t2 )]
Sa = Sa1 + Sa2 in Fig. 3. Thus, in practice of numerical 2π
integration in (6), the integrations on these two surfaces can 




R̂× R̂× n̂× r̂ f × F(θ f , φ f )

be considered separately.  ∂  J A ( , ϕ)
dϕ
Cϕ Rr f ( R̂ − r̂ f ) · ∂ r

= t

IV. E VALUATION OF T RANSIENT F IELDS (12)

A. Simplification of Double Surface Integral
to a Single Line Integral
To simplify the analysis, we assume a single reflection point
existed on Sa and its extension to infinity with continuous
surface curvatures hereafter in the following analysis. One
may decompose the surface into sub-surfaces, as described
in Section III, and employ a superposition of fields radiated
where Cϕ is the integration contour in ϕ. The determination of
Cϕ is illustrated in Fig. 5, where the thick solid-line contour
indicates the projection of Sa edge boundary over the projec-
tion plane as shown in Fig. 4, while the dashed-line contours
are the integration contributing contours, Ct (t), at various
instant times, t. In both cases of Fig. 5(a) and (b), the finite
TD response of scattering fields begins at t = t1 and ends at
4796
dϕ.
Fig. 5. Illustration of integration contours at various times, and the definition
of subsequent span angles, where the two cases of reflection point on and off
the scatterer’s surface are shown in (a) and (b), respectively. (a) Qr inside Sa .
(b) Q r Outside Sa .
t = t2 . In the situation of Fig. 5(a), the reflection point, Q r ,
is on the internal surface of Sa . At the early times, closed-
loop integration contours are formed, starting from t = t1 in
the vicinity of Q r , to result in Cϕ = [0 2π] until t = t3 at
Q e1 where Ct (t) touches the edge contour of Sa in a tangent
fashion. Here, Q e1 is the edge diffraction point fulfilling the
property of Keller’s cone. As t continues to increase, Ct (t) will
intersect with the edge contour at two points. The integration
range, Cϕ , is defined by the span angles formed by the two
intersection points and Q r . Here, the real Ct (t) is defined
by the part of dashed line on Sa to find Cϕ . This procedure
continues until t = t2 , where Ct touches the edge contour
at Q e2 . At t = t2 , Cϕ has a zero span angle.
On the other hand, in the situation of Fig. 5(b), Q r is off
Sa on its extended surface, where no reflection effect can be
found. In this situation, t = t1 when Ct touches the edge
contour at Q e1 . In this case, the span angle for Cϕ is zero.
Afterward, two intersection points appear to increase the span
angle. This span angle continues to increase until it reaches a
maximum, and then it decreases until it becomes zero again
at t = t2 , where Ct touches the edge boundary at Q e2 .
The transformation Jacobi can be found in the follow-
ing analysis. One first defines a local coordinate system
(x  , y  , z ) at r 0 = (x 0 , y0 , z0 ), which is expressed in
(x  , y  , z ) by the following transformation:
r  = r  · A + r 0
where A is the transformation matrix. It is noted that r  and
r  are the position vectors on the intersection of (9) and
f (x  , y  , z ) in different coordinate systems, and thus they
are dependent of ϕ and (t). Thus J A ( , ϕ) in (12) can be
expressed as
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 67, NO. 7, JULY 2019
where r  = (∂/∂ )r  and r ϕ = (∂/∂ϕ)r  . The sign in (15) is
selected to point toward the direction of incident field.
Substituting (14) and (15) into (12) gives
εus (r , t)
∼ 1
= [U (t − t1 ) − U (t − t2 )]
2π

R̂ × R̂ ×(±)(r  ×r ϕ )× r̂ f × F(θ f , φ f )
×
Cϕ Rr f ( R̂ − r̂ f ) · (r  )
=
t
(16)
It appears that (16) takes a numerical integration to find its
TD responses for a general surface. Several characteristics
can be explored in the following when one employs the
approximation of local second-order surface previously used
in GO.
B. Characteristics of TD Responses at Special Field Points
1) Reflection Effect: One first considers the situation
in Fig. 5(a) and examines the transient responses near t = t1 ,
where the contributing contour is a closed loop in the vicinity
of Q r with Cϕ = [0 2π]. At Q r , R(Q r ) + r f (Q r ) =
vt1 = 2 (t1 ). As a result, the projection plane in Fig. 3 is the
tangent plane shared by the scatterer and the TEPL ellipsoid
at Q r . It is easy to understand that the surface normal direction
is along the direction of ( R̂ − r̂ f ) at Q r .
One thus considers the GO concept to approximate the
surface of the scatterer near Q r by
(x  )2 (y  )2
z (x  , y  ) = + (17)
2R1 2R2
where ẑ = n̂ is surface normal unit vector at Q r , and (x̂  , ŷ  )
are along the principal axes of surface curvature with (R1 , R2 )
being their radii, respectively. It is noted that if (R1 , R2 ) > 0,
then this surface is concave. If (R1 , R2 ) < 0, then this surface
is convex. In this case, both source and field observation points
are located in z > 0 half-space. In addition, the projection
plane in Fig. 4 is given by z = 0 plane. In this case, the span
angle is given by Cϕ = [0 2π].
At the time near t = t1 , Ct is relatively small such that
the surface of (9) near Q r can be approximated by a planar
surface orthogonal to ( R̂ − r̂ f ) which is parallel to the tangent
plane at Q r , and can be described by
(r̂ f (Q r ) − R̂(Q r )) · r e = L(t) = v(t − t1 ) = 2( (t) − (t1 )).
(18)
(13)
In (18), r e is used to represent r  on the contour, Ct . This
relationship can be easily observed from the parameter of delta
function in (8) by considering a local plane wave and far-field
radiation approximations for the incident and scattering field,
respectively. It is noted that (18) reduces to
  2 
ds 

 (x e ) (ye )2
J A ( , ϕ) = =
r  × r ϕ
(14) a 3 ze = a 3 + = 2( (t) − (t1 )) (19)
d dϕ 2R1 2R2
r  × r ϕ ∇ f (x  , y  , z )
n̂ = ±

= (15) where r̂ f (Q r ) − R̂(Q r ) = (a1 , a2 , a3 ). In particular, it can be

r × r 
|∇ f (x  , y  , z )| seen from Fig. 6 that (a1 , a2 , a3 ) = (0, 0, −2 cos θi ) with θi
ϕ
CHOU: GENERALIZED PO-BASED DIFFRACTION MECHANISM ANALYSIS
Fig. 6. Illustration of reflection mechanism and its relationship of incident
and reflection field unit vectors.
being the angle of incidence with respect to n̂ at Q r . As a
result, the integration contour can be expressed as
4797
Fig. 7. Illustration of local second-order surface patch decomposition for the
fast integration of transient responses in (28). The second-order surface may
fit better to curved surface and may reduce the number of decomposition.
Only the patches which contains the integration contour are considered.
  2 
(x e ) (y  )2 where ẑ = n̂| Q r . This solution is analogous to that in [4]
+ e = 4( (t) − (t1 ))/a3 . (20)
R1 R2 except that a plane wave incidence is now replaced with a
This contour is analogous to the one in [4], and one may spherical wave.
follow the similar procedure to simplify (16). It can be shown 1) Diffraction Effect: The diffraction effect can be found
that by considering a finite angular integration in (24), where
⎧ Cϕ = [ϕb ϕe ] being the span angular range of Ct . As a result,
⎪  ∂r  1
⎪
⎪ r = = (24) reduces to
⎪
⎪

∂ (a ( (t) − (t1 )))1/2 √  
⎪
⎪  3

⎨   2( (t) − (t1 ))1/2 R1 R2 ϕ e − ϕ b ye x̂  −x e ŷ  yb x̂  −x b ŷ 
× R1 cos ϕ, R2 sin ϕ, P = −ẑ 2π + −
⎪ a3 2π a3 a3
⎪
⎪ (a3 )1/2
⎪
⎪    (27)
⎪
⎪r  = ∂r = 2( (t) − (t1 )) (− R sin ϕ, R cos ϕ, 0).
1/2
⎩ ϕ
∂ϕ (a3 )1/2
1 2
where r b,e = (x b,e , yb,e , zb,e ) with zb,e = z (x b,e , yb,e ) are the
(21) position vectors at ϕ = ϕb and ϕe , respectively.
The above formulation assumes R1 R2 > 0; otherwise,
the angular variation, ϕ, should be replaced with√ j ϕ, which C. Fast Integral Integration
will result in an “ j ” factor to maintain a valid −R1 R2 in A fast integration technique is developed to compute (16)
the final formulation. As a result, r  × r ϕ and ( R̂ − r̂ f ) · (r  ) by decomposing the integration
N contour into several
N small
in (16) can be found by segments by Ct = C
n=1 t
n with C
ϕ = n
n=1 ϕ as
C
√   illustrated in Fig. 7. Thus, (16) becomes
2 R1 R2  x y
r  × r ϕ = ẑ − e x̂  − e ŷ  (22)
a3 R1 R2 1 N
εus (r , t) ∼
= [U (t − t1 ) − U (t − t2 )]
and 2π
n=1
 n

( R̂ − r̂ f ) · (r  ) = −2. (23) R̂n × R̂n r̂ f × F(θ nf , φ nf )
× × Pn × (28)
Substituting (22) and (24) into (16) gives Rn r nf


×
where
u ∼ 1 R̂ R̂×

E s (r , t) = [U (t − t1 ) − U (t − t2 )]
    

2π R

Qr (±) r n × r ϕn


 
Pn      
dϕ (29)
r̂ f × F(θ f , φ f )

C ϕn R̂ n − r̂ nf · r ϕn

= t
P×
(24)
rf

Qr and the parameters are computed on the nth subcontour, Ctn .
where In this case, the source and field points are both in the far zone
√    (at least in the Fresnel’s zone) of this subcontour’s induced
R1 R2  x e  ye  n
P =− ẑ − x̂ − ŷ dϕ. (25) current. In particular, R = R n R̂ n and r nf = r nf r̂ nf is computed
a3 Cϕ R1 R2 at the center of this segment.
It can be shown that when Ct is a closed loop with Cϕ = One next matches this local surface profile to a second-order
[0 2π], (24) can be simplified to surface by
√
R1 R2  (x  − x 0 )2 (y  − y0 )2
P = −2π ẑ (26) z (x  , y  ) = z0 + + (30)
a3 2R1 2R2
4798 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 67, NO. 7, JULY 2019

where the origin of coordinate system is at the center of this

subcontour or near this point according to the localization of
surface. In addition, to compute (29), a plane wave incident
from r̂ nf is assumed to illuminate the surface modeled by (30).
The field point is also assumed in the far zone. This assump-
tion resembles the scenario of TD scattering in [4]–[6] to make
Ctn a second-order curve, where the closed-form formulations
in [4] can be employed to fast compute (30). Thus, when all
vectors in (30) are expressed in (x  , y  , z ) coordinate system,
the two end points of Cϕn and Ctn are expressed as (ϕbn , ϕen )
and (r nb , r ne ), respectively, where r nb,e = (x b,e
n , y n , zn ). One
b,e b,e
also let r̂ f − R̂ be expressed by (a1 , a2 , a3n ).
n n n n

Based on the result in [4]–[6], the integration of (29) can

be simplified to
n n n
P n = P r · Tn (t) + P e + P b (31)

where
⎧ √
⎪
⎪ R1 R2 [ R̂ n − r̂ nf ]
⎪
⎪
n
=
⎪
⎪
P r 2π
(a3n )2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪  n  
⎨
n ye x̂ − x en ŷ  ẑ × r ne
⎪ P e = = (32)
⎪
⎪ a3n a3n
⎪
⎪  
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ n ybn x̂  − x bn ŷ  ẑ × r nb
⎪
⎩Pb = − = −
a3n a3n
and the transition function is given by [4]–[6]
ϕen − ϕbn
Tn (t) = . (33)
2π
It is apparent that (31) is similar to (27) in solution format.
It is noted that when the subdivision of Ct is significantly fine,
n n+1
the diffraction terms, P e will be canceled by P b because
r ne = r n+1
n , which is true when the surface has continuous Fig. 8. Illustration of parabolic reflector antenna for transient impulse-
surface curvatures. radiation along the reflector’s boresight direction, and the variation in the two
TEPL ellipsoids at the vertex and edge of the reflector. The time difference
results in the pulsewidth of TD field responses at a field point. (a) Geometric
V. N UMERICAL D EMONSTRATION AND VALIDATION illustration. (b) Variation in TEPL surface and the pulsewidth.

Numerical examples are presented to demonstrate this

TD-PO analysis technique. These examples include the radi-
ation of reflector antennas for far- and near-field impulse-
radiating and the scattering from a general target. In particular,
the impulse-radiating mechanism in terms of contributing
contours will be demonstrated.
A. Transient Analysis of Parabolic Reflector Antenna for
Far-Field Impulse-Radiating Applications
A rotationally symmetric parabolic reflector is excited by
a Huygen’s source at the focal point for a far-field impulse
radiation [10]–[12], [28] as illustrated in Fig. 8(a), where the
coordinate systems of reflector and feed are also shown. The
reflector diameter, D = 2 m and the focal length, F = 4 m.
The radiation of feed source points to the center of reflector
along ẑ f = −ẑ and is given by [28]
F f (θ f , ϕ f ) = V0 cos θ f (cos ϕ f θ̂ f − sin ϕ f ϕ̂ f )
where V0 denotes the initial value of feed’s excitation and
(r f , θ f , ϕ f ) is defined in the feed’s spherical coordinate sys-
tem with ẑ f = −ẑ and x̂ f = x̂ as also illustrated in Fig. 8(a).
The field point is in the near zone at a finite distance away
from the reflector. As mentioned earlier in Section III, when
the field point is at infinity, the TEPL ellipsoid in (9) exactly
adheres to the parabolic surface to result in an impulse field
response because (9) near z = − (t) can be approximated by
 
x e2 + ye2
ze + (t) ≈ . (35)
4( (t) − C)
In the numerical analysis, the field point is selected to make
C = 5 m, which corresponds to r = 10 m measured from the
focal point of reflector along its axis in Fig. 8(a).
In this case, the contributing contour, Ct , is a closed circular
ring with a radius ar , being the intersection of the parabolic
(34) reflector and the TEPL surface of (9). It is rotationally
CHOU: GENERALIZED PO-BASED DIFFRACTION MECHANISM ANALYSIS 4799

symmetric with respect to the reflector’s axis. It is noted that

ar reduces to 0 at the vertex of the reflector, i.e., the reflection
point is at the vertex. Its variation as a function of time
between t1 and t2 can be related by
⎛  ⎞
 2 2  2 2
vt 1 a a
(t) = = ⎝ ar2 + r − F + ar2 + r − F −r ⎠
2 2 4F 4F
with respect to a reference time t = 0 at the focal point of
feed. In this case, Cϕ = [0 2π]. It is observed that the earliest
rising time of field TD response, t1 , appears at the time when
the TEPL surface of (9) touches the reflector at the vertex (the
reflection point) to make ar = 0. In this case, (36) reduces to
(t2 ) = F +r/2 and results in t1 = (2F +r )/v = 60 ns. On the
other hand, the latest falling time of field TD responses, t2 ,
appears at the time when the TEPL surface touches the
reflector’s edge truncation, where ar = D/2, which is found
from (36) to give t2 = 60.119 ns.
Using these characteristics, (16) can be simplified to
−1
E s (r , t) ∼
u
= [U (t − t1 ) − U (t − t2 )]
2   distance of field point increases. The amplitudes of transient
ar V0 cos θ f r  · (θ̂ R cos θ R + θ̂ f ) x̂ f
×  
Rr f ( R̂ − r̂ f ) · r  field point. As a result, the field strength can be retained as
where r  = (ρ̂ − (ar /2F)ẑ f )(∂ar /∂ (t)) with ρ̂ =
cos φ f x̂ f + sin φ f ŷ f . The parameters in (37) are computed
at any φ f without affecting the results. θ̂ R is defined in
the (x̂ f , ŷ f , ẑ f ) coordinate system with respect to − R̂. Also
∂ar /∂ (t) can found from (36), which is canceled in (37)
without the need to compute it.
The impulse-radiation mechanism is demonstrated by the
variation in the TEPL surface when the field point distance, r ,
moves further out from a near-field point. In particular,
Fig. 8(b) shows the variation in TEPL surfaces at t1 and t2
when they touch the reflection and edge points, respectively.
In particular, the plot on the top left-hand side shows the TEPL
ellipsoid variation at t1 to touch the vertex of reflector. It is
observed that when the field distance, r , increases, the TEPL
ellipsoid tends to become a parabolic surface adhering to the
reflector. On the other hand, the plot on the right-hand side
shows that at t2 when the TEPL surface touches the edge of the
reflector. It is also observed that it tends to become a parabolic
surface adhering to the reflector surface. The time delay in
these two surfaces on the left- and right-hand sides results in
the pulsewidth of TD field responses. This pulsewidth variation
with respect to the distance of field points is shown by the
bottom figure in Fig. 8(b). It is observed that the pulsewidth
decreases as the field point distance moves away from the
reflector. It will shrink to zero when r is infinite. In this
case, the two surfaces of TEPL ellipsoids at t1 and t2 become
parabolic and are both in the same shape of the reflector
antenna. They will exactly overlap on the top of each other to
make t1 = t2 and result in a impulse transient response.
The TD responses at various field distances of 10, 20, and
30 m are shown in Fig. 9, which are shown in the same
(36)
Fig. 9. Transient field responses at various distances of 10, 20, and 30 m
away from the focal point of the reflector along its axis. Uniform amplitudes
have been observed regardless the distance of field point. The pulsewidth
continues to shrink to make an impulse in the far zone at infinity.
scales for easy comparison. Here, V0 = 1 is used in (37).
It is observed that the pulsewidth continues to decrease as the
(37) responses are almost the same regardless of the distance of
the field points move into the far zone except the pulsewidth
shrinks to make an impulse radiation.
B. Transient Analysis of Ellipsoidal Reflector Antenna
for Near-Field Focus Impulse Radiation
One next examines the near-field focus impulse radiation by
an ellipsoidal reflector as previously investigated by TO-AI
in [27]. The configuration of this antenna is rotationally
symmetric and is identical to the description in Fig. 8(a)
except now the parabolic reflector antenna is replaced with
an ellipsoidal reflector described by
(z − a e )2 x 2 + y2
2
+ =1 (38)
ae be2
where ae and be (ae > be ) are the radii of its two principal
 two focal points are at ae − ce and ae + ce with
axes. The
ce = ae2 − be2 to make F = ae − ce at Q F in Fig. 8(a).
The diameter of this antenna is also assumed to be D < 2be .
The feed source in (34) is also placed at Q F whose radiation
faces to the center of reflector. The field point is placed
along the axis of reflector to examine the radiation focusing
characteristics.
Similar to the analysis in Section V-A, the contributing
contour, Ct , is also a circular ring. The earliest rising time
of transient field responses appears when the TEPL ellipsoid
touches the reflector at the reflection point which is at the
vertex of reflector. The latest falling appears at the time when
the TEPL ellipsoid touches the reflector at the edge. Thus,
if we assume (ae , be , ce ) = (10, 8, 6) m to make F = 4 m. Let
D = 2 m and r = 10 m, then t1 = 60 ns, while t2 = 60.015.
Following the derivation in Section V-A, the solution of (16)
4800 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 67, NO. 7, JULY 2019
Fig. 10. Variation in TEPL surface at and, and the pulsewidth of transient
responses with respect to field distance in (a). The transient responses at
three selected field points before, on, and after the second focal point of
the ellipsoidal reflector. An impulse-like transient response is observed at the
focal point. (a) Variation in TEPL surface and the pulsewidth. (b) Transient
response.
for this analysis is given by (37) with a different formulation
for the parameter, r  , which is now given by
Fig. 11. (a) Geometric illustration of a transient scattering from a flat circular
disk, and the (b) TD field responses at various field points (0◦ , 10◦ , 20◦ ,
30◦ , 45◦ , and 60◦ ).
time difference or zero pulsewidth. This phenomenon can be
further observed by the pulsewidth variation with respect to
the distance of observation by the figure at the bottom of
Fig. 10(a), where zero pulsewidth appears at r = 12 m.
Moreover, Fig. 10(b) shows the transient responses at three
selected distances of field points before, on, and after the
second focal point. It clearly shows an impulse-like transient
response at the second focal point. The amplitude of transient
responses decay after the field points passing through the focal
point.
 
ar ae2 ∂ar
r  = ρ̂ − 2 ẑ f (39)
be (ae − zc ) ∂ (t)
where zc can be found by using ar into (38).
Fig. 10(a) shows the variation in TEPL surfaces at t1 and t2
when the field point distance moves away from the feed point
(the first focal point of ellipsoidal reflector) toward the second
focal point at r = 12 m. It is noted that this field point is
the second focal point of the TEPL ellipsoid.
Similar to the parabolic reflector case, when the field point
is at the second focal point of the reflector, the TEPL surfaces
at t1 and t2 overlap with the reflector surface to cause a zero
C. Transient Analysis of EM Scattering
From a Second-Order Surface
One next examines the transient responses of EM scattering
from a finite circular metal disk. The disk has a radius of ad
on a xy plane with its center at (x, y, z) = (0, 0, −F). The
source is at Q F = (0, 0, 0) as illustrated in Fig. 11(a), where
the field points are in the θ directions on the φ = 0◦ plane at
a far-field distance, r . Thus, the coordinate system for TEPL
surface is (x̂ e , ŷe , ẑe ) = (θ̂ , ŷ, r̂ ), i.e.,

x̂ e = cos θ x̂ − sin θ ẑ
(40)
ẑe = sin θ x̂ + cos θ ẑ
CHOU: GENERALIZED PO-BASED DIFFRACTION MECHANISM ANALYSIS
where the origin is at Q F . In this coordinate system, the
TEPL surface in (9) becomes a parabolic surface, as previously
demonstrated in (36), and is given by
 
x 2 + ye2
ze = −Fe + e ; Fe = (t) − r/2 (41)
4Fe
where Fe is the focal length. The contributing contour on the
plate in the (x, y, z) coordinate system is given by
(x  − x c )2 (y  )2
+ =1 (42)
A2 B2
where x c = (2Fa − F) tan θ , B = [4Fa (Fa − F)]1/2, and
A = B/ cos θ with Fa = Fe / cos θ .
In the results in Fig. 11(b), the radius of the disk is ad = 2 m
with F = 4 m. Six cases of θ = 0◦ , 10◦ , 20◦ , 30◦, 45◦,
and 60◦ are considered. The time in Fig. 11(b) is shifted
by r/v. In addition, 1/r spreading factor in transient responses
is normalized. It is first observed that the transient response
at θ = 0◦ exhibits a relatively uniform finite pulse response
before Ct touches the edge contour, where Cϕ = [0 2π].
Here, the reflection point is at the center of the plate at
Q r = (0, 0, −F).
The first three cases have reflection points inside the disk.
As can be observed that when Cϕ = [0 2π], the transient
responses are relatively flat at the early times. Afterward, the
transient responses start to fall off until t = t2 when Ct leaves
the disk. Here, the earliest time, t = t1 appears at the reflection
points. On the other hand, the latter three cases have reflection
points outside the disk. Thus the earliest time, t1 , appears at
when Ct touches the right-hand side edge of the disk while
the latest time, t2 appears at when Ct losses the contact with
the disk at the left-hand side edge. Also, at a wider angle of
field points, the transient responses have smaller amplitudes as
expected by the fact that a planar disk reflects the illuminating
fields. At wider angles, the contributions arise from the edge
diffractions.
VI. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, a TD-PO-based near-field quasi-analytic tran-
sient analysis of EM scattering from a relatively general metal
scatterer is presented. The scattering mechanism in terms of
finding the contributing contour at any instant time t has been
explored to provide the physical interpretation. This contour
has been well explained by the intersection of the scatterer’s
surface to a TEPL ellipsoid. This technique is demonstrated by
the application to the transient analysis of impulse-radiating
reflector antennas, where the impulse-radiating mechanism
can be well interpreted by observing the matched adherence
between the reflecting surface and TEPL to result in infinite
number of integration contours. The numerical results further
exhibit the radiation mechanisms. As a result, the presented
TD-PO analysis technique can be used to treat a class of
EM transient scattering problems. Analogous to ray-tracing-
based solutions such as TD-UTDs, this TD-PO also requires
numerical search to determine contributing contours. Effi-
cient searching techniques will be pursued in the next phase
4801
of study. Hybridization with direct TD full-wave techniques to
treat the transient analysis of realistic and sophisticated objects
will be also developed.
R EFERENCES
[1] E.-Y. Sun and W. V. T. Rusch, “Time-domain physical-optics,” IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 9–15, Jan. 1994.
[2] E.-Y. Sun, “Transient analysis of large paraboloidal reflector anten-
nas,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 1491–1496,
Dec. 1995.
[3] H.-T. Chou, S.-C. Tuan, and H.-H. Chou, “Transient analysis of scat-
tering from a perfectly conducting parabolic reflector illuminated by a
Gaussian beam electromagnetic field,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.,
vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 1711–1719, May 2010.
[4] H.-T. Chou and S.-C. Tuan, “Analytic analysis of transient scattering
from a finite second-order surface illuminated by an incident plane
wave,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 54, no. 9, pp. 2463–2471,
Sep. 2006.
[5] H.-T. Chou, S.-C. Tuan, K.-Y. Lu, and H.-H. Chou, “An analytic solution
of transient scattering from perfectly conducting ellipsoidal surfaces
illuminated by an electromagnetic plane wave,” IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propag., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 340–350, Jan. 2012.
[6] H.-T. Chou and S.-C. Tuan, “Analytic transient analysis of scattering
from general PEC hyperbolic surfaces via surface curvature continuation
of ellipsoidal surfaces,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 13,
pp. 726–729, 2014.
[7] J. Li, B. Wei, Q. He, L.-X. Guo, and D.-B. Ge, “Time-domain iterative
physical optics method for analysis of EM scattering from the target half
buried in rough surface: PEC case,” Prog. Electromagn. Res., vol. 121,
no. 1, pp. 391–408, 2011.
[8] N. Bojarski, “A survey of the physical optics inverse scattering identity,”
IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. AP-30, no. 5, pp. 980–989,
Sep. 1982.
[9] N. Bleistein, “Physical optics farfield inverse scattering in the time
domain,” J. Acoust. Soc. Amer., vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 1249–1255,
1976.
[10] C. E. Baum, E. G. Farr, and D. V. Giri, “Review of impulse-radiating
antennas,” in Review of Radio Science, London, U.K: Oxford Univ.
Press, 1999, pp. 403–439.
[11] S. P. Skulkin and V. I. Turchin, “Transient fields of parabolic reflector
antennas,” in Ultra-Wideband, Short-Pulse Electromagnetics, vol. 3,
C. E. Baum, L. Carin, and A. P. Stone, Eds. New York, NY, USA:
Plenum, 2007, Springer, pp. 81–87.
[12] E. G. Farr, C. E. Baum, W. D. Prather, and L. H. Bowen, “Multifunction
impulse radiating antennas: Theory and experiment,” in Proc. Ulta-
Wideband, Short-Pulse Electromagn. New York, NY, USA: Kluwer,
Jun. 1999, pp. 131–144.
[13] M. Commer, G. M. Hoversten, and E. S. Um, “Transient-electromagnetic
finite-difference time-domain earth modeling over steel infrastructure,”
Geophysics, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. E147–E162, 2015.
[14] B. Shanker, A. A. Ergin, K. Aygun, and E. Michielssen, “Analysis of
transient electromagnetic scattering from closed surfaces using a com-
bined field integral equation,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 48,
no. 7, pp. 1064–1074, Jul. 2000.
[15] Y. Beghein, K. Cools, H. Bagci, and D. D. Zutter, “A space-time mixed
Galerkin marching-on-in-time scheme for the time-domain combined
field integral equation,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 61, no. 3,
pp. 1228–1238, Mar. 2013.
[16] S. P. Walker, “Scattering analysis via time-domain integral equations:
Methods to reduce the scaling of cost with frequency,” IEEE Antennas
Propag. Mag., vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 13–20, Oct. 1997.
[17] T. Jirapunth, R. Veruttipong and G. Kouyoumjian, “Early-time responses
of currents and charges on wedges and strips,” in IEEE APS Symp. Dig.,
vol. 2, Jun. 1979, pp. 590–593.
[18] T. W. Veruttipong, “Time domain version of the uniform GTD,”
IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 1757–1764,
Nov. 1990.
[19] P. R. Rousseau and P. H. Pathak, “Time-domain uniform geometrical
theory of diffraction for a curved wedge,” IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propag., vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 1375–1382, Dec. 1995.
[20] P. R. Rousseau, P. H. Pathak, and H.-T. Chou, “A time domain formula-
tion of the uniform geometrical theory of diffraction for scattering from
a smooth convex surface,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 55, no. 6,
pp. 1522–1534, Jun. 2007.
4802 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 67, NO. 7, JULY 2019
[21] H.-T. Chou, P. R. Rousseau, and P. H. Pathak, “TD-UTD solutions for
the transient radiation and surface fields of pulsed antennas placed on
PEC smooth convex surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 59,
no. 5, pp. 1626–1637, May 2011.
[22] P. M. Johansen, “Time-domain version of the physical theory of dif-
fraction,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 261–270,
Feb. 1999.
[23] A. Altintas and P. Russer, “Time-domain equivalent edge currents for
transient scattering,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 49, no. 4,
pp. 602–606, Apr. 2001.
[24] R. Ianconescu and E. Heyman, “Pulsed field diffraction by a perfectly
conducting wedge: A spectral theory of transients analysis,” IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propag., vol. 42, no. 6, p. 78l-789, Jun. 1994.
[25] R. Ianconescu and E. Heyman, “Pulsed field diffraction by a perfectly
conducting wedge: Exact solution,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.,
vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 1377–1385, Oct. 1994.
[26] E. Heyman and R. Ianconescu, “Pulsed beam diffraction by a perfectly
conducting wedge: Local scattering models,” IEEE Trans. Antennas
propag., vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 519–528, May 1995.
[27] H.-T. Chou, S.-C. Tuan, K.-Y. Lu, and H.-H. Chou, “Analytic transient
analysis of radiation from ellipsoidal reflector antennas for impulse-
radiating antennas applications,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 60,
no. 1, pp. 328–339, Jan. 2012.
[28] H.-T. Chou, P. H. Pathak, and P. R. Rousseau, “Analytical solution
for early-time transient radiation from pulse-excited parabolic reflector
antennas,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 829–836,
May 1997.
[29] C. Letrou and A. Boag, “Generalized multilevel physical optics (MLPO)
for comprehensive analysis of reflector antennas,” IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propag., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 1182–1186, Feb. 2012.
[30] P. Pathak, “High frequency techniques for antenna analysis,” Proc. IEEE,
vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 44–65, Jan. 1992.
[31] P. H. Pathak, “Techniques for high-frequency problems,” in Antenna
Handbook: Theory, Application Design, Y. Ts. Lo, and S. W. Lee, Eds.
New York, NY, USA: Van Nostrand, 1988, ch. 4.
[32] S. P. Skulkin and V. I. Turchin, “Transient field calculation of aperture
antennas,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 929–932,
May 1999.
Hsi-Tseng Chou (F’12) received the B.S. degree
in electrical engineering from National Taiwan Uni-
versity, Taipei, Taiwan, in 1988 and the M.S. and
Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from The
Ohio State University (OSU), Columbus, OH, USA,
in 1993 and 1996, respectively.
He joined the ElectroScience Laboratory, OSU,
as a Graduate Research Associate from 1991 to
1996 and as a Post-Doctoral Researcher from
1996 to 1998. He is currently a Distinguished Pro-
fessor with the Graduate Institute of Communication
Engineering and Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan
University. He has authored over 493 journal and conference papers and holds
40 patents. His current research interests include wireless communication
network, antenna design, antenna measurement, electromagnetic scattering,
and asymptotic high-frequency techniques such as uniform geometrical theory
of diffraction (UTD), novel Gaussian beam techniques, and UTD-type solution
for periodic structures.
Dr. Chou is an IET Fellow and an elected member of the URSI Interna-
tional Radio Science US commission B. He has received many awards in
recognition of his distinguished contributions to technological developments.
Some important ones include the Distinguished Contribution Award in pro-
moting interacademic and industrial cooperation from Ministry of Education,
the Distinguished Engineering Professor Award from the Chinese Institute
of Engineers, the Distinguished Electrical Engineering Professor Award from
the Chinese Institute of Electrical Engineering, and University’s Industrial
Economics Contribution Award in 2008 and National Industrial Innovation
Awards—Key Technology Elite Award in 2011 and Industrial-Academia
Collaboration Award in 2017 all from Ministry of Economics. He was elected
in 2004 as one of the nation’s ten outstanding young persons by Junior
Chamber International, in 2005 a National Young Person Medal from China
Youth Corps of Taiwan, and as one of the top 10 rising stars in Taiwan
by Central News Agency of Taiwan. He has served as the Chair of IEEE
AP-S Taipei Chapter and received the Best Chapter Award in 2012 and is
currently the Chair of EMC-S Taipei chapter. He also received outstanding
branch counselor awards from the IEEE including IEEE headquarters, R-
10, and Taipei Section. He received the IEEE Technical Field Undergraduate
Teaching Award in 2014.